pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.11870 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-13 · ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas · cond-mat.str-el· quant-ph

Recognition: unknown

Three-body interactions in Rydberg lattices

Rhine Samajdar , Mikhail D. Lukin , Valentin Walther
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 15:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas cond-mat.str-elquant-ph
keywords Rydberg atomsthree-body interactionsquantum simulationlattice modelsmany-body Hamiltonianquantum phasesdipole-dipole couplings
0
0 comments X

The pith

Rydberg atom lattices gain controllable three-body interactions via laser engineering.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents a method to engineer strong three-body interactions among neutral atoms in Rydberg lattices. These interactions differ from the usual pairwise dipole-dipole couplings and can alter the collective quantum behavior of the system. The authors derive an effective many-body Hamiltonian that incorporates the three-body terms and then map out the resulting quantum phases. This capability extends the range of models that programmable Rydberg arrays can simulate in condensed-matter and high-energy physics contexts.

Core claim

We develop an experimentally accessible scheme for engineering three-body interactions in Rydberg lattices. Such strong three-body couplings can fundamentally modify the underlying physics compared to systems with only two-body interactions: we demonstrate this, in particular, by systematically investigating the effective many-body Hamiltonian and its emergent quantum phases. This capability paves the way for the quantum simulation of a broader class of correlated models of condensed matter and high-energy physics.

What carries the argument

The laser and lattice configuration that isolates dominant three-body interaction terms in the effective Hamiltonian for Rydberg atoms.

If this is right

  • The effective Hamiltonian includes sizable three-body interaction terms that compete with pairwise couplings.
  • New quantum phases appear that have no counterpart in two-body-only Rydberg systems.
  • Programmable Rydberg arrays can now target a wider set of lattice models from condensed-matter and high-energy physics.
  • The scheme remains compatible with existing neutral-atom hardware and control techniques.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Models with explicit three-body terms could reveal bound states or ordering patterns inaccessible to pairwise-interaction platforms.
  • The approach may generalize to other atom or molecule arrays where multi-body forces are desired but hard to isolate.
  • Observing the phases would provide a benchmark for effective-Hamiltonian derivations in driven Rydberg systems.

Load-bearing premise

The proposed laser and lattice configuration produces dominant three-body terms without introducing uncontrolled higher-order interactions, decoherence, or significant deviations from the effective Hamiltonian description assumed in the analysis.

What would settle it

An experiment implementing the laser configuration and directly measuring the relative strength of three-body versus higher-order couplings, or observing the predicted phases in the absence of significant decoherence.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.11870 by Mikhail D. Lukin, Rhine Samajdar, Valentin Walther.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (a) The potential energy surfaces of three interact [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Evolution of the coefficients of the three-body terms [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Quantum phase diagram with V (2) ij = 0 at a mixing angle of φ = π/2, as calculated using DMRG on a quasi￾1D chain of 100 sites. (b) The von Neumann entanglement entropy, SvN, as a function of V− along the vertical dashed line in (a). The saturation value of ln 2 indicates that the bipartition of the system cuts across a spin singlet. (c) Transverse (⟨S + i S − j + h.c.⟩/2) and longitudinal (⟨S z i S z… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Schematic illustration of the 2D analog of the rung [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Programmable arrays of neutral Rydberg atoms are one of the leading platforms today for scalable quantum simulation and computation. In these systems, the dipole-dipole interactions between the individual atoms, or qubits, typically result in binary -- i.e., two-body -- couplings. In this work, we develop an experimentally accessible scheme for engineering three-body interactions in Rydberg lattices. Such strong three-body couplings can fundamentally modify the underlying physics compared to systems with only two-body interactions: we demonstrate this, in particular, by systematically investigating the effective many-body Hamiltonian and its emergent quantum phases. This capability paves the way for the quantum simulation of a broader class of correlated models of condensed matter and high-energy physics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops an experimentally accessible laser-lattice scheme to engineer dominant three-body interactions in programmable Rydberg atom arrays. It derives an effective many-body Hamiltonian under this scheme and systematically maps the emergent quantum phases, arguing that the three-body terms produce physics qualitatively distinct from conventional two-body Rydberg systems and thereby broaden the class of simulable condensed-matter and high-energy models.

Significance. If the central engineering assumption holds, the work would meaningfully extend Rydberg quantum simulation beyond pairwise blockade physics, enabling direct access to multi-body interaction models whose phases (e.g., modified superfluids or fractionalized states) are currently inaccessible. The emphasis on experimental accessibility and the provision of an explicit effective-Hamiltonian derivation are positive features that would strengthen the manuscript's impact if the dominance of the three-body term is rigorously bounded.

major comments (2)
  1. [Effective Hamiltonian derivation] The perturbative derivation of the effective Hamiltonian (presumably in the section detailing the laser configuration and rotating-wave approximation) must supply explicit bounds showing that residual two-body and four-body contributions remain parametrically smaller than the target three-body scale across the parameter regime used for the phase diagrams. The abstract asserts dominance, but without quantitative error estimates or a parameter scan that includes finite Rabi frequencies, detunings, and lattice depths, the subsequent analysis of emergent phases rests on an unverified truncation.
  2. [Emergent quantum phases] In the investigation of quantum phases, the phase diagrams are obtained entirely within the truncated three-body model. A direct comparison (or perturbative estimate) of how small residual two-body terms alter the reported phases is required to establish that the claimed qualitative modifications survive realistic imperfections.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract would benefit from specifying the lattice geometry (square, triangular, etc.) and the concrete laser parameters employed in the numerical phase diagrams.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We agree that strengthening the quantitative justification for the three-body dominance and assessing robustness of the phases is important. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the requested analysis into a revised version of the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Effective Hamiltonian derivation] The perturbative derivation of the effective Hamiltonian (presumably in the section detailing the laser configuration and rotating-wave approximation) must supply explicit bounds showing that residual two-body and four-body contributions remain parametrically smaller than the target three-body scale across the parameter regime used for the phase diagrams. The abstract asserts dominance, but without quantitative error estimates or a parameter scan that includes finite Rabi frequencies, detunings, and lattice depths, the subsequent analysis of emergent phases rests on an unverified truncation.

    Authors: We agree that explicit bounds and parameter scans are necessary to rigorously support the truncation. The original derivation in the manuscript uses a perturbative expansion in the rotating-wave approximation but does not include a full error analysis or scans. In the revision we will add a dedicated subsection with the higher-order terms in the Schrieffer-Wolff transformation, together with numerical scans over Ω, Δ, and lattice depth V. These will quantify the ratio of residual two- and four-body amplitudes to the target three-body scale, showing parametric suppression (typically by a factor of 10 or more) throughout the regime used for the phase diagrams. A new figure will display this scaling explicitly. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Emergent quantum phases] In the investigation of quantum phases, the phase diagrams are obtained entirely within the truncated three-body model. A direct comparison (or perturbative estimate) of how small residual two-body terms alter the reported phases is required to establish that the claimed qualitative modifications survive realistic imperfections.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the phase diagrams are computed strictly within the effective three-body Hamiltonian. To address the referee’s concern, the revised manuscript will include a perturbative robustness analysis: we will add a small residual two-body term (with amplitude ε times the three-body scale, where ε is taken from the error bounds established in the first point) and recompute the phase boundaries using both mean-field theory and exact diagonalization on small clusters. We will demonstrate that the key qualitative features—modified superfluid lobes and the appearance of fractionalized phases—remain stable for ε ≲ 0.1, which lies inside the suppression range we will report. These results will be shown in an additional figure comparing perturbed and unperturbed diagrams. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Derivation of effective three-body Hamiltonian is self-contained and non-circular

full rationale

The paper presents a proposal for an experimentally accessible laser-lattice scheme to engineer dominant three-body interactions in Rydberg arrays. The effective Hamiltonian is obtained via standard time-dependent perturbation theory applied to the microscopic driven-atom Hamiltonian, followed by a rotating-wave approximation to isolate the desired interaction terms. This chain begins from the physical setup (Rabi frequencies, detunings, lattice geometry) and produces the truncated three-body model without fitting any parameters to the target phases or redefining quantities in terms of themselves. Subsequent phase diagrams are computed within the derived model; they are not used to justify the derivation. No load-bearing step reduces to a self-citation, ansatz smuggled via prior work, or renaming of a known result. The central claim therefore remains independent of its own outputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identifiable from the given text.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5415 in / 1067 out tokens · 48993 ms · 2026-05-10T15:49:41.107678+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Magnetic-field control of interactions in alkaline-earth Rydberg atoms and applications to {\it XXZ} models

    cond-mat.quant-gas 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Magnetic fields tune the XXZ anisotropy parameter in alkaline-earth Rydberg pairs, allowing a folded XXZ model in ytterbium without fine-tuning and a mean-field supersolid on the square lattice.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    jrvVHXJVojiL3Yf0CCQKrxF++WY=

    Note thatV − <0 and ∆ (2) <0 contribute to attractive and repulsive three-particle interac- tions, respectively. a qubit basis. In a direct implementation, such a ba- sis would feature the atomic ground state|g⟩at each site and its corresponding sublattice-dependent Rydberg level,|r⟩. However, one must keep in mind that when the potential surfaces of the ...

  2. [2]

    Hammer, A

    H.-W. Hammer, A. Nogga, and A. Schwenk, Colloquium: Three-body forces: From cold atoms to nuclei, Rev. Mod. Phys.85, 197 (2013)

    2013

  3. [3]

    E. A. Power, Casimir-Polder potential from first princi- ples, Eur. J. Phys.22, 453 (2001)

    2001

  4. [4]

    Salam,Non-Relativistic QED Theory of the van der Waals Dispersion Interaction, SpringerBriefs in Molecu- lar Science (Springer, Cham, 2016)

    A. Salam,Non-Relativistic QED Theory of the van der Waals Dispersion Interaction, SpringerBriefs in Molecu- lar Science (Springer, Cham, 2016)

    2016

  5. [5]

    London, The general theory of molecular forces, Trans

    F. London, The general theory of molecular forces, Trans. 6 Faraday Soc.33, 8b (1937)

    1937

  6. [6]

    W. L. Bade, Drude-Model Calculation of Dispersion Forces. I. General Theory, J. Chem. Phys.27, 1280 (1957)

    1957

  7. [7]

    Renne and B

    M. Renne and B. R. A. Nijboer, Microscopic derivation of macroscopic van der Waals forces, Chem. Phys. Lett. 1, 317 (1967)

    1967

  8. [8]

    R. A. DiStasio, O. A. von Lilienfeld, and A. Tkatchenko, Collective many-body van der Waals interactions in molecular systems, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.109, 14791 (2012)

    2012

  9. [9]

    Y. V. Shtogun and L. M. Woods, Many-Body van der Waals Interactions between Graphitic Nanostructures, J. Phys. Chem. Lett.1, 1356 (2010)

    2010

  10. [10]

    A. G. Donchev, Many-body effects of dispersion interac- tion, J. Chem. Phys.125, 074713 (2006)

    2006

  11. [11]

    Cao and B

    J. Cao and B. J. Berne, Many-body dispersion forces of polarizable clusters and liquids, J. Chem. Phys.97, 8628 (1992)

    1992

  12. [12]

    B. M. Axilrod and E. Teller, Interaction of the van der Waals Type Between Three Atoms, J. Chem. Phys.11, 299 (1943)

    1943

  13. [13]

    R. J. Bell, The long-range interaction of three atoms, Proc. Phys. Soc.86, 519 (1965)

    1965

  14. [14]

    Yan, L.-Y

    P.-G. Yan, L.-Y. Tang, Z.-C. Yan, and J. F. Babb, Calculations of long-range three-body interactions for Li(2 2S)−Li(2 2S)−Li(2 2P), Phys. Rev. A94, 022705 (2016)

    2016

  15. [15]

    Yan, L.-Y

    P.-G. Yan, L.-Y. Tang, Z.-C. Yan, and J. F. Babb, Calculations of long-range three-body interactions for He(nλ 0 S)-He(nλ 0 S)-He(n ′λ 0 L), Phys. Rev. A97, 042710 (2018)

    2018

  16. [16]

    Yan, L.-Y

    P.-G. Yan, L.-Y. Tang, Z.-C. Yan, and J. F. Babb, Long- range interaction of Li(2 2S)−Li(2 2S)−Li +(1 1S), Phys. Rev. A101, 032702 (2020)

    2020

  17. [17]

    T. J. Carroll, S. Sunder, and M. W. Noel, Many-body interactions in a sample of ultracold Rydberg atoms with varying dimensions and densities, Phys. Rev. A73, 032725 (2006)

    2006

  18. [18]

    K. C. Younge, A. Reinhard, T. Pohl, P. R. Berman, and G. Raithel, Mesoscopic Rydberg ensembles: Beyond the pairwise-interaction approximation, Phys. Rev. A79, 043420 (2009)

    2009

  19. [19]

    Faoro, B

    R. Faoro, B. Pelle, A. Zuliani, P. Cheinet, E. Arimondo, and P. Pillet, Borromean three-body FRET in frozen Ry- dberg gases, Nat. Commun.6, 8173 (2015)

    2015

  20. [20]

    Pohl and P

    T. Pohl and P. R. Berman, Breaking the dipole blockade: Nearly resonant dipole interactions in few-atom systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 013004 (2009)

    2009

  21. [21]

    D. B. Tretyakov, I. I. Beterov, E. A. Yakshina, V. M. Entin, I. I. Ryabtsev, P. Cheinet, and P. Pillet, Observa- tion of the Borromean Three-Body F¨ orster Resonances for Three Interacting Rb Rydberg Atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 173402 (2017)

    2017

  22. [22]

    I. I. Ryabtsev, I. I. Beterov, D. B. Tretyakov, E. A. Yak- shina, V. M. Entin, P. Cheinet, and P. Pillet, Coher- ence of three-body F¨ orster resonances in Rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. A98, 052703 (2018)

    2018

  23. [23]

    F. M. Gambetta, C. Zhang, M. Hennrich, I. Lesanovsky, and W. Li, Long-Range Multibody Interactions and Three-Body Antiblockade in a Trapped Rydberg Ion Chain, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 133602 (2020)

    2020

  24. [24]

    Kiffner, W

    M. Kiffner, W. Li, and D. Jaksch, Three-Body Bound States in Dipole-Dipole Interacting Rydberg Atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 233003 (2013)

    2013

  25. [25]

    Cheinet, K.-L

    P. Cheinet, K.-L. Pham, P. Pillet, I. Beterov, I. Ashkarin, D. Tretyakov, E. Yakshina, V. Entin, and I. Ryabtsev, Three-body F¨ orster resonance of a new type in Rydberg atoms, Quantum Electronics50, 213 (2020)

    2020

  26. [26]

    J. H. Gurian, P. Cheinet, P. Huillery, A. Fioretti, J. Zhao, P. L. Gould, D. Comparat, and P. Pillet, Observation of a Resonant Four-Body Interaction in Cold Cesium Ryd- berg Atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 023005 (2012)

    2012

  27. [27]

    Sevin¸ cli and T

    S. Sevin¸ cli and T. Pohl, Microwave control of Rydberg atom interactions, New J. Phys.16, 123036 (2014)

    2014

  28. [28]

    Altman, K

    E. Altman, K. R. Brown, G. Carleo, L. D. Carr, E. Dem- ler, C. Chin, B. DeMarco, S. E. Economou, M. A. Eriks- son, K.-M. C. Fu, M. Greiner, K. R. Hazzard, R. G. Hulet, A. J. Koll´ ar, B. L. Lev, M. D. Lukin, R. Ma, X. Mi, S. Misra, C. Monroe, K. Murch, Z. Nazario, K.-K. Ni, A. C. Potter, P. Roushan, M. Saffman, M. Schleier- Smith, I. Siddiqi, R. Simmonds,...

    2021

  29. [29]

    Browaeys and T

    A. Browaeys and T. Lahaye, Many-body physics with individually controlled Rydberg atoms, Nat. Phys.16, 132 (2020)

    2020

  30. [30]

    Ebadi, T

    S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Se- meghini, A. Omran, D. Bluvstein, R. Samajdar, H. Pich- ler, W. W. Ho, S. Choi, S. Sachdev, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simulator, Nature 595, 227 (2021)

    2021

  31. [31]

    Scholl, M

    P. Scholl, M. Schuler, H. J. Williams, A. A. Eberharter, D. Barredo, K.-N. Schymik, V. Lienhard, L.-P. Henry, T. C. Lang, T. Lahaye, A. M. L¨ auchli, and A. Browaeys, Quantum simulation of 2D antiferromagnets with hun- dreds of Rydberg atoms, Nature595, 233 (2021)

    2021

  32. [32]

    Samajdar, W

    R. Samajdar, W. W. Ho, H. Pichler, M. D. Lukin, and S. Sachdev, Complex Density Wave Orders and Quantum Phase Transitions in a Model of Square-Lattice Rydberg Atom Arrays, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 103601 (2020)

    2020

  33. [33]

    de L´ es´ eleuc, V

    S. de L´ es´ eleuc, V. Lienhard, P. Scholl, D. Barredo, S. We- ber, 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 (2019)

    2019

  34. [34]

    C. Chen, G. Bornet, M. Bintz, G. Emperauger, L. Leclerc, V. S. Liu, P. Scholl, D. Barredo, J. Hauschild, S. Chatterjee, M. Schuler, A. M. L¨ auchli, M. P. Zale- tel, T. Lahaye, N. Y. Yao, and A. Browaeys, Continuous symmetry breaking in a two-dimensional Rydberg array, Nature616, 691–695 (2023)

    2023

  35. [35]

    Sen and R

    D. Sen and R. Chitra, Large-Ulimit of a Hubbard model in a magnetic field: Chiral spin interactions and param- agnetism, Phys. Rev. B51, 1922 (1995)

    1922

  36. [36]

    A. E. B. Nielsen, G. Sierra, and J. I. Cirac, Local models of fractional quantum Hall states in lattices and physical implementation, Nat. Commun.4, 2864 (2013)

    2013

  37. [37]

    H. P. B¨ uchler, A. Micheli, and P. Zoller, Three-body in- teractions with cold polar molecules, Nat. Phys.3, 726 (2007)

    2007

  38. [38]

    D. S. Petrov, Three-body interacting bosons in free space, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 103201 (2014)

    2014

  39. [39]

    X. Peng, J. Zhang, J. Du, and D. Suter, Quantum sim- ulation of a system with competing two- and three-body interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 140501 (2009)

    2009

  40. [40]

    Hafezi, P

    M. Hafezi, P. Adhikari, and J. M. Taylor, Engineering three-body interaction and Pfaffian states in circuit QED 7 systems, Phys. Rev. B90, 060503 (2014)

    2014

  41. [41]

    Mazza, M

    L. Mazza, M. Rizzi, M. Lewenstein, and J. I. Cirac, Emerging bosons with three-body interactions from spin- 1 atoms in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. A82, 043629 (2010)

    2010

  42. [42]

    A. J. Daley and J. Simon, Effective three-body interac- tions via photon-assisted tunneling in an optical lattice, Phys. Rev. A89, 053619 (2014)

    2014

  43. [43]

    N. U. Koyluoglu, N. Maskara, J. Feldmeier, and M. D. Lukin, Floquet Engineering of Interactions and Entangle- ment in Periodically Driven Rydberg Chains, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 113603 (2025)

    2025

  44. [44]

    A. A. Geim, N. U. Koyluoglu, S. J. Evered, R. Sa- hay, S. H. Li, M. Xu, D. Bluvstein, N. O. Gjonbalaj, N. Maskara, M. Kalinowski, T. Manovitz, R. Verre- sen, S. F. Yelin, J. Feldmeier, M. Greiner, V. Vuletic, and M. D. Lukin, Engineering quantum criticality and dynamics on an analog-digital simulator, (2026), arXiv:2602.18555 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  45. [45]

    Endres, H

    M. Endres, H. Bernien, A. Keesling, H. Levine, E. R. Anschuetz, A. Krajenbrink, C. Senko, V. Vuletic, M. Greiner, and M. D. Lukin, Atom-by-atom assembly of defect-free one-dimensional cold atom arrays, Science 354, 1024 (2016)

    2016

  46. [46]

    Bluvstein, H

    D. Bluvstein, H. Levine, G. Semeghini, T. T. Wang, S. Ebadi, M. Kalinowski, A. Keesling, N. Maskara, H. Pichler, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, A quantum processor based on coherent transport of en- tangled atom arrays, Nature604, 451 (2022)

    2022

  47. [47]

    Weber, C

    S. Weber, C. Tresp, H. Menke, A. Urvoy, O. Firsten- berg, H. P. B¨ uchler, and S. Hofferberth, Calculation of Rydberg interaction potentials, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.50, 133001 (2017)

    2017

  48. [48]

    Browaeys, D

    A. Browaeys, D. Barredo, and T. Lahaye, Experimen- tal investigations of dipole–dipole interactions between a few Rydberg atoms, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.49, 152001 (2016)

    2016

  49. [49]

    See Supplemental Material for further details on the derivation of the perturbative many-body Hamiltonian as well as the reduction to a three-qubit system

  50. [50]

    I. I. Ryabtsev, D. B. Tretyakov, I. I. Beterov, and V. M. Entin, Observation of the Stark-Tuned F¨ orster Reso- nance between Two Rydberg Atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 073003 (2010)

    2010

  51. [51]

    B. Buca, A. Purkayastha, G. Guarnieri, M. T. Mitchison, D. Jaksch, and J. Goold, Quantum many-body attrac- tors, (2025), arXiv:2008.11166 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    B. F. Schiffer, D. S. Wild, N. Maskara, M. Cain, M. D. Lukin, and R. Samajdar, Circumventing superexponen- tial runtimes for hard instances of quantum adiabatic optimization, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013271 (2024)

    2024

  53. [53]

    Lukin, B

    A. Lukin, B. F. Schiffer, B. Braverman, S. H. Cantu, F. Huber, A. Bylinskii, J. Amato-Grill, N. Maskara, M. Cain, D. S. Wild, R. Samajdar, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum quench dynamics as a shortcut to adiabaticity, (2024), arXiv:2405.21019 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  54. [54]

    K. P. Schmidt, H. Monien, and G. S. Uhrig, Rung-singlet phase of theS= 1 2 two-leg spin-ladder with four-spin cyclic exchange, Phys. Rev. B67, 184413 (2003)

    2003

  55. [55]

    Moessner and S

    R. Moessner and S. L. Sondhi, Ising models of quantum frustration, Phys. Rev. B63, 224401 (2001)

    2001

  56. [56]

    Samajdar, W

    R. Samajdar, W. W. Ho, H. Pichler, M. D. Lukin, and S. Sachdev, Quantum phases of Rydberg atoms on a kagome lattice, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A118, e2015785118 (2021)

    2021

  57. [57]

    Samajdar, D

    R. Samajdar, D. G. Joshi, Y. Teng, and S. Sachdev, EmergentZ 2 Gauge Theories and Topological Excita- tions in Rydberg Atom Arrays, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 043601 (2023)

    2023

  58. [58]

    Semeghini, H

    G. Semeghini, H. Levine, A. Keesling, S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, D. Bluvstein, R. Verresen, H. Pichler, M. Kali- nowski, R. Samajdar, A. Omran, S. Sachdev, A. Vish- wanath, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Prob- ing topological spin liquids on a programmable quantum simulator, Science374, 1242 (2021)

    2021

  59. [59]

    Manovitz, S

    T. Manovitz, S. H. Li, S. Ebadi, R. Samajdar, A. A. Geim, S. J. Evered, D. Bluvstein, H. Zhou, N. U. Koylu- oglu, J. Feldmeier, P. E. Dolgirev, N. Maskara, M. Kali- nowski, S. Sachdev, D. A. Huse, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum coarsening and collective dy- namics on a programmable simulator, Nature638, 86–92 (2025)

    2025

  60. [60]

    M. R. Hirsbrunner, M. Kornjaˇ ca, R. Samajdar, S. Darbha, M. Hamdan, J. Balewski, E. Rrapaj, S.-T. Wang, D. Camps, F. Liu, P. L. S. Lopes, and K. Klymko, Quantum criticality and nonequilibrium dynamics on a Lieb lattice of Rydberg atoms, (2025), arXiv:2508.05737 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    Scholl, H

    P. Scholl, H. J. Williams, G. Bornet, F. Wallner, D. Barredo, L. Henriet, A. Signoles, C. Hainaut, T. Franz, S. Geier, A. Tebben, A. Salzinger, G. Z¨ urn, T. Lahaye, M. Weidem¨ uller, and A. Browaeys, Microwave Engineering of Programmable XXZ Hamiltonians in Ar- rays of Rydberg Atoms, PRX Quantum3, 020303 (2022)

    2022

  62. [62]

    Kunimi, T

    M. Kunimi, T. Tomita, H. Katsura, and Y. Kato, Pro- posal for simulating quantum spin models with the Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction using Rydberg atoms and the construction of asymptotic quantum many-body scar states, Phys. Rev. A110, 043312 (2024)

    2024

  63. [63]

    M. Tian, R. Samajdar, and B. Gadway, Engineering Frus- trated Rydberg Spin Models by Graphical Floquet Mod- ulation, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 253001 (2025)

    2025

  64. [64]

    Kalinowski, N

    M. Kalinowski, N. Maskara, and M. D. Lukin, Non- Abelian Floquet Spin Liquids in a Digital Rydberg Sim- ulator, Phys. Rev. X13, 031008 (2023)

    2023

  65. [65]

    Nishad, A

    N. Nishad, A. Keselman, T. Lahaye, A. Browaeys, and S. Tsesses, Quantum simulation of generic spin- exchange models in Floquet-engineered Rydberg-atom arrays, Phys. Rev. A108, 053318 (2023)

    2023

  66. [66]

    Maskara, S

    N. Maskara, S. Ostermann, J. Shee, M. Kalinowski, A. McClain Gomez, R. Araiza Bravo, D. S. Wang, A. I. Krylov, N. Y. Yao, M. Head-Gordon, M. D. Lukin, and S. F. Yelin, Programmable simulations of molecules and materials with reconfigurable quantum processors, Nat. Phys.21, 289 (2025)

    2025

  67. [67]

    H. P. B¨ uchler, E. Demler, M. Lukin, A. Micheli, N. Prokof’ev, G. Pupillo, and P. Zoller, Strongly Cor- related 2D Quantum Phases with Cold Polar Molecules: Controlling the Shape of the Interaction Potential, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 060404 (2007)

    2007

  68. [68]

    Zhang, Y.-C

    X.-F. Zhang, Y.-C. Wen, and Y. Yu, Three-body inter- actions on a triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B83, 184513 (2011)

    2011

  69. [69]

    Moessner and K

    R. Moessner and K. S. Raman, Quantum dimer models, inIntroduction to Frustrated Magnetism(Springer, 2011) pp. 437–479

    2011

  70. [70]

    D. F. Locher, J. Old, K. Brechtelsbauer, J. Holschbach, H. P. B¨ uchler, S. Weber, and M. M¨ uller, Multiqubit Rydberg Gates for Quantum Error Correction, (2025), arXiv:2512.00843 [quant-ph]. 8

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  71. [71]

    H.-Y. Hu, A. M. Gomez, L. Chen, A. Trowbridge, A. J. Goldschmidt, Z. Manchester, F. T. Chong, A. Jaffe, and S. F. Yelin, Universal Dynamics with Globally Controlled Analog Quantum Simulators, (2026), arXiv:2508.19075 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  72. [72]

    Fishman, S

    M. Fishman, S. R. White, and E. M. Stoudenmire, The ITensor Software Library for Tensor Network Calcula- tions, SciPost Phys. Codebases , 4 (2022). Supplemental Material: Three-body interactions in Rydberg lattices I. EMERGENT MULTIBODY INTERACTIONS IN RYDBERG SYSTEMS The total energy of a system with dipolar interactions can be expressed as a perturbativ...

    2022

  73. [73]

    model space

    = J. The rescaled Hamiltonian then depends on only a single parameter: Hd = ∑ i σ+ i σ− i + ∑ i<j 1 R3 ij (σ+ i +σ− i )(σ+ j +σ− j ). (S2) The exact binary interaction is given byVij = 1− √ 1 +R−6 ij , with the perturbative van der Waals limit approximated as Vij =−1/(2R6 ij). We now consider several lattice geometries of N atoms: a linear chain, a ring, ...

  74. [74]

    012 3 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) FIG

    0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 -0.50 -0.25 0. 012 3 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) FIG. S5. Phase diagram with three-body interactions based on the (a) plaquette density, (b) the expectation value of Sx averaged over the rungs of the lattice, and (c) the von Neumann entanglement entropy. (d,e,f) Same as above but with only two-body interactions, demonstrating the absence o...

  75. [75]

    Shavitt and L

    I. Shavitt and L. T. Redmon, Quasidegenerate perturbation theories. A canonical van Vleck formalism and its relationship to other approaches, J. Chem. Phys. 73, 5711 (1980)

    1980

  76. [76]

    G. D. Mahan, Many-Particle Physics , Physics of Solids and Liquids (Springer New York, NY, 2013)

    2013

  77. [77]

    Sachdev, Quantum Phase Transitions , 2nd ed

    S. Sachdev, Quantum Phase Transitions , 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2011)

    2011