pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.19421 · v1 · pith:V43VWR23new · submitted 2026-05-19 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

Fractonic Constraints and Magnetic Order in a Dipole-Conserving Spin Chain

Prabhakar , Giuseppe De Tomasi , Soumya Bera This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 03:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el
keywords dipole conservationfractonic constraintsspin chainmagnetic orderIsing interactionsphase transitionDMRG
0
0 comments X

The pith

A dipole-conserving spin chain stabilizes antiferromagnetic order on pairs of spins despite kinetic constraints that block isolated excitations.

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

The work studies the ground-state phase diagram of a one-dimensional spin chain that obeys exact dipole conservation together with Ising interactions. Dipole conservation imposes strong dynamical restrictions that prevent single-spin motion, yet the system still develops long-range order in which the antiferromagnetic pattern is carried by neighboring spin pairs rather than by individual spins. When the Ising coupling becomes large and positive the pair order gives way to ordinary spin antiferromagnetism; when the coupling is large and negative the pair order is replaced by conventional ferromagnetism. These transitions are located with DMRG and exact diagonalization, and the authors recover the same sequence of phases by mapping the constrained model onto an effective XXZ chain of composite spins.

Core claim

Despite the kinetic constraints imposed by dipole conservation, the model realizes an antiferromagnetic dipole-ordered ground state in which ordering occurs at the level of spin pairs. At sufficiently large Ising interaction the system undergoes a transition from this dipole-ordered phase to a conventional spin antiferromagnetic phase; for ferromagnetic Ising couplings both antiferromagnetic and ferromagnetic dipole-ordered phases appear before the system crosses over to ordinary spin ferromagnetism at large negative coupling.

What carries the argument

Exact dipole conservation, which restricts the Hilbert space to fixed-dipole-moment sectors and permits an exact mapping onto effective XXZ models defined on composite spins.

If this is right

  • The dipole-ordered phase remains stable even though isolated spin flips cannot propagate.
  • A quantum phase transition separates the pair-ordered regime from conventional magnetic order when the Ising strength is increased.
  • Ferromagnetic Ising couplings produce an additional ferromagnetic dipole-ordered phase before conventional ferromagnetism appears.
  • Entanglement spectra and dynamical structure factors differ qualitatively between the dipole-ordered and conventional phases.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Similar competition between exact conservation laws and local interactions may produce pair-ordered or higher-moment ordered states in two-dimensional fracton models.
  • The effective XXZ description on composite spins could be used to predict correlation lengths or excitation spectra in other dipole-conserving lattices.
  • Realizations in Rydberg-atom or trapped-ion chains with engineered dipole-conserving gates would allow direct measurement of the pair-order parameter.

Load-bearing premise

The dipole conservation law is taken to be exact, so the dynamics remain confined to a single fixed-dipole-moment sector for all times.

What would settle it

DMRG data showing that the dipole-pair order parameter drops to zero while the conventional spin order parameter rises at a specific critical value of the Ising coupling.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.19421 by Giuseppe De Tomasi, Prabhakar, Soumya Bera.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. A schematic of the possible exchange of spins is shown [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Finite size phase diagram illustrating the transition [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. The static structure factor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Spin-spin correlator and doublon-doublon correlator [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) The dipole correlator [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a) The static structure factor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Entanglement entropy for fixed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Dynamical spin structure factor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. (a) The order parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Panel (a) and (b) shows, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Difference between the ground state energies [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_14.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This work investigates the competition between dipole conservation, which imposes strong dynamical constraints and prevents the propagation of isolated spin excitations, and Ising-type interactions that favor ordering. Specifically, we explore the ground state phase diagram of a one-dimensional spin chain in the presence of both fractonic constraints and interactions. Despite the kinetic constraints, the system stabilizes an antiferromagnetic dipole-ordered ground state, where the ordering occurs at the level of spin pairs rather than individual spins. At a large Ising interaction strength, the model undergoes a phase transition from a dipole-ordered phase to a spin antiferromagnetic phase. In contrast, for ferromagnetic Ising interactions, the model exhibits both antiferromagnetic and ferromagnetic dipole ordered phases. At sufficiently large negative interaction strength, the dipole ordered phase transitions to a ferromagnetic phase with conventional spin ferromagnetic order. To characterize these distinct phases, we employ density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) simulations alongside large-scale diagonalization. We analyze appropriate order parameters, along with features of the entanglement spectrum and dynamical spectral functions. In limiting cases, the observed transitions can be understood by mapping the dipole conserving model onto effective XXZ models in a restricted Hilbert space of composite spins.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines the ground-state phase diagram of a one-dimensional spin chain subject to exact dipole conservation (fractonic kinetic constraints) together with Ising interactions. It reports that the constraints do not preclude magnetic order: an antiferromagnetic dipole-ordered phase appears in which ordering is defined on composite spin pairs rather than individual spins. At large positive Ising coupling this phase gives way to a conventional spin antiferromagnetic phase. For ferromagnetic Ising couplings the model realizes both antiferromagnetic and ferromagnetic dipole-ordered phases, with a further transition to conventional spin ferromagnetism at large negative coupling. The phases are diagnosed via DMRG and exact diagonalization, supplemented by order parameters, entanglement spectra, dynamical spectral functions, and effective mappings to XXZ models on a restricted composite-spin Hilbert space.

Significance. If the numerical identification of the phases is robust and the dipole sectors are correctly verified, the work would establish that strong kinetic constraints can stabilize ordered states whose symmetry breaking is qualitatively different from conventional magnetism. The combination of standard numerical methods with analytic mappings to effective XXZ models on composite spins provides a concrete, falsifiable route to understanding constrained quantum magnets and may inform higher-dimensional fracton constructions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Numerical Methods and Results] The central claim that the ground state realizes pair-level antiferromagnetic dipole order (distinct from conventional spin AF order) rests on the system remaining in a fixed, non-zero dipole-moment sector. The abstract and methods description indicate that dipole conservation is imposed by construction, yet no explicit verification of ⟨P⟩ or its fluctuations on the DMRG or diagonalization ground-state wavefunctions is reported. Without such a check it is impossible to confirm that the measured order parameters reflect the intended composite-spin ordering rather than a conventional Néel state that happens to be dipole-conserving.
  2. [Effective Model Mapping] The effective XXZ mapping on composite spins is invoked to explain the observed transitions in limiting cases. The mapping presupposes that the low-energy states lie strictly within the dipole-conserving subspace that admits the composite-spin representation. The manuscript should supply a direct comparison (e.g., overlap or energy difference) between the full-model ground state and the effective-model ground state for at least one representative point in each phase to substantiate the mapping.
minor comments (2)
  1. The manuscript should report the system sizes, bond dimensions, and convergence criteria employed in the DMRG scans, as well as the Hilbert-space dimensions used in the exact-diagonalization studies, to allow independent assessment of the phase boundaries.
  2. Figure captions and axis labels for the order-parameter plots would benefit from explicit statements of the dipole sector (value of P) in which each quantity is evaluated.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments. We address each major point below and indicate the revisions we will make to strengthen the presentation of our results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Numerical Methods and Results] The central claim that the ground state realizes pair-level antiferromagnetic dipole order (distinct from conventional spin AF order) rests on the system remaining in a fixed, non-zero dipole-moment sector. The abstract and methods description indicate that dipole conservation is imposed by construction, yet no explicit verification of ⟨P⟩ or its fluctuations on the DMRG or diagonalization ground-state wavefunctions is reported. Without such a check it is impossible to confirm that the measured order parameters reflect the intended composite-spin ordering rather than a conventional Néel state that happens to be dipole-conserving.

    Authors: Dipole conservation is enforced at the level of the Hilbert space in both our DMRG and exact-diagonalization implementations: the basis is restricted to a single, fixed dipole sector and the Hamiltonian commutes with the dipole operator, so the ground state cannot leave that sector. Nevertheless, we agree that an explicit numerical check would remove any ambiguity. In the revised manuscript we will add a supplementary figure or table reporting ⟨P⟩ together with its variance (or standard deviation) for representative points in each identified phase, confirming that the dipole moment remains fixed at the value chosen for the simulation and that fluctuations are consistent with machine precision. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Effective Model Mapping] The effective XXZ mapping on composite spins is invoked to explain the observed transitions in limiting cases. The mapping presupposes that the low-energy states lie strictly within the dipole-conserving subspace that admits the composite-spin representation. The manuscript should supply a direct comparison (e.g., overlap or energy difference) between the full-model ground state and the effective-model ground state for at least one representative point in each phase to substantiate the mapping.

    Authors: We will strengthen the manuscript by providing the requested quantitative comparison. For at least one representative point in each dipole-ordered phase we will compute and report either the overlap between the full-model DMRG ground state and the ground state of the effective XXZ model (projected back into the original spin basis) or the relative energy difference |E_full − E_eff| / |E_full|. These data will be added to the revised text or supplementary material to make the validity of the mapping explicit. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; central claims rest on numerical evidence and model-derived mappings within explicitly defined constraints.

full rationale

The paper defines its model with exact dipole conservation as a starting assumption that restricts the Hilbert space by construction, then performs DMRG and exact diagonalization to locate ground states and measure order parameters within that space. Effective mappings to XXZ models on composite spins are derived in limiting cases from the same constrained Hamiltonian rather than fitted to target data. No load-bearing step reduces a claimed prediction or phase identification to a parameter defined by the same output; the distinction between dipole-ordered and conventional AF phases is diagnosed via distinct order parameters and entanglement features. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external numerical benchmarks and does not rely on self-citation chains or ansatz smuggling for its primary results.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the exact enforcement of dipole conservation and the validity of numerical methods for the restricted Hilbert space; no new particles or forces are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • Ising interaction strength
    Varied across positive and negative values to locate phase boundaries; specific fitted values not given in abstract.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Dipole conservation is exact and restricts dynamics to pair-like motion of excitations.
    Invoked to explain why isolated spin excitations cannot propagate.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5737 in / 1257 out tokens · 44309 ms · 2026-05-20T03:08:33.036697+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    ES is determined from the Schmidt decomposition of the ground state|ϕ⟩ and defined as,|ϕ⟩= P i √λi |ϕA i ⟩ ⊗ |ϕ B i ⟩

    Entanglement Spectrum The entanglement spectrum (ES) is routinely used [52– 54] to investigate phase transitions. ES is determined from the Schmidt decomposition of the ground state|ϕ⟩ and defined as,|ϕ⟩= P i √λi |ϕA i ⟩ ⊗ |ϕ B i ⟩. Here,λ j de- 9 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50S( ) (a) U/J = 1.00 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0.04 0.06 0.08S( ) (b) U/J = 2.50 FIG. 7. Entang...

    work page

  2. [2]

    P.Sala, T.Rakovszky, R.Verresen, M.Knap,andF.Poll- mann, Ergodicity breaking arising from hilbert space fragmentation in dipole-conserving hamiltonians, Phys. 13 Rev. X10, 011047 (2020)

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Khemani, M

    V. Khemani, M. Hermele, and R. Nandkishore, Local- ization from hilbert space shattering: From theory to physical realizations, Phys. Rev. B101, 174204 (2020)

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Morningstar, N

    A. Morningstar, N. O’Dea, and J. Richter, Hydrodynam- ics in long-range interacting systems with center-of-mass conservation, Phys. Rev. B108, L020304 (2023)

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Moudgalya, B

    S. Moudgalya, B. A. Bernevig, and N. Regnault, Quan- tum many-body scars and hilbert space fragmentation: a review of exact results, Reports on Progress in Physics 85, 086501 (2022)

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Seidel, H

    A. Seidel, H. Fu, D.-H. Lee, J. M. Leinaas, and J. Moore, Incompressible quantum liquids and new conservation laws, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 266405 (2005)

    work page 2005

  7. [7]

    Gromov, A

    A. Gromov, A. Lucas, and R. M. Nandkishore, Fracton hydrodynamics, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 033124 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Iaconis, A

    J. Iaconis, A. Lucas, and R. Nandkishore, Multipole con- servation laws and subdiffusion in any dimension, Phys. Rev. E103, 022142 (2021)

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    Moudgalya and O

    S. Moudgalya and O. I. Motrunich, Hilbert space frag- mentation and commutant algebras, Phys. Rev. X12, 011050 (2022)

    work page 2022

  10. [10]

    M. Will, R. Moessner, and F. Pollmann, Realization of hilbert space fragmentation and fracton dynamics in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 196301 (2024)

    work page 2024

  11. [11]

    P.Łydżba, P.Prelovšek,andM.Mierzejewski,Localinte- grals of motion in dipole-conserving models with hilbert space fragmentation, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 220405 (2024)

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    Feldmeier, P

    J. Feldmeier, P. Sala, G. De Tomasi, F. Pollmann, and M. Knap, Anomalous diffusion in dipole- and higher-moment-conserving systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 245303 (2020)

    work page 2020

  13. [14]

    Zerba, A

    C. Zerba, A. Seidel, F. Pollmann, and M. Knap, Emer- gent fracton hydrodynamics of ultracold atoms in par- tially filled landau levels, PRX Quantum6, 020321 (2025)

    work page 2025

  14. [15]

    S. Pai, M. Pretko, and R. M. Nandkishore, Localization in fractonic random circuits, Phys. Rev. X9, 021003 (2019)

    work page 2019

  15. [16]

    K. T. Grosvenor, C. Hoyos, F. Peña Benitez, and P. Surówka, Hydrodynamics of ideal fracton fluids, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 043186 (2021)

    work page 2021

  16. [17]

    Gliozzi, J

    J. Gliozzi, J. May-Mann, T. L. Hughes, and G. De Tomasi, Hierarchical hydrodynamics in long-range multipole-conserving systems, Phys. Rev. B108, 195106 (2023)

    work page 2023

  17. [18]

    Gliozzi, F

    J. Gliozzi, F. Balducci, and G. De Tomasi, Domain coars- ening in fractonic systems: A cascade of critical expo- nents, Phys. Rev. E113, 044112 (2026)

    work page 2026

  18. [19]

    Lake, H.-Y

    E. Lake, H.-Y. Lee, J. H. Han, and T. Senthil, Dipole condensates in tilted bose-hubbard chains, Phys. Rev. B 107, 195132 (2023)

    work page 2023

  19. [20]

    Lake and T

    E. Lake and T. Senthil, Non-fermi liquids from kinetic constraintsintiltedopticallattices,Phys.Rev.Lett.131, 043403 (2023)

    work page 2023

  20. [21]

    E. Lake, M. Hermele, and T. Senthil, Dipolar bose- hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B106, 064511 (2022)

    work page 2022

  21. [22]

    A. Prem, M. Pretko, and R. M. Nandkishore, Emer- gent phases of fractonic matter, Phys. Rev. B97, 085116 (2018)

    work page 2018

  22. [23]

    J.-K. Yuan, S. A. Chen, and P. Ye, Fractonic superfluids, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 023267 (2020)

    work page 2020

  23. [24]

    S. A. Chen, J.-K. Yuan, and P. Ye, Fractonic superfluids. ii. condensing subdimensional particles, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 013226 (2021)

    work page 2021

  24. [25]

    Gliozzi, G

    J. Gliozzi, G. De Tomasi, and T. L. Hughes, Many-body non-hermitian skin effect for multipoles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 136503 (2024)

    work page 2024

  25. [26]

    Guardado-Sanchez, A

    E. Guardado-Sanchez, A. Morningstar, B. M. Spar, P. T. Brown, D. A. Huse, and W. S. Bakr, Subdiffusion and heat transport in a tilted two-dimensional fermi-hubbard system, Phys. Rev. X10, 011042 (2020)

    work page 2020

  26. [28]

    Wadleigh, N

    L. Wadleigh, N. Kowalski, and B. DeMarco, Interact- ing Stark localization dynamics in a three-dimensional lattice Bose gas, Phys. Rev. A107, 043325 (2023), arXiv:2211.12336 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2023

  27. [29]

    Scherg, T

    S. Scherg, T. Kohlert, P. Sala, F. Pollmann, B. Hebbe Madhusudhana, I. Bloch, and M. Aidelsburger, Observing non-ergodicity due to kinetic constraints in tilted fermi-hubbard chains, Nature Communications12, 4490 (2021)

    work page 2021

  28. [30]

    Morong, F

    W. Morong, F. Liu, P. Becker, K. S. Collins, L. Feng, A. Kyprianidis, G. Pagano, T. You, A. V. Gorshkov, and C. Monroe, Observation of stark many-body localization without disorder, Nature599, 393 (2021)

    work page 2021

  29. [31]

    Q. Guo, C. Cheng, H. Li, S. Xu, P. Zhang, Z. Wang, C. Song, W. Liu, W. Ren, H. Dong, R. Mondaini, and H. Wang, Stark many-body localization on a supercon- ductingquantumprocessor,Phys.Rev.Lett.127,240502 (2021)

    work page 2021

  30. [32]

    Kapustin and L

    A. Kapustin and L. Spodyneiko, Hohenberg-mermin- wagner-type theorems and dipole symmetry, Phys. Rev. B106, 245125 (2022)

    work page 2022

  31. [33]

    Kohlert, S

    T. Kohlert, S. Scherg, P. Sala, F. Pollmann, B. Hebbe Madhusudhana, I. Bloch, and M. Aidelsburger, Exploring the regime of fragmentation in strongly tilted fermi-hubbard chains, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 010201 (2023)

    work page 2023

  32. [34]

    H. P. Zahn, V. P. Singh, M. N. Kosch, L. Asteria, L. Freystatzky, K. Sengstock, L. Mathey, and C. Weit- enberg, Formation of spontaneous density-wave patterns in dc driven lattices, Phys. Rev. X12, 021014 (2022)

    work page 2022

  33. [35]

    Zechmann, E

    P. Zechmann, E. Altman, M. Knap, and J. Feldmeier, Fractonic luttinger liquids and supersolids in a con- strained bose-hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B107, 195131 (2023)

    work page 2023

  34. [36]

    Boesl, P

    J. Boesl, P. Zechmann, J. Feldmeier, and M. Knap, De- confinement dynamics of fractons in tilted bose-hubbard chains, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 143401 (2024)

    work page 2024

  35. [37]

    De Tomasi, D

    G. De Tomasi, D. Hetterich, P. Sala, and F. Pollmann, Dynamics of strongly interacting systems: From fock- space fragmentation to many-body localization, Phys. Rev. B100, 214313 (2019)

    work page 2019

  36. [38]

    Moudgalya, A

    S. Moudgalya, A. Prem, R. Nandkishore, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, Thermalization and its absence within krylov subspaces of a constrained hamiltonian (WORLD SCIENTIFIC, 2020) pp. 147–209, 0. 14

    work page 2020

  37. [39]

    S. R. White, Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalizationgroups,Phys.Rev.Lett.69,2863(1992)

    work page 1992

  38. [40]

    U.Schollwöck,Thedensity-matrixrenormalizationgroup in the age of matrix product states, Annals of Physics 326, 96 (2011), january 2011 Special Issue

    work page 2011

  39. [41]

    Lanczos, An iteration method for the solution of the eigenvalue problem of linear differential and integral op- erators, J

    C. Lanczos, An iteration method for the solution of the eigenvalue problem of linear differential and integral op- erators, J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand.45, 255 (1950)

    work page 1950

  40. [42]

    Dagotto, Correlated electrons in high-temperature su- perconductors, Rev

    E. Dagotto, Correlated electrons in high-temperature su- perconductors, Rev. Mod. Phys.66, 763 (1994)

    work page 1994

  41. [43]

    Giamarchi, Theoretical framework for quasi-one di- mensional systems, Chemical Reviews104, 5037 (2004)

    T. Giamarchi, Theoretical framework for quasi-one di- mensional systems, Chemical Reviews104, 5037 (2004)

    work page 2004

  42. [44]

    M. A. Cazalilla, R. Citro, T. Giamarchi, E. Orignac, and M. Rigol, One dimensional bosons: From condensed mat- ter systems to ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 1405 (2011)

    work page 2011

  43. [45]

    Hauschild and F

    J. Hauschild and F. Pollmann, Efficient numerical sim- ulations with Tensor Networks: Tensor Network Python (TeNPy), SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes , 5 (2018)

    work page 2018

  44. [46]

    S. R. White, Density-matrix algorithms for quantum renormalization groups, Phys. Rev. B48, 10345 (1993)

    work page 1993

  45. [47]

    Giamarchi,Quantum Physics in One Dimension(Ox- ford University Press, 2003)

    T. Giamarchi,Quantum Physics in One Dimension(Ox- ford University Press, 2003)

    work page 2003

  46. [48]

    V. E. Korepin, N. M. Bogoliubov, and A. G. Izer- gin,Quantum Inverse Scattering Method and Correla- tion Functions,CambridgeMonographsonMathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993)

    work page 1993

  47. [49]

    Calabrese and J

    P. Calabrese and J. Cardy, Entanglement entropy and conformal field theory, Journal of Physics A: Mathemat- ical and Theoretical42, 504005 (2009)

    work page 2009

  48. [50]

    Fagotti and P

    M. Fagotti and P. Calabrese, Universal parity effects in the entanglement entropy of xx chains with open bound- ary conditions, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2011, P01017 (2011)

    work page 2011

  49. [51]

    Laflorencie, E

    N. Laflorencie, E. S. Sørensen, M.-S. Chang, and I. Af- fleck, Boundary effects in the critical scaling of entangle- ment entropy in 1d systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 100603 (2006)

    work page 2006

  50. [52]

    V. E. Korepin, Universality of entropy scaling in one di- mensional gapless models, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 096402 (2004)

    work page 2004

  51. [53]

    Li and F

    H. Li and F. D. M. Haldane, Entanglement spectrum as a generalization of entanglement entropy: Identification of topological order in non-abelian fractional quantum hall effect states, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 010504 (2008)

    work page 2008

  52. [54]

    J. T. Schneider, S. J. Thomson, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Entanglement spectrum and quantum phase diagram of the long-range xxz chain, Phys. Rev. B106, 014306 (2022)

    work page 2022

  53. [55]

    Plat and C

    X. Plat and C. Hotta, Entanglement spectrum as a marker for phase transitions in the density embedding theory for interacting spinless fermionic models, Phys. Rev. B102, 140410 (2020)

    work page 2020

  54. [56]

    Stenger, S

    J. Stenger, S. Inouye, A. P. Chikkatur, D. M. Stamper- Kurn, D. E. Pritchard, and W. Ketterle, Bragg spec- troscopy of a bose-einstein condensate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 4569 (1999)

    work page 1999

  55. [57]

    Lovesey,Theory of neutron scattering from condensed matter(Clarendon Press., 2024)

    S. Lovesey,Theory of neutron scattering from condensed matter(Clarendon Press., 2024)

    work page 2024

  56. [58]

    Karabach, G

    M. Karabach, G. Müller, H. Gould, and J. Tobochnik, In- troduction to the Bethe Ansatz I, Computer in Physics 11, 36 (1997), https://pubs.aip.org/aip/cip/article- pdf/11/1/36/12196073/36_1_online.pdf

    work page 1997

  57. [59]

    Karbach, K

    M. Karbach, K. Hu, and G. Müller, Introduc- tion to the Bethe Ansatz II, Computer in Physics 12, 565 (1998), https://pubs.aip.org/aip/cip/article- pdf/12/6/565/7865636/565_1_online.pdf

    work page 1998

  58. [60]

    R. M. Nandkishore and M. Hermele, Fractons, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics10, 295 (2019)

    work page 2019

  59. [61]

    K. T. Grosvenor, C. Hoyos, F. Peña Benítez, and P. Surówka, Space-dependent symmetries and fractons, Frontiers in Physics9, 10.3389/fphy.2021.792621 (2022)

    work page doi:10.3389/fphy.2021.792621 2021