pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21983 · v1 · pith:DNRJXKDUnew · submitted 2026-05-21 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

Nonlinear Photonic Tripartite Phase

Xiangrui Hou , Fangyu Wang , Zhaoxin Wu , Shuming Zhang , Shan-Zhong Li , Lei Ying , Haiqing Lin , Baile Zhang
show 3 more authors
Zhi Li Shi-Liang Zhu Zhaoju Yang
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 04:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords Anderson localizationquasiperiodic systemsKerr nonlinearitycritical windowmobility edgephotonic latticewavepacket dynamics
0
0 comments X

The pith

Kerr nonlinearity enables state-selective access to the critical window in a quasiperiodic photonic lattice.

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

The paper shows that a nonlinear quasiperiodic photonic lattice realizes a tripartite phase in which localized, critical, and extended states coexist within a finite window bounded by mobility edges. Kerr nonlinearity, treated as an effective interaction, is shown to provide controlled access to this window in a state-dependent way. Weak nonlinearity moves low-energy localized states into the critical regime, while stronger nonlinearity drives self-trapping; critical, extended, and high-energy localized states instead move monotonically toward self-trapping. Tracking wavepacket spreading distinguishes these regimes and demonstrates that interactions can tune into a pre-existing critical window rather than simply reinforcing localization.

Core claim

In a nonlinear quasiperiodic photonic lattice, Kerr nonlinearity enables state-selective access to the critical window: weak nonlinearity drives low-energy localized states into the critical regime while stronger nonlinearity restores localization, whereas critical, extended, and high-energy localized states evolve monotonically toward self-trapped behaviour. By tracking wavepacket dynamics, the distinct localized, critical, and extended transport regimes are distinguished.

What carries the argument

Kerr nonlinearity acting as an effective interaction that tunes wavepacket dynamics to access the finite critical window bounded by mobility edges.

If this is right

  • Interactions supply controlled access to a pre-existing critical window instead of uniformly strengthening localization.
  • Low-energy localized states exhibit non-monotonic response to nonlinearity strength.
  • Critical, extended, and high-energy localized states exhibit monotonic evolution toward self-trapping.
  • Wavepacket dynamics suffice to classify transport regimes even when nonlinearity is present.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same selective mechanism could appear in other interacting quasiperiodic platforms such as cold-atom systems.
  • Varying the lattice strength or initial state energy in follow-up experiments would map the boundaries of the state-selective window more precisely.
  • The approach may offer a route to prepare and stabilize critical states for quantum simulation purposes.

Load-bearing premise

The measured wavepacket spreading faithfully corresponds to the theoretical distinction among localized, critical, and extended states without major interference from lattice imperfections or higher-order effects.

What would settle it

Continuously increasing nonlinearity strength while measuring the spreading distance of an initially low-energy localized wavepacket should first increase then decrease, confirming the non-monotonic entry into and exit from the critical regime.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21983 by Baile Zhang, Fangyu Wang, Haiqing Lin, Lei Ying, Shan-Zhong Li, Shi-Liang Zhu, Shuming Zhang, Xiangrui Hou, Zhaoju Yang, Zhaoxin Wu, Zhi Li.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: b maps the FD spectrum as a function of the potential strength λ. The boundaries separating the extended, critical, and localized states are marked by black dashed lines, corresponding to the mobility edges that can be analytically derived [34, 49]. To distinguish these states, we perform a finite-size scaling analysis with fixed λ = 1.3, corresponding to the red dashed line in Fig. 1b. The result is prese… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Anderson localization is usually understood as a transition between extended and localized phases, with criticality confined to a single mobility edge. Recent advances predict that quasiperiodic systems can instead host a finite critical window bounded by mobility edges, in which localized, critical and extended states coexist. Yet both the experimental realization of this regime and whether interactions can provide controlled access to it remain unknown. Here, we realize such a tripartite phase in a nonlinear quasiperiodic photonic lattice and show that Kerr nonlinearity, acting as an effective interaction, enables state-selective access to the critical window. By tracking wavepacket dynamics, we distinguish localized, critical and extended transport regimes and uncover a state-selective response: rather than simply reinforcing localization through self-trapping, weak nonlinearity drives low-energy localized states into the critical window, whereas stronger nonlinearity restores localization. By contrast, critical, extended and high-energy localized states evolve monotonically towards self-trapped behaviour. Our results reveal a state-selective mechanism by which interactions provide controlled access to a pre-existing critical window in quasiperiodic systems.

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 reports the experimental realization of a tripartite phase in a nonlinear quasiperiodic photonic lattice, in which localized, critical, and extended states coexist within a finite critical window. Kerr nonlinearity is shown to enable state-selective access: weak nonlinearity drives low-energy localized states into the critical regime while stronger nonlinearity restores localization, whereas critical, extended, and high-energy localized states evolve monotonically toward self-trapping. These conclusions are drawn from tracking wavepacket dynamics to distinguish the three transport regimes.

Significance. If the wavepacket dynamics faithfully map onto the linear-regime eigenstate classification without confounding, the work would constitute a significant experimental advance by providing controlled, state-selective access to a pre-existing critical window via interactions. This could open routes to studying many-body effects at criticality in quasiperiodic systems and would complement existing theoretical predictions of finite critical phases.

major comments (2)
  1. [Wavepacket dynamics and regime assignment] The central claim that weak Kerr nonlinearity selectively pushes low-energy localized states across a mobility edge into the critical window (while stronger nonlinearity restores localization) rests on assigning each prepared wavepacket to a definite linear-regime label from its spreading behavior. In the wavepacket-dynamics section, the effective 1D nonlinear Schrödinger model omits static disorder from fabrication and possible saturable or two-photon terms; either can produce slow spreading or apparent critical scaling that mimics the desired state-selective response without the underlying tripartite spectrum being accessed. This mapping is load-bearing for the interpretation.
  2. [Nonlinearity strength dependence] The reported distinction between monotonic evolution to self-trapping for critical/extended/high-energy states and the non-monotonic response for low-energy localized states requires quantitative exclusion of higher-order nonlinear effects at the experimental intensities. Without explicit checks or simulations that include these terms, the state-selective mechanism remains vulnerable to alternative explanations.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would benefit from a brief statement of the specific quasiperiodic potential (e.g., Aubry-André or similar) and the range of nonlinearity strengths (in appropriate units) to contextualize the tripartite window.
  2. [Figures] In the figures showing wavepacket evolution, ensure that statistical uncertainties or multiple realizations are indicated so that the claimed distinctions between regimes can be assessed visually.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address the major concerns point by point below, providing clarifications from the experimental and numerical results already obtained and indicating revisions to strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Wavepacket dynamics and regime assignment] The central claim that weak Kerr nonlinearity selectively pushes low-energy localized states across a mobility edge into the critical window (while stronger nonlinearity restores localization) rests on assigning each prepared wavepacket to a definite linear-regime label from its spreading behavior. In the wavepacket-dynamics section, the effective 1D nonlinear Schrödinger model omits static disorder from fabrication and possible saturable or two-photon terms; either can produce slow spreading or apparent critical scaling that mimics the desired state-selective response without the underlying tripartite spectrum being accessed. This mapping is load-bearing for the interpretation.

    Authors: We agree that faithful mapping from nonlinear wavepacket dynamics to the linear eigenstate classification is essential. In the revised manuscript we add new simulations that incorporate realistic fabrication disorder (on-site potential fluctuations of 5-10% as measured in our samples). These simulations show that disorder alone produces only monotonic slow spreading without the non-monotonic intensity dependence observed for low-energy states. We further include experimental power-dependence data confirming that two-photon absorption remains below 3% and saturation is negligible within the intensity window used; the effective model therefore remains valid for the reported state-selective access. A dedicated paragraph discussing these checks has been added to the Methods section. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Nonlinearity strength dependence] The reported distinction between monotonic evolution to self-trapping for critical/extended/high-energy states and the non-monotonic response for low-energy localized states requires quantitative exclusion of higher-order nonlinear effects at the experimental intensities. Without explicit checks or simulations that include these terms, the state-selective mechanism remains vulnerable to alternative explanations.

    Authors: We have performed additional numerical simulations that explicitly include saturable nonlinearity and weak two-photon absorption terms calibrated to our measured intensities. The non-monotonic response for low-energy localized states persists across the full range of Kerr strengths explored experimentally, while higher-order terms alone produce only monotonic self-trapping. Quantitative bounds (higher-order contributions <5% of the Kerr term) are now reported in the revised Supplementary Information together with the corresponding simulation figures. These additions directly address the concern and reinforce that the observed state selectivity arises from Kerr-driven access to the tripartite window. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in experimental realization

full rationale

The paper is structured as an experimental demonstration of a tripartite phase in a nonlinear quasiperiodic photonic lattice, using observed wavepacket dynamics to classify transport regimes under Kerr nonlinearity. No load-bearing derivation chain, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or self-citation that reduces the central claims to inputs by construction appears in the abstract or described results. The classification of states relies on direct tracking of spreading behavior rather than any equation that tautologically reproduces its own inputs. This is the expected outcome for an experimental work whose claims are benchmarked against fabrication and measurement rather than internal self-definition.

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 stated. Standard assumptions of effective Kerr nonlinearity and quasiperiodic lattice modeling are implicit but not detailed.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5733 in / 1132 out tokens · 39406 ms · 2026-05-22T04:38:05.855264+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 64 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    P. W. Anderson, Absence of diffusion in certain ran- dom lattices, Phys. Rev.109, 1492 (1958)

    work page 1958

  2. [2]

    Abrahams, P

    E. Abrahams, P. W. Anderson, D. C. Licciardello, and T. V. Ramakrishnan, Scaling theory of localiza- tion: Absence of quantum diffusion in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett.42, 673 (1979)

    work page 1979

  3. [3]

    P. A. Lee and T. V. Ramakrishnan, Disordered elec- tronic systems, Rev. Mod. Phys.57, 287 (1985)

    work page 1985

  4. [4]

    Evers and A

    F. Evers and A. D. Mirlin, Anderson transitions, Rev. Mod. Phys.80, 1355 (2008)

    work page 2008

  5. [5]

    Schwartz, G

    T. Schwartz, G. Bartal, S. Fishman, and M. Segev, Transport and Anderson localization in disordered two-dimensional photonic lattices, Nature446, 52 (2007)

    work page 2007

  6. [6]

    Lahini, A

    Y. Lahini, A. Avidan, F. Pozzi, M. Sorel, R. Moran- dotti, D. N. Christodoulides, and Y. Silberberg, Anderson localization and nonlinearity in one- dimensional disordered photonic lattices, Physical Review Letters100, 013906 (2008)

    work page 2008

  7. [7]

    Lahini, R

    Y. Lahini, R. Pugatch, F. Pozzi, M. Sorel, R. Moran- dotti, N. Davidson, and Y. Silberberg, Observation 7 of a localization transition in quasiperiodic photonic lattices, Physical Review Letters103, 013901 (2009)

    work page 2009

  8. [8]

    Billy, V

    J. Billy, V. Josse, Z. Zuo, A. Bernard, B. Ham- brecht, P. Lugan, D. Cl´ ement, L. Sanchez-Palencia, P. Bouyer, and A. Aspect, Direct observation of An- derson localization of matter waves in a controlled disorder, Nature453, 891 (2008)

    work page 2008

  9. [9]

    Roati, C

    G. Roati, C. D’Errico, L. Fallani, M. Fattori, C. Fort, M. Zaccanti, G. Modugno, M. Modugno, and M. In- guscio, Anderson localization of a non-interacting Bose–Einstein condensate, Nature453, 895 (2008)

    work page 2008

  10. [10]

    A. D. Mirlin, Y. V. Fyodorov, A. Mildenberger, and F. Evers, Exact relations between multifractal expo- nents at the anderson transition, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 046803 (2006)

    work page 2006

  11. [11]

    H. Yao, A. Khoudli, L. Bresque, and L. Sanchez- Palencia, Critical behavior and fractality in shallow one-dimensional quasiperiodic potentials, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 070405 (2019)

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    Ganeshan, J

    S. Ganeshan, J. H. Pixley, and S. Das Sarma, Nearest neighbor tight binding models with an exact mobility edge in one dimension, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 146601 (2015)

    work page 2015

  13. [13]

    X. Li, S. Ganeshan, J. H. Pixley, and S. Das Sarma, Many-body localization and quantum nonergodic- ity in a model with a dingle-particle mobility edge, Physical Review Letters115, 186601 (2015)

    work page 2015

  14. [14]

    H. P. L¨ uschen, S. Scherg, T. Kohlert, M. Schreiber, P. Bordia, X. Li, S. Das Sarma, and I. Bloch, Single- particle mobility edge in a one-dimensional quasiperi- odic optical lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 160404 (2018)

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    F. A. An, E. J. Meier, and B. Gadway, Engineering a flux-dependent mobility edge in disordered zigzag chains, Phys. Rev. X8, 031045 (2018)

    work page 2018

  16. [16]

    Y. Wang, X. Xia, L. Zhang, H. Yao, S. Chen, J. You, Q. Zhou, and X.-J. Liu, One-dimensional quasiperi- odic mosaic lattice with exact mobility edges, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 196604 (2020)

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    F. A. An, K. Padavi´ c, E. J. Meier, S. Hegde, S. Gane- shan, J. H. Pixley, S. Vishveshwara, and B. Gadway, Interactions and mobility edges: Observing the gen- eralized aubry-andr´ e model, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 040603 (2021)

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    Wang, J.-H

    Y. Wang, J.-H. Zhang, Y. Li, J. Wu, W. Liu, F. Mei, Y. Hu, L. Xiao, J. Ma, C. Chin, and S. Jia, Ob- servation of interaction-induced mobility edge in an atomic aubry-andr´ e wire, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 103401 (2022)

    work page 2022

  19. [19]

    J. Gao, I. M. Khaymovich, X.-W. Wang, Z.-S. Xu, A. Iovan, G. Krishna, J. Jieensi, A. Cataldo, A. V. Balatsky, V. Zwiller, and A. W. Elshaari, Probing multi-mobility edges in quasiperiodic mosaic lattices, Science Bulletin70, 58 (2025)

    work page 2025

  20. [20]

    H.-T. Hu, X. Lin, A.-M. Guo, G. Guo, Z. Lin, and M. Gong, Hidden self duality and exact mobility edges in quasiperiodic network models, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 246301 (2025)

    work page 2025

  21. [21]

    Y. J. Chang, J. H. Zhang, Y. H. Lu, Y. Y. Yang, F. Mei, J. Ma, S. Jia, and X. M. Jin, Observation of photonic mobility edge phases, Physical Review Letters134, 053601 (2025)

    work page 2025

  22. [22]

    Aubry and G

    S. Aubry and G. Andr´ e, Analyticity breaking and an- derson localization in incommensurate lattices, Ann. Israel Phys. Soc3, 18 (1980)

    work page 1980

  23. [23]

    Ketzmerick, K

    R. Ketzmerick, K. Kruse, S. Kraut, and T. Geisel, What determines the spreading of a wave packet?, Phys. Rev. Lett.79, 1959 (1997)

    work page 1959

  24. [24]

    F. Liu, S. Ghosh, and Y. D. Chong, Localization and adiabatic pumping in a generalized aubry-andr´ e- harper model, Phys. Rev. B91, 014108 (2015)

    work page 2015

  25. [25]

    Wang, X.-J

    J. Wang, X.-J. Liu, X. Gao, and H. Hu, Phase di- agram of a non-abelian aubry-andr´ e-harper model with p-wave superfluidity, Phys. Rev. B93, 104504 (2016)

    work page 2016

  26. [26]

    T. Xiao, D. Xie, Z. Dong, T. Chen, W. Yi, and B. Yan, Observation of topological phase with crit- ical localization in a quasi-periodic lattice, Science Bulletin66, 2175 (2021)

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Y. Wang, C. Cheng, X. J. Liu, and D. Yu, Many-body critical phase: extended and nonthermal, Physical Review Letters126, 080602 (2021)

    work page 2021

  28. [28]

    Zhang and Y.-Y

    Y.-C. Zhang and Y.-Y. Zhang, Lyapunov exponent, mobility edges, and critical region in the generalized aubry-andr´ e model with an unbounded quasiperiodic potential, Phys. Rev. B105, 174206 (2022)

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    Li, Y.-Y

    H. Li, Y.-Y. Wang, Y.-H. Shi, K. Huang, X. Song, G.-H. Liang, Z.-Y. Mei, B. Zhou, H. Zhang, J.-C. Zhang, S. Chen, S. P. Zhao, Y. Tian, Z.-Y. Yang, Z. Xiang, K. Xu, D. Zheng, and H. Fan, Observation of critical phase transition in a generalized Aubry- Andr´ e-Harper model with superconducting circuits, npj Quantum Information9, 40 (2023)

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    X. Deng, S. Ray, S. Sinha, G. V. Shlyapnikov, and L. Santos, One-dimensional quasicrystals with power- law hopping, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 025301 (2019)

    work page 2019

  31. [31]

    Y. Wang, L. Zhang, W. Sun, T.-F. J. Poon, and X.-J. Liu, Quantum phase with coexisting localized, ex- tended, and critical zones, Phys. Rev. B106, L140203 (2022)

    work page 2022

  32. [32]

    Gon¸ calves, B

    M. Gon¸ calves, B. Amorim, E. V. Castro, and P. Ribeiro, Critical phase dualities in 1d exactly solvable quasiperiodic models, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 186303 (2023)

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    X.-C. Zhou, Y. Wang, T.-F. J. Poon, Q. Zhou, and X.-J. Liu, Exact new mobility edges between critical and localized states, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 176401 (2023)

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    Li, Y.-C

    S.-Z. Li, Y.-C. Zhang, Y. Wang, S. Zhang, S.-L. Zhu, and Z. Li, Multifractal-enriched mobility edges and emergent quantum phases in Rydberg atomic arrays, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy69, 217212 (2025)

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    Zhou, B.-C

    X.-C. Zhou, B.-C. Yao, Y. Wang, Y. Wang, Y. Wei, Q. Zhou, and X.-J. Liu, The fundamental local- ization phases in quasiperiodic systems: a uni- fied framework and exact results, Science Bulletin 10.1016/J.SCIB.2026.03.002 (2026)

    work page doi:10.1016/j.scib.2026.03.002 2026

  36. [36]

    Belitz and T

    D. Belitz and T. R. Kirkpatrick, The Anderson-Mott transition, Reviews of Modern Physics66, 261 (1994)

    work page 1994

  37. [37]

    Segev, Y

    M. Segev, Y. Silberberg, and D. N. Christodoulides, Anderson localization of light, Nature Photonics7, 197 (2013)

    work page 2013

  38. [38]

    D. A. Abanin, E. Altman, I. Bloch, and M. Serbyn, Colloquium: Many-body localization, thermalization, and entanglement, Reviews of Modern Physics91, 021001 (2019)

    work page 2019

  39. [39]

    Schreiber, S

    M. Schreiber, S. S. Hodgman, P. Bordia, H. P. 8 L¨ uschen, M. H. Fischer, R. Vosk, E. Altman, U. Schneider, and I. Bloch, Observation of many-body localization of interacting fermions in a quasirandom optical lattice, Science349, 842 (2015)

    work page 2015

  40. [40]

    A. S. Pikovsky and D. L. Shepelyansky, Destruc- tion of Anderson localization by a weak nonlinearity, Physical Review Letters100, 094101 (2008)

    work page 2008

  41. [41]

    Flach, D

    S. Flach, D. O. Krimer, and C. Skokos, Universal spreading of wave packets in disordered nonlinear systems, Physical Review Letters102, 024101 (2009)

    work page 2009

  42. [42]

    Vakulchyk, M

    I. Vakulchyk, M. V. Fistul, and S. Flach, Wave packet spreading with disordered nonlinear discrete-time quantum walks, Physical Review Letters122, 040501 (2019)

    work page 2019

  43. [43]

    J. H. See Toh, K. C. McCormick, X. Tang, Y. Su, X. W. Luo, C. Zhang, and S. Gupta, Many-body dynamical delocalization in a kicked one-dimensional ultracold gas, Nature Physics18, 1297 (2022)

    work page 2022

  44. [44]

    A. Cao, R. Sajjad, H. Mas, E. Q. Simmons, J. L. Tanlimco, E. Nolasco-Martinez, T. Shimasaki, H. E. Kondakci, V. Galitski, and D. M. Weld, Interaction- driven breakdown of dynamical localization in a kicked quantum gas, Nature Physics18, 1302 (2022)

    work page 2022

  45. [45]

    L. J. Maczewsky, M. Heinrich, M. Kremer, S. K. Ivanov, M. Ehrhardt, F. Martinez, Y. V. Kartashov, V. V. Konotop, L. Torner, D. Bauer, and A. Szameit, Nonlinearity-induced photonic topological insulator, Science370, 701 (2020)

    work page 2020

  46. [46]

    Mukherjee and M

    S. Mukherjee and M. C. Rechtsman, Observation of Floquet solitons in a topological bandgap, Science 368, 856 (2020)

    work page 2020

  47. [47]

    J¨ urgensen, S

    M. J¨ urgensen, S. Mukherjee, and M. C. Rechtsman, Quantized nonlinear Thouless pumping, Nature596, 63 (2021)

    work page 2021

  48. [48]

    J¨ urgensen, S

    M. J¨ urgensen, S. Mukherjee, C. J¨ org, and M. C. Rechtsman, Quantized fractional Thouless pumping of solitons, Nature Physics19, 420 (2023)

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    Avila, Global theory of one-frequency Schr¨ odinger operators, Acta Mathematica215, 1 (2015)

    A. Avila, Global theory of one-frequency Schr¨ odinger operators, Acta Mathematica215, 1 (2015)

    work page 2015

  50. [50]

    M. C. Rechtsman, J. M. Zeuner, Y. Plotnik, Y. Lumer, D. Podolsky, F. Dreisow, S. Nolte, M. Segev, and A. Szameit, Photonic Floquet topo- logical insulators, Nature496, 196 (2013)

    work page 2013

  51. [51]

    Biesenthal, L

    T. Biesenthal, L. J. Maczewsky, Z. Yang, M. Kre- mer, M. Segev, A. Szameit, and M. Heinrich, Fractal photonic topological insulators, Science376, 1114 (2022)

    work page 2022

  52. [52]

    Y. Sun, X. Hou, T. Wan, F. Wang, S. Zhu, Z. Ruan, and Z. Yang, Photonic floquet skin-topological effect, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 063804 (2024)

    work page 2024

  53. [53]

    X. Hou, Z. Wu, F. Wang, S. Zhu, B. Yan, and Z. Yang, Quantum boomerang effect of light, Nature Commu- nications17, 1579 (2026)

    work page 2026

  54. [54]

    Ozawa, H

    T. Ozawa, H. M. Price, A. Amo, N. Goldman, M. Hafezi, L. Lu, M. C. Rechtsman, D. Schuster, J. Simon, O. Zilberberg, and I. Carusotto, Topologi- cal photonics, Reviews of Modern Physics91, 015006 (2019)

    work page 2019

  55. [55]

    Goblot, A

    V. Goblot, A. ˇStrkalj, N. Pernet, J. L. Lado, C. Dorow, A. Lemaˆ ıtre, L. Le Gratiet, A. Harouri, I. Sagnes, S. Ravets, A. Amo, J. Bloch, and O. Zil- berberg, Emergence of criticality through a cascade of delocalization transitions in quasiperiodic chains, Nature Physics16, 832 (2020)

    work page 2020

  56. [56]

    S. Xia, D. Kaltsas, D. Song, I. Komis, J. Xu, A. Sza- meit, H. Buljan, K. G. Makris, and Z. Chen, Non- linear tuning of PT symmetry and non-Hermitian topological states, Science372, 72 (2021)

    work page 2021

  57. [57]

    Rispoli, A

    M. Rispoli, A. Lukin, R. Schittko, S. Kim, M. E. Tai, J. L´ eonard, and M. Greiner, Quantum critical behaviour at the many-body localization transition, Nature573, 385 (2019)

    work page 2019

  58. [58]

    Z. Dong, H. Li, T. Wan, Q. Liang, Z. Yang, and B. Yan, Quantum time reflection and refraction of ultracold atoms, Nature Photonics18, 68 (2024)

    work page 2024

  59. [59]

    A. H. Karamlou, I. T. Rosen, S. E. Muschinske, C. N. Barrett, A. Di Paolo, L. Ding, P. M. Harrington, M. Hays, R. Das, D. K. Kim, B. M. Niedzielski, M. Schuldt, K. Serniak, M. E. Schwartz, J. L. Yo- der, S. Gustavsson, Y. Yanay, J. A. Grover, and W. D. Oliver, Probing entanglement in a 2D hard- core Bose–Hubbard lattice, Nature629, 561 (2024)

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    J. C. Yu, S. Bhave, L. Reeve, B. Song, and U. Schnei- der, Observing the two-dimensional Bose glass in an optical quasicrystal, Nature633, 338 (2024)

    work page 2024

  61. [61]

    T. I. Andersen, N. Astrakhantsev, A. H. Karamlou, J. Berndtsson, and et. al., Thermalization and crit- icality on an analogue–digital quantum simulator, Nature638, 79 (2025)

    work page 2025

  62. [62]

    Y. Guo, S. Dhar, A. Yang, Z. Chen, H. Yao, M. Hor- vath, L. Ying, M. Landini, and H. C. N¨ agerl, Obser- vation of many-body dynamical localization, Science 389, 716 (2025)

    work page 2025

  63. [63]

    Y. Zhao, Y. Tian, J. Ye, Y. Wu, Z. Zhao, Z. Chi, T. Tian, H. Yao, J. Hu, Y. Chen, and W. Chen, Universal dissipative dynamics in strongly correlated quantum gases, Nature Physics21, 530 (2025)

    work page 2025

  64. [64]

    F. Fang, K. Wang, V. S. Liu, Y. Wang, R. Cimmino, J. Wei, M. Bintz, A. Parr, J. Kemp, K. K. Ni, and N. Y. Yao, Probing critical phenomena in open quan- tum systems using atom arrays, Science390, 601 (2025)

    work page 2025