pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.22449 · v1 · pith:XYVDHPDDnew · submitted 2026-05-21 · ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas

Interaction-enabled metal-insulator phase transition in a driven quantum gas

Camilo Cantillano , Karthick Ramanathan , Zekai Chen , Ang Yang , Emilio Aguilera-Valdes , Lei Ying , Manuele Landini , Hanns-Christoph N\"agerl
show 1 more author
Yanliang Guo
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 02:00 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas
keywords many-body dynamical localizationFloquet quantum gasmetal-insulator transitiondriven quantum systemsquantum transportultracold atomsdynamical phase transition
0
0 comments X

The pith

Interactions enable a sharp metal-insulator transition in a periodically driven three-dimensional quantum gas.

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

This paper establishes that interactions in a tunable, periodically driven 3D quantum gas produce a sharp dynamical boundary separating a localized regime from one with diffusive energy absorption. A sympathetic reader would care because this shows interactions can suppress ergodicity and energy absorption through quantum interference in many-body Hilbert space, rather than always promoting diffusion as classically expected. The authors map the phase diagram by varying drive amplitude and interaction strength, observing many-body dynamical localization with arrested momentum transport on the insulating side, subdiffusive transport near the boundary, and classical diffusion in the delocalized regime. Finite-time scaling characterizes the boundary, and the results are interpreted as an interaction-enabled dynamical phase transition in a closed Floquet system.

Core claim

The authors claim that interactions give rise to a sharp dynamical boundary that separates localization from diffusive energy absorption. By tuning the driving amplitude and interaction strength, they map the localization-delocalization phase diagram and characterize the boundary via finite-time scaling. On the insulating side, they observe many-body dynamical localization for a wide range of parameters, with arrested transport in momentum space. Near the boundary, transport becomes subdiffusive, while in the delocalized regime they observe classical diffusion. This metal-insulator transition is interpreted in terms of localization in many-body Hilbert space.

What carries the argument

Many-body dynamical localization (MBDL) that arises from interactions and produces the sharp boundary in the phase diagram of the driven quantum gas.

If this is right

  • The system exhibits arrested transport in momentum space on the insulating side of the boundary.
  • Transport turns subdiffusive near the transition point.
  • Beyond the boundary, energy absorption follows classical diffusion.
  • The transition can be controlled by adjusting interaction strength and driving amplitude.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Similar interaction-driven localization boundaries might appear in other Floquet many-body systems without explicit disorder.
  • This could connect to understanding ergodicity breaking in periodically driven systems more broadly.
  • Testing the scaling in larger systems or different geometries would further validate the many-body nature.

Load-bearing premise

The observed sharp boundary and distinct transport regimes must stem from genuine many-body localization effects in Hilbert space instead of single-particle localization, heating, or finite-time artifacts.

What would settle it

An experiment showing that the boundary disappears when single-particle effects are isolated or when observation time is extended without additional heating would challenge the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.22449 by Ang Yang, Camilo Cantillano, Emilio Aguilera-Valdes, Hanns-Christoph N\"agerl, Karthick Ramanathan, Lei Ying, Manuele Landini, Yanliang Guo, Zekai Chen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Experimental setup and observation of localization and delocalization. a Schematics of the experimental setup (top) and of the protocol (bottom): The BEC (blue) confined in crossed trapping beams (green) is subjected to Np pulses of a vertically oriented optical lattice (orange) before undergoing ToF imaging or, alternatively, in-situ imaging. b, c, Momentum distribution n(k) plotted after applying a certa… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Metal-insulator phase diagram and finite-time scaling analysis. a,b, Phase diagrams constructed from the measured (a) and the numerically determined (b) energy proxy E(Np) after Np = 500 kicks as a function of κ and as. c, Scaling function ln Λ as a function of ln[1/N1/3 p ] for different values of κ as measured at as = 220 a0. d, Data collapse in (c) onto a universal scaling function, with ln Λ plotted ag… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Reversibility of the MBDL-to-delocalization phase transition. Evolution of E versus Np at κ = 0.75 for as = 220 a0 (blue circles), 775 a0 (orange circles), and in￾teraction ramp-up from 220 a0 to 775 a0 (purple dots) and ramp-down from 775 a0 to 220 a0 (green dots) at Np = 400. The dashed and dotted lines are linear fits. The insets provide a comparison of n(k) at Np = 800 (blue line) and Np = 1200 (red li… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Real-space dynamics for many-body QKR. Time evolution of the spatial density ρ(z) for (a) the MBDL case with (κ, as/a0) = (0.75, 220), for (b) the delocalized case with (κ, as/a0)=(1.5,775), and for (c) the MBDL case for which the kicking is stopped at Np = 300. Insets: Numerical simulation results under the same conditions as the experiment. The red dashed lines in (b) and the dashed-dotted lines in (c) i… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Interaction quench. The width of the central peak σz is plotted as a function of hold time thold for ini￾tial as = 220 a0 and κ = 0.75. The colored (grey) data are taken with (without) an interaction quench to as = 0 a0 af￾ter Np kicks as indicated, ranging from zero to 1000. The dashed lines are sinusoidal fits to the oscillation data, giving 37.4(4) Hz after zero kicks and 36.3(3) Hz after 1000 kicks. Fo… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: , the dynamics exhibits a distinct change in be￾havior around Np = 500. Fitting the late-time data (500 < Np ≤ 1500) yields excellent agreement with the predicted power-law exponent of 2/3 and extracts a tran￾sient offset of N∗ p = 358(23). The observed critical growth provides an internal consistency check of the choice of ef￾fective dimensionality d= 3. 0 500 1000 1500 N p 0 10 20 30 40 E( Np) c =1.16, a… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Particle transport and energy flow are central for our understanding of a wealth of phenomena in physics and the natural sciences. Interactions are generically expected to promote ergodicity and diffusive behavior, yet quantum interference can arrest transport and prevent energy absorption, defying classical expectations. How interactions and quantum coherence compete remains a fundamental open question. Here, we experimentally investigate their interplay in a periodically driven, three-dimensional (3D) quantum gas with tunable interactions. Strikingly, we find that interactions give rise to a sharp dynamical boundary that separates localization from diffusive energy absorption. By tuning the driving amplitude and interaction strength, we map the localization-delocalization phase diagram and characterize the boundary via finite-time scaling. On the insulating side, we observe many-body dynamical localization (MBDL) for a wide range of parameters, finding arrested transport in momentum space. Near the boundary, transport becomes subdiffusive, whereas in the delocalized regime we observe classical diffusion, yielding a metal-insulator transition that we interpret in terms of localization in many-body Hilbert space. Our results exemplify an interaction-enabled dynamical phase transition in a closed Floquet many-body system and clarify how coherence and interactions jointly govern the quantum-to-classical transition.

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 an experimental investigation of a periodically driven 3D quantum gas with tunable interactions. The central claim is that interactions induce a sharp dynamical boundary separating a localized regime (arrested momentum transport, interpreted as many-body dynamical localization or MBDL) from a delocalized regime exhibiting classical diffusion in energy absorption. The authors map the localization-delocalization phase diagram by varying driving amplitude and interaction strength, characterize the boundary with finite-time scaling, and observe subdiffusive transport near the boundary.

Significance. If the many-body interpretation holds, the work provides direct experimental evidence for an interaction-enabled metal-insulator transition in a closed Floquet many-body system, clarifying the competition between interactions and quantum coherence in suppressing ergodicity. Strengths include the tunable 3D platform allowing systematic mapping of the phase diagram and the use of finite-time scaling to locate the boundary. This could inform theoretical understanding of Floquet many-body localization beyond single-particle effects.

major comments (2)
  1. [Finite-time scaling analysis] Finite-time scaling section: The identification of the sharp boundary and the claim that it arises from interaction-induced MBDL in the many-body Floquet Hilbert space is load-bearing for the headline result. However, the analysis does not appear to include a direct side-by-side comparison of the scaling collapse or boundary location in the non-interacting limit (interaction strength tuned to zero). Without this control, it remains unclear whether the observed localization is genuinely many-body or could arise from single-particle dynamical localization, which is known to occur in driven systems even at weak interactions.
  2. [Transport regimes and phase diagram] Results on transport regimes: The arrested transport on the insulating side and the subdiffusive-to-diffusive crossover are presented as evidence for MBDL. To support this over residual heating or finite-time artifacts, the manuscript should report whether the boundary location or the nature of the insulating regime changes when observation times are extended beyond those used in the scaling analysis. If longer-time data show eventual delocalization or heating, this would affect the interpretation of a stable many-body localized phase.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] The abstract and introduction use 'many-body dynamical localization (MBDL)' without a concise definition or reference to the precise Hilbert-space localization criterion employed; adding this would improve clarity for readers outside the immediate subfield.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions for the phase diagram and scaling collapse should explicitly state the number of experimental realizations, error estimation method, and any post-selection criteria to allow assessment of statistical robustness.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and robustness of our claims. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional analysis and discussion where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Finite-time scaling analysis] Finite-time scaling section: The identification of the sharp boundary and the claim that it arises from interaction-induced MBDL in the many-body Floquet Hilbert space is load-bearing for the headline result. However, the analysis does not appear to include a direct side-by-side comparison of the scaling collapse or boundary location in the non-interacting limit (interaction strength tuned to zero). Without this control, it remains unclear whether the observed localization is genuinely many-body or could arise from single-particle dynamical localization, which is known to occur in driven systems even at weak interactions.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit side-by-side comparison strengthens the many-body interpretation. The original manuscript discusses single-particle dynamical localization in the non-interacting limit but does not present a direct scaling analysis. In the revised manuscript we have added this control: we show that for vanishing interactions the momentum transport remains diffusive across the explored driving amplitudes, with no sharp boundary and no scaling collapse. The finite-time scaling procedure applied to the non-interacting data yields no consistent critical point, in contrast to the interacting case. This new comparison is included in an updated Figure 3 and the accompanying text in the finite-time scaling section. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Transport regimes and phase diagram] Results on transport regimes: The arrested transport on the insulating side and the subdiffusive-to-diffusive crossover are presented as evidence for MBDL. To support this over residual heating or finite-time artifacts, the manuscript should report whether the boundary location or the nature of the insulating regime changes when observation times are extended beyond those used in the scaling analysis. If longer-time data show eventual delocalization or heating, this would affect the interpretation of a stable many-body localized phase.

    Authors: We have examined the longest observation windows available in our dataset and find that the location of the boundary extracted from finite-time scaling remains stable and that transport on the insulating side stays arrested without detectable heating or crossover to diffusion. We have added a paragraph in the results section and a supplementary panel that explicitly compares the extracted boundary for the two longest accessible times. While technical constraints (atom loss and trap lifetime) prevent arbitrarily long hold times, the persistence of the subdiffusive regime near the boundary and the clear separation from classical diffusion support the MBDL interpretation within experimentally accessible timescales. We note that a definitive statement about infinite-time stability would ultimately require theoretical modeling beyond the present scope. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental observations and finite-time scaling are independent of fitted inputs or self-citation chains

full rationale

The manuscript is an experimental study that maps a localization-delocalization boundary in a driven 3D quantum gas by direct tuning of drive amplitude and interaction strength, followed by finite-time scaling collapse on measured transport data. No equation or derivation is presented that reduces the reported boundary location, the MBDL regime, or the subdiffusive-to-diffusive crossover to a parameter fitted from the same dataset by construction. Self-citations, if present, are not load-bearing for the central claim; the phase diagram and scaling analysis rest on external experimental controls and observable quantities that remain falsifiable outside any internal fit.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that the driven gas remains closed and coherent over experimental times and that finite-time scaling reliably locates the dynamical boundary without long-time heating or single-particle contamination.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The quantum gas is a closed Floquet many-body system with negligible dissipation or heating on the relevant timescales.
    The abstract explicitly frames the system as a closed Floquet many-body system.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5777 in / 1317 out tokens · 85694 ms · 2026-05-22T02:00:28.435811+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

50 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Q-M&S”, I5868-N/FOR5249 “QUAST

    for thes-wave scattering lengtha s(B). We seta s to values from 0(1.7) to 1037(1)a 0, wherea 0 is the Bohr radius. The tunable QKR is implemented by periodically pulsing a standing wave that propagates in the vertical z-direction with lattice spacinga=π/k L = 532.2 nm and lattice depthV 0 = 30(1.5) to 84(1.5) E r. Here,k L is the wave number and E r =π 2ℏ...

    work page doi:10.55776/coe1 2025

  2. [2]

    J. M. Deutsch, Quantum statistical mechanics in a closed system, Phys. Rev. A43, 2046 (1991)

    work page 2046

  3. [3]

    Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys

    M. Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys. Rev. E50, 888 (1994)

    work page 1994

  4. [4]

    Rigol, V

    M. Rigol, V. Dunjko, and M. Olshanii, Thermalization and its mechanism for generic isolated quantum systems, Nature452, 854 (2008)

    work page 2008

  5. [5]

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

    work page 1958

  6. [6]

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

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Bukov, L

    M. Bukov, L. D’Alessio, and A. Polkovnikov, Universal high-frequency behavior of periodically driven systems: from dynamical stabilization to Floquet engineering, Ad- vances in Physics64, 139 (2015)

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    Eckardt, Colloquium: Atomic quantum gases in pe- riodically driven optical lattices, Rev

    A. Eckardt, Colloquium: Atomic quantum gases in pe- riodically driven optical lattices, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 011004 (2017)

    work page 2017

  9. [9]

    Y. Guo, S. Dhar, A. Yang, Z. Chen, H. Yao, M. Hor- vath, L. Ying, M. Landini, and H.-C. N¨ agerl, Observa- tion of many-body dynamical localization, Science389, 716 (2025)

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    Polkovnikov, K

    A. Polkovnikov, K. Sengupta, A. Silva, and M. Vengalat- tore, Colloquium: Nonequilibrium dynamics of closed in- teracting quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 863 (2011)

    work page 2011

  11. [11]

    Haake, S

    F. Haake, S. Gnutzmann, and M. Ku´ s,Quantum signa- tures of chaos, 4th ed., Springer Series in Synergetics (Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, 2019)

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    B. V. Chirikov, A universal instability of many- dimensional oscillator systems, Phys. Rep.52, 263 (1979)

    work page 1979

  13. [13]

    D’Alessio and M

    L. D’Alessio and M. Rigol, Long-time behavior of isolated periodically driven interacting lattice systems, Phys. Rev. X4, 041048 (2014)

    work page 2014

  14. [14]

    Lazarides, A

    A. Lazarides, A. Das, and R. Moessner, Equilibrium states of generic quantum systems subject to periodic driving, Phys. Rev. E90, 012110 (2014)

    work page 2014

  15. [15]

    Ponte, A

    P. Ponte, A. Chandran, Z. Papi´ c, and D. A. Abanin, Pe- riodically driven ergodic and many-body localized quan- tum systems, Annals of Physics353, 196 (2015)

    work page 2015

  16. [16]

    J. F. G. Casati, B.V. Chirikov and F. Izrailev, Stochastic behavior of a quantum pendulum under a periodic per- turbation, inLecture notes in physics, Vol. 93 (1979) p. 334

    work page 1979

  17. [17]

    Santhanam, S

    M. Santhanam, S. Paul, and J. B. Kannan, Quantum kicked rotor and its variants: Chaos, localization and beyond, Physics Reports956, 1 (2022)

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    L. M. Sieberer, T. Olsacher, A. Elben, M. Heyl, P. Hauke, F. Haake, and P. Zoller, Digital quantum simulation, trotter errors, and quantum chaos of the kicked top, npj Quantum Information5, 78 (2019)

    work page 2019

  19. [19]

    F. L. Moore, J. C. Robinson, C. F. Bharucha, B. Sun- daram, and M. G. Raizen, Atom optics realization of the quantumδ-kicked rotor, Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 4598 (1995)

    work page 1995

  20. [20]

    Ammann, R

    H. Ammann, R. Gray, N. Christensen, and I. Shvarchuck, Experimental observation of dynamical localization and decoherence in the atomicδ-kicked rotor, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics31, 2449 (1998)

    work page 1998

  21. [21]

    Fishman, D

    S. Fishman, D. R. Grempel, and R. E. Prange, Chaos, quantum recurrences, and anderson localization, Phys. Rev. Lett.49, 509 (1982)

    work page 1982

  22. [22]

    Lemari´ e, J

    G. Lemari´ e, J. Chab´ e, P. Szriftgiser, J. C. Garreau, B. Gr´ emaud, and D. Delande, Observation of the Ander- son metal-insulator transition with atomic matter waves: Theory and experiment, Phys. Rev. A80, 043626 (2009)

    work page 2009

  23. [23]

    Madani, M

    F. Madani, M. Denis, P. Szriftgiser, J.-C. Garreau, A. Ran¸ con, and R. Chicireanu, Observation of quantum criticality of a four-dimensional phase transition, Nature Communications16, 2519 (2025)

    work page 2025

  24. [24]

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

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    A. S. Pikovsky and D. L. Shepelyansky, Destruction of anderson localization by a weak nonlinearity, Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 094101 (2008)

    work page 2008

  26. [26]

    B. L. Altshuler, Y. Gefen, A. Kamenev, and L. S. Levitov, Quasiparticle lifetime in a finite system: A nonperturba- tive approach, Phys. Rev. Lett.78, 2803 (1997)

    work page 1997

  27. [27]

    Kraemer, J

    T. Kraemer, J. Herbig, M. Mark, T. Weber, C. Chin, H.-C. N¨ agerl, and R. Grimm, Optimized production of a cesium Bose–Einstein condensate, Applied Physics B79, 1013 (2004)

    work page 2004

  28. [28]

    See Supplemental Materials

    work page

  29. [29]

    C. Chin, R. Grimm, P. Julienne, and E. Tiesinga, Fesh- bach resonances in ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1225 (2010)

    work page 2010

  30. [30]

    Abrahams, P

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

    work page 1979

  31. [31]

    Olsen, P

    H. Olsen, P. Devillard, G. Aupetit-Diallo, P. Vignolo, and M. Albert, Interaction Induced Anderson Transition in a Kicked One Dimensional Bose Gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 173403 (2025)

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    F. J. Wegner, Electrons in disordered systems. Scaling near the mobility edge, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik B Con- densed Matter and Quanta25, 327 (1976)

    work page 1976

  33. [33]

    A. Yang, Z. Chen, Y. Guo, M. Landini, H.-C. N¨ agerl, and L. Ying, Origin and emergent features of many-body dynamical localization, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 123402 (2026)

    work page 2026

  34. [34]

    Rylands, E

    C. Rylands, E. B. Rozenbaum, V. Galitski, and R. Konik, Many-Body Dynamical Localization in a Kicked Lieb- Liniger Gas, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 155302 (2020)

    work page 2020

  35. [35]

    Ammann, R

    H. Ammann, R. Gray, I. Shvarchuck, and N. Christensen, Quantum delta-kicked rotor: Experimental observation of decoherence, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 4111 (1998)

    work page 1998

  36. [36]

    B. G. Klappauf, W. H. Oskay, D. A. Steck, and M. G. Raizen, Observation of noise and dissipation effects on dynamical localization, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 1203 (1998)

    work page 1998

  37. [37]

    D. A. Steck, V. Milner, W. H. Oskay, and M. G. Raizen, Quantitative study of amplitude noise effects on dynam- ical localization, Phys. Rev. E62, 3461 (2000)

    work page 2000

  38. [38]

    M. B. d’Arcy, R. M. Godun, M. K. Oberthaler, D. Cas- settari, and G. S. Summy, Quantum enhancement of mo- 9 mentum diffusion in the delta-kicked rotor, Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 074102 (2001)

    work page 2001

  39. [39]

    Schomerus and E

    H. Schomerus and E. Lutz, Nonexponential Decoherence and Momentum Subdiffusion in a Quantum L´ evy Kicked Rotator, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 260401 (2007)

    work page 2007

  40. [40]

    D. L. Shepelyansky, Delocalization of quantum chaos by weak nonlinearity, Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 1787 (1993)

    work page 1993

  41. [41]

    Gligori´ c, J

    G. Gligori´ c, J. D. Bodyfelt, and S. Flach, Interactions de- stroy dynamical localization with strong and weak chaos, Europhysics Letters96, 30004 (2011)

    work page 2011

  42. [42]

    M. D. Winn and D. E. Logan, Localization versus band crossing transitions in a multiband model of spatially dis- ordered materials, The Journal of Chemical Physics93, 6756 (1990)

    work page 1990

  43. [43]

    Many-body dynamical localization in Fock space

    N. Dupont, B. Peaudecerf, D. Gu´ ery-Odelin, G. Lemari´ e, B. Georgeot, C. Miniatura, and N. Goldman, Many-body dynamical localization in Fock space, arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.09224 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  44. [44]

    Basko, I

    D. Basko, I. Aleiner, and B. Altshuler, Metal–insulator transition in a weakly interacting many-electron system with localized single-particle states, Annals of Physics 321, 1126 (2006)

    work page 2006

  45. [45]

    Altman and R

    E. Altman and R. Vosk, Universal dynamics and renor- malization in many-body-localized systems, Annual Re- view of Condensed Matter Physics6, 383 (2015)

    work page 2015

  46. [46]

    Data set is available from Zenodo at doi: 10.5281/zen- odo.14567996

    work page doi:10.5281/zen-

  47. [47]

    Lellouch, A

    S. Lellouch, A. Ran¸ con, S. De Bi` evre, D. Delande, and J. C. Garreau, Dynamics of the mean-field-interacting quantum kicked rotor, Phys. Rev. A101, 043624 (2020)

    work page 2020

  48. [48]

    Ardourel and S

    V. Ardourel and S. Bangu, Finite-size scaling theory: Quantitative and qualitative approaches to critical phe- nomena, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 100, 99 (2023)

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    M. Gazo, A. Karailiev, T. Satoor, C. Eigen, M. Ga lka, and Z. Hadzibabic, Universal coarsening in a homoge- neous two-dimensional Bose gas, Science389, 802 (2025)

    work page 2025

  50. [50]

    Manuscript under preparation

    work page