Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 47 references

Two hidden symmetries unlock a family of bosonic skin-effect chains

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

Sublattice symmetry in any 1D quadratic bosonic pairing Hamiltonian automatically implies an effective time-reversal symmetry of the dynamical matrix, enabling a symmetry-protected skin effect distinct from quadrature decoupling.

T0 review reviewed 2026-07-10 challenge →

load-bearing objection Clean symmetry framework for bosonic Kitaev chains; the SLS→effective-TRS result is the real contribution, with an honest gap in the stability proof. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.08638 v1 pith:U6HRMU65 submitted 2026-07-09 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hall

Symmetry as a route to generalized bosonic Kitaev chains

Gideon Lee , Tony Jin , Aashish A. Clerk This is my paper
classification quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hall PACS 03.67.-a05.30.Jp11.30.Er
keywords symmetrybosoniceffectivegeneralizedmodelpairingdiscussdynamical
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The reading

The bosonic Kitaev chain (BKC) is a Hermitian quadratic Hamiltonian for bosons in 1D that nonetheless exhibits phenomena usually associated with non-Hermitian systems, including the non-Hermitian skin effect (NHSE) — where all eigenstates localize at a boundary under open boundary conditions — and a dramatic sensitivity of dynamical stability to boundary conditions. This paper identifies two distinct symmetries responsible for these behaviors and shows they are logically independent. The first is an effective particle-hole symmetry of the dynamical matrix that forces the dynamics of conjugate quadrature variables (position-like and momentum-like) to decouple, reducing the system to two copies of the Hatano-Nelson model. The second is sublattice (chiral) symmetry — the same kind of symmetry familiar from the SSH model — which, when combined with a particle-hole symmetry that is automatically built into any bosonic BdG dynamical matrix, generates an effective time-reversal symmetry. This effective TRS is not a physical time-reversal operation on the original Hamiltonian, but it supports a Z2 topological invariant that protects a genuine symmetry-protected skin effect not reducible to single-band physics. The paper proves that any quadratic bosonic pairing Hamiltonian with sublattice symmetry necessarily possesses this effective TRS. By treating these two symmetries as independent design knobs, the authors construct and classify generalized BKC-like models that retain one symmetry while breaking the other, yielding phenomena absent in the bare BKC: frequency-selective amplification, phase-sensitive directional amplification, localization transitions without stability loss, and even regimes where the open-boundary system is unstable while the periodic-boundary system is stable — the reverse of conventional NHSE phenomenology. The paper also establishes an exact unitary equivalence between a hopping-augmented BKC and the symplectic Hatano-Nelson fermionic model, showing that the effective TRS inherited from sublattice symmetry in the bosonic setting corresponds to a bona fide physical time-reversal symmetry in the fermionic setting.

Core claim

The central claim is that sublattice symmetry in any 1D quadratic bosonic pairing Hamiltonian automatically implies an effective time-reversal symmetry of the dynamical matrix (Eq. 34), obtained by multiplying the sublattice operator with the automatic particle-hole symmetry (Eq. 21) that is built into all such systems. This effective TRS — which has no connection to physical time-reversal of the second-quantized Hamiltonian — supports a Z2 spectral winding number (Eq. 36) that diagnoses a symmetry-protected skin effect. This mechanism is logically distinct from the quadrature-decoupling mechanism (qPHS, Eq. 24) that reduces the BKC to two single-band Hatano-Nelson chains. The two symmetries

What carries the argument

The automatic particle-hole symmetry aPHS (Eq. 21: σ_y M(-k)^T σ_y = -M(k)) is built into every quadratic bosonic dynamical matrix. Sublattice symmetry SLS (Eq. 33: S M[k] S^{-1} = -M[k]) holds when only odd-distance couplings are present. Their product yields the effective TRS (Eq. 34): (σ_x ⊗ σ_y) M^T[k] (σ_x ⊗ σ_y) = M[-k], with (σ_x ⊗ σ_y)(σ_x ⊗ σ_y)* = -I, satisfying the transpose-type TRS condition (Eq. 12). The Z2 invariant (Eq. 36) is computed from the Pfaffian ratio P[M] and a spectral winding integral. Quadrature decoupling (qPHS, Eq. 24: M(-k)* = -M(k)) forces the dynamical matrix to commute with σ_x (Eq. 26), diagonalizing it into independent q and p sectors. The perturbative OBC

Load-bearing premise

The perturbative stability proof assumes the OBC spectrum of the unperturbed dynamical matrix is non-degenerate and only demonstrates protection to first order in the pairing perturbation. The numerically observed finite-range stability in the g3-BKC model extends well beyond this perturbative regime, and the authors acknowledge this gap by deferring it to future work.

What would settle it

Find a 1D quadratic bosonic pairing Hamiltonian that has sublattice symmetry (only odd-distance couplings) but whose dynamical matrix does not satisfy the effective TRS condition (Eq. 34), or for which the Z2 invariant (Eq. 36) fails to predict skin modes under OBC. Alternatively, find a sublattice-symmetric perturbation that destabilizes the OBC system at first order, contradicting the matrix-element cancellation in Eq. (59).

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Any 1D quadratic bosonic pairing Hamiltonian with only odd-distance couplings automatically hosts a symmetry-protected skin effect, regardless of whether quadrature dynamics decouple — this gives a design rule for engineering skin-effect physics in bosonic lattice platforms.
  • The perturbative stability argument (Sec. IV) predicts that sublattice-symmetric perturbations cannot destabilize the OBC system at first order, while sublattice-breaking perturbations generically do — explaining why on-site detunings are so destructive to BKC physics and identifying sublattice symmetry as the protective ingredient.
  • The g3-BKC model exhibits frequency-selective amplification: modes near specific reference energies remain localized and amplified while the rest of the spectrum is suppressed, suggesting applications in quantum sensing beyond what the bare BKC offers.
  • The exact equivalence between the g1-BKC and the symplectic Hatano-Nelson model (Eq. 48) means results from the extensive non-Hermitian fermionic literature on the SHN — including entanglement phase transitions — can be directly imported into a purely Hermitian bosonic setting without post-selection.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript identifies and disentangles two distinct symmetries underlying the non-Hermitian phenomenology of the bosonic Kitaev chain (BKC): (1) an effective particle-hole symmetry (qPHS) equivalent to quadrature decoupling, and (2) an effective time-reversal symmetry (TRS) that follows automatically from sublattice symmetry (SLS) in any quadratic bosonic pairing Hamiltonian. The authors show that these two symmetries are independent, construct generalized BKC models that retain only one of them, classify all translationally-invariant 1D quadratic bosonic pairing Hamiltonians accordingly, and establish a precise connection between the g1-BKC and the symplectic Hatano-Nelson model. A perturbative argument shows that SLS protects OBC systems against dynamical instabilities from pairing perturbations. The central algebraic derivations are clean and verifiable, and the generalized models exhibit genuinely novel phenomena (frequency-selective amplification, phase-sensitive criticality, boundary-condition-dependent instability inversion).

Significance. The paper provides a unifying symmetry framework that clarifies why the BKC exhibits its remarkable non-Hermitian properties despite being Hermitian. The key insight — that SLS automatically generates an effective TRS of the dynamical matrix via combination with the built-in aPHS (Eq. 34) — is a non-trivial and broadly applicable structural result. The classification table (Table I) and the explicit generalized models (g3-BKC, Δ2-BKC, g0-BKC) are constructive and falsifiable, each exhibiting distinct physical phenomena. The connection to the symplectic Hatano-Nelson model (Eq. 48) bridges bosonic and fermionic non-Hermitian topology. The perturbative stability proof (Sec. IV, Eq. 59), while limited in scope, provides an honest and correct result within its stated assumptions. The large-N coarse-graining in App. A yields a quantitative analytical prediction (Eq. 82) that is checked against numerics (Fig. 6).

major comments (2)
  1. Sec. III.D, Eq. (35): The simplification from the general SPSE formula (Eqs. 13–14) to the concrete winding number (Eq. 36) relies on the Pfaffian ratio P[M] = -1, stated as following from 'straightforward computation' without showing the steps. Since this Pfaffian evaluation is load-bearing for the claim that SLS yields a well-defined Z2 invariant, the authors should either include the derivation or provide a reference where this computation is carried out. As it stands, a reader cannot verify this step without redoing the calculation.
  2. Sec. IV.A, after Eq. (54): The perturbative stability argument assumes non-degeneracy of the OBC spectrum of M^(0) and only proves first-order protection in λ. The authors acknowledge that the g3-BKC exhibits finite-range stability well beyond this regime (Fig. 2d) and defer further study. This is honest, but the gap between proof and observation is significant for the broader claim that SLS protects stability. The authors should at minimum clarify whether the non-degeneracy assumption can be verified for the specific models considered (g3-BKC, etc.), or whether there exist model classes within the classification where it fails. This would sharpen the generality claim.
minor comments (6)
  1. Table I: The column 'Skin Effect?' uses the entry 'Single-band + SPSE' for the first row and 'SPSE' or 'None' for others, but the distinction between 'Single-band' and 'SPSE' mechanisms is only fully explained later in Sec. III. A brief footnote or parenthetical in the table caption would help readers interpret this column.
  2. Sec. III.G, Eq. (48): The unitary equivalence H_SHN(k) = P M_g1(k - π/2) P† is stated without much explanation of the physical meaning of the π/2 momentum shift. A sentence explaining why this shift arises and whether it has a physical interpretation would help the reader.
  3. Sec. V.B, Fig. 3 caption: The caption refers to 'g3 = 0.1w' and 'g3 = 0.3w' but the figure labels use 'g3' without the 'w' factor in some places. Consistent notation would help.
  4. Sec. V.D, Eq. (79): The function f(k, k') has a special case f(k, π-k) = 0 that is crucial for the argument that the bare BKC (g0 = 0) is stable, as acknowledged in footnote [47]. This special case should be stated more prominently in the main text rather than only in the footnote, since it is essential for consistency with the known BKC stability result.
  5. App. A, Eq. (A8): The approximation turning a discrete sum into an integral is stated without specifying the error scaling. Given that the result (Eq. 82) is compared quantitatively to numerics, a brief comment on the order of the approximation would be useful.
  6. The acronym list (Table II) is helpful but is introduced only in Sec. II. Some acronyms (e.g., NHSE, SLS) appear in the Introduction before they are defined. Forward-referencing the table or defining acronyms on first use would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; central results follow from verifiable symmetry algebra and explicit model construction.

full rationale

The paper's central claim — that sublattice symmetry (SLS) in a quadratic bosonic pairing Hamiltonian implies an effective time-reversal symmetry (TRS) of the dynamical matrix — is derived by direct algebraic combination of two independently stated symmetry conditions: the automatic particle-hole symmetry (aPHS, Eq. 21) and the sublattice symmetry (Eq. 33). The product yields Eq. 34 with T = σ_x ⊗ σ_y, and the condition TT* = -I is verifiable by direct matrix multiplication. No step in this chain is defined in terms of its own output. The topological invariant (Eq. 36) follows from standard non-Hermitian topology results (Refs. [14, 15]) applied to this TRS, which is external mathematical machinery, not a self-citation of unverified prior work by the same authors. The connection to the symplectic Hatano-Nelson model (Eq. 48) is established by an explicit unitary equivalence computation. The independence of qPHS and SLS is demonstrated by constructing explicit counterexample models (g3-BKC, Δ2-BKC) that break one symmetry while preserving the other — these are genuine new models, not renamings of known results. The perturbative stability argument (Sec. IV) is a first-order proof with an honestly acknowledged gap regarding finite-range stability. Self-citations to [1] (McDonald, Pereg-Barnea, Clerk) are used for context and motivation, not as load-bearing logical steps: the SLS→TRS implication is re-derived in this paper from first principles. The only minor concern is that the Pfaffian ratio simplification P[M] = -1 (Eq. 35) is stated as 'straightforward computation' without showing steps, but this is a calculational gap, not a circularity — the result is independently verifiable and does not depend on any prior claim by the authors. No fitted parameters are renamed as predictions; no ansatz is smuggled through self-citation; no 'uniqueness theorem' from the authors' prior work is invoked to forbid alternatives. The derivation is self-contained against external benchmarks (numerical diagonalization serves as verification, not input). Score 1 reflects the minor self-citation to [1] for foundational context, which is not load-bearing for the central algebraic result.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are postulated. The 'effective TRS' is a derived property of the dynamical matrix, not a new postulated symmetry of nature.

axioms (4)
  • standard math Bosonic commutation relations [a_i, a_j†] = δ_ij and the resulting symplectic structure of the dynamical matrix M = iσ_z H
    Used throughout to construct the dynamical matrix (Eq. 9) and establish automatic symmetries (Eqs. 19-21). Standard for quadratic bosonic systems.
  • domain assumption Hermiticity of the second-quantized Hamiltonian (Eq. 15)
    Forces pseudo-Hermiticity (Eq. 20) and constrains the form of coupling parameters to be real. Essential for the built-in symmetries that the SLS→TRS derivation combines.
  • domain assumption Non-Hermitian topological classification framework of Kawabata et al. [15], including the definition of point gaps, winding numbers, and symmetry-protected skin effects
    Invoked in Sec. IIB and IIIH to define topological invariants and classify symmetry classes. The TRS-protected Z2 invariant (Eq. 13) and the 38-fold way classification rely on this framework.
  • ad hoc to paper Non-degeneracy of the OBC spectrum of the unperturbed dynamical matrix M^(0)
    Stated after Eq. 54 in Sec. IVA: 'We further assume that, for OBC, the spectrum ε_k is non-degenerate — an assumption we verify for every model considered in this work.' This assumption is load-bearing for the perturbative stability proof but is not proven in general.

reviewed 2026-07-10 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Symmetry as a route to generalized bosonic Kitaev chains." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/U6HRMU65

@misc{pith2026260708638,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Symmetry as a route to generalized bosonic Kitaev chains},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/U6HRMU65}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.08638}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

The bosonic Kitaev chain (BKC) model is a deceptively simple looking quadratic pairing Hamiltonian. Despite being purely Hermitian, it exhibits a number of striking non-Hermitian topological phenomena, including skin effects. We show here how symmetries play a key role in this model, and how identifying these allows one to develop generalized BKC-like models. We emphasize the surprising fact that any quadratic bosonic pairing Hamiltonian with a sublattice (chiral) symmetry necessarily has a dynamical matrix with an effective time reversal symmetry. This symmetry is unrelated to physical time-reversal, but enables non-trivial topological invariants. We also discuss how this symmetry is unrelated to another key property of the BKC, the decoupling of quadrature dynamics. This feature can instead be connected to a distinct symmetry, namely an effective particle-hole symmetry of the dynamical matrix. We discuss non-trivial generalized BKC models that only keep one of these two effective symmetries intact. We also provide a classification of all translationally-invariant 1D pairing Hamiltonians, and show connections between the BKC and a well-studied non-Hermitian fermionic system, the symplectic Hatano-Nelson model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.08638 by Aashish A. Clerk, Gideon Lee, Tony Jin.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Left: Schematic of the bosonic Kitaev chain (BKC), [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Plot of the maximum imaginary part of any eigen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Plot depicting the localization-delocalization transition (or lack thereof) of particular sets of eigenstates in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Steady-state position-dependent quadrature vari [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Plot of maximum imaginary part of the eigenvalues [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png] view at source ↗

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

47 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    McDonald, T

    A. McDonald, T. Pereg-Barnea, and A. A. Clerk, Phase- dependent chiral transport and effective non-hermitian dynamicsinabosonickitaev-majoranachain,Phys.Rev. X8, 041031 (2018)

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Okuma and M

    N. Okuma and M. Sato, Non-hermitian topological phe- nomena: A review (2022)

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    E. J. Bergholtz, J. C. Budich, and F. K. Kunst, Ex- ceptional topology of non-hermitian systems, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 015005 (2021)

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Ashida, Z

    Y. Ashida, Z. Gong, and M. Ueda, Non-hermitian physics, Advances in Physics69, 249 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1080/00018732.2021.1876991

    work page doi:10.1080/00018732.2021.1876991 2020

  5. [5]

    R. Lin, T. Tai, L. Li, and C. H. Lee, Topological non- hermitian skin effect, Frontiers of Physics18(2023)

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    G. Lee, T. Jin, Y.-X. Wang, A. McDonald, and A. Clerk, Entanglement phase transition due to reciprocity break- ing without measurement or postselection, PRX Quan- tum5, 010313 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Quantum-limited amplification without instability

    A. Metelmann, O. Lanes, T.-Z. Chien, A. McDonald, I. Tsiamis, M. Hatridge, and A. A. Clerk, Quantum- limited amplification without instability (2025), arXiv:2208.00024 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    Villiers, W

    M. Villiers, W. Smith, A. Petrescu, A. Borgognoni, M. Delbecq, A. Sarlette, M. Mirrahimi, P. Campagne- Ibarcq, T. Kontos, and Z. Leghtas, Dynamically enhanc- ing qubit-photon interactions with antisqueezing, PRX Quantum5, 020306 (2024)

    work page 2024

  9. [9]

    McDonald and A

    A. McDonald and A. A. Clerk, Exponentially-enhanced quantum sensing with non-hermitian lattice dynamics, Nature Communications11(2020)

    work page 2020

  10. [10]

    Blanchard, A

    P.-E. Blanchard, A. McDonald, and P. St-Jean, Expo- nentially enhanced sensing through nonreciprocal light propagation (2025), arXiv:2511.16895 [physics.optics]

    work page arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    Ughrelidze, V

    M. Ughrelidze, V. P. Flynn, E. Cobanera, and L. Viola, Interplay of finite- and infinite-size stability in quadratic bosonic lindbladians, Phys. Rev. A110, 032207 (2024)

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    Yokomizo and S

    K. Yokomizo and S. Murakami, Non-bloch band theory in bosonic bogoliubov–de gennes systems, Phys. Rev. B 103, 165123 (2021). 17

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    C. Lv, T. Bilitewski, A. M. Rey, and Q. Zhou, Polarization-dependent chiral transport and chiral soli- tons in spin kitaev models (2025), arXiv:2508.17084 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Okuma, K

    N. Okuma, K. Kawabata, K. Shiozaki, and M. Sato, Topological origin of non-hermitian skin effects, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 086801 (2020)

    work page 2020

  15. [15]

    Kawabata, K

    K. Kawabata, K. Shiozaki, M. Ueda, and M. Sato, Sym- metryandtopologyinnon-hermitianphysics,Phys.Rev. X9, 041015 (2019)

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    Kawabata, T

    K. Kawabata, T. Numasawa, and S. Ryu, Entanglement phase transition induced by the non-hermitian skin ef- fect, Phys. Rev. X13, 021007 (2023)

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    Serafini,Quantum continuous variables: A Primer of Theoretical Methods(CRC Press, 2023)

    A. Serafini,Quantum continuous variables: A Primer of Theoretical Methods(CRC Press, 2023)

    work page 2023

  18. [18]

    Chaudhary, M

    G. Chaudhary, M. Levin, and A. A. Clerk, Simple ap- proach to characterizing band topology in bosonic pair- ing hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. B103, 214306 (2021)

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    Z. Gong, Y. Ashida, K. Kawabata, K. Takasan, S. Hi- gashikawa, and M. Ueda, Topological phases of non- hermitian systems, Phys. Rev. X8, 031079 (2018)

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    Zhang, Z

    K. Zhang, Z. Yang, and C. Fang, Correspondence be- tweenwindingnumbersandskinmodesinnon-hermitian systems, Physical Review Letters125(2020)

    work page 2020

  21. [21]

    S. Yao, F. Song, and Z. Wang, Non-hermitian chern bands, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 136802 (2018)

    work page 2018

  22. [22]

    V. M. Martinez Alvarez, J. E. Barrios Vargas, and L. E. F. Foa Torres, Non-hermitian robust edge states in one dimension: Anomalous localization and eigenspace condensation at exceptional points, Phys. Rev. B97, 121401 (2018)

    work page 2018

  23. [23]

    Hatano and D

    N. Hatano and D. R. Nelson, Vortex pinning and non- hermitian quantum mechanics, Phys. Rev. B56, 8651 (1997)

    work page 1997

  24. [24]

    Hatano and D

    N. Hatano and D. R. Nelson, Localization transitions in non-hermitian quantum mechanics, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 570 (1996)

    work page 1996

  25. [25]

    J. H. Busnaina, Z. Shi, A. McDonald, D. Dubyna, I. Nsanzineza, J. S. Hung, C. W. Chang, A. A. Clerk, and C. M. Wilson, Quantum simulation of the bosonic kitaev chain, Nature Communications15(2024)

    work page 2024

  26. [26]

    J. J. Slim, C. C. Wanjura, M. Brunelli, J. del Pino, A. Nunnenkamp, and E. Verhagen, Optomechanical re- alization of the bosonic kitaev chain, Nature627, 767 (2024)

    work page 2024

  27. [27]

    The important thing here is that the definition of the quadratures is the same on each site, i.e

    One may object that such decoupling is always possi- ble given an appropriate change of basis. The important thing here is that the definition of the quadratures is the same on each site, i.e. we have a local change of basis that isk-independent

    work page

  28. [28]

    B. A. Bernevig and T. L. Hughes,Topological insula- tors and topological superconductors(Princeton Univer- sity Press, 2013)

    work page 2013

  29. [29]

    Wan and X.-Y

    L.-L. Wan and X.-Y. Lü, Quantum-squeezing-induced point-gap topology and skin effect, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 203605 (2023)

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    Fortin, K

    C. Fortin, K. Wang, and T. Pereg-Barnea, Topological amplification of the bosonic kitaev chain with nonuni- form loss, Phys. Rev. B112, 064208 (2025)

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    V. P. Flynn, E. Cobanera, and L. Viola, Deconstructing effective non-hermitian dynamics in quadratic bosonic hamiltonians, New Journal of Physics22, 083004 (2020)

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Altland and M

    A. Altland and M. R. Zirnbauer, Nonstandard symme- try classes in mesoscopic normal-superconducting hybrid structures, Phys. Rev. B55, 1142 (1997)

    work page 1997

  33. [33]

    J.Koch, A.A.Houck, K.L.Hur,andS.M.Girvin,Time- reversal-symmetry breaking in circuit-qed-based photon lattices, Phys. Rev. A82, 043811 (2010)

    work page 2010

  34. [34]

    C. C. Wanjura, J. J. Slim, J. del Pino, M. Brunelli, E. Verhagen, and A. Nunnenkamp, Quadrature nonre- ciprocity in bosonic networks without breaking time- reversal symmetry, Nature Physics (2023)

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    Kawabata, N

    K. Kawabata, N. Okuma, and M. Sato, Non-bloch band theory of non-hermitian hamiltonians in the symplectic class, Physical Review B101(2020)

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    Weemphasizethatagivenmodelmaybelongtodifferent symmetry classes, since one is always free to disregard symmetries that are not relevant to the problem under consideration

    work page

  37. [37]

    These fall outside the scope of the current work

    We note that the absence of either symmetry does not indicate the absence of a skin effect, as there remain less well-understood effects, such as the reentrant skin ef- fect [12], which appear to defy topological classification. These fall outside the scope of the current work

    work page

  38. [38]

    Žnidarič, Solvable non-hermitian skin effect in many- body unitary dynamics, Phys

    M. Žnidarič, Solvable non-hermitian skin effect in many- body unitary dynamics, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 033041 (2022)

    work page 2022

  39. [39]

    J. M. Bhat, J. Bensa, and M. Žnidarič, Boom and bust cycles due to pseudospectra of matrices with unimod- ular spectra, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical58, 295202 (2025)

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    McDonald, R

    A. McDonald, R. Hanai, and A. A. Clerk, Nonequilib- rium stationary states of quantum non-hermitian lattice models, Phys. Rev. B105, 064302 (2022)

    work page 2022

  41. [41]

    G. Lee, A. McDonald, and A. Clerk, Anomalously large relaxation times in dissipative lattice models beyond the non-hermitian skin effect, Phys. Rev. B108, 064311 (2023)

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    C. C. Wanjura, M. Brunelli, and A. Nunnenkamp, Cor- respondence between non-hermitian topology and direc- tional amplification in the presence of disorder, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 213601 (2021)

    work page 2021

  43. [43]

    C. C. Wanjura, M. Brunelli, and A. Nunnenkamp, Topo- logical framework for directional amplification in driven- dissipative cavity arrays, Nature Communications11 (2020)

    work page 2020

  44. [44]

    Porras and S

    D. Porras and S. Fernández-Lorenzo, Topological am- plification in photonic lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 143901 (2019)

    work page 2019

  45. [45]

    Ramos, J

    T. Ramos, J. J. García-Ripoll, and D. Porras, Topo- logical input-output theory for directional amplification, Phys. Rev. A103, 033513 (2021)

    work page 2021

  46. [46]

    Belyansky, C

    R. Belyansky, C. Weis, R. Hanai, P. B. Littlewood, and A. A. Clerk, Phase transitions in nonreciprocal driven- dissipative condensates, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 123401 (2025)

    work page 2025

  47. [47]

    block structure

    Forg 0 = 0, the resonance condition reduces tocosk+ cosk ′ = 0, corresponding to opposite momentakand π−k, i.e.,n ′ =N+ 1−n. Sincef(k, π−k) = 0, these resonant pairs never produce an instability at first order, consistent with the known behavior of the bare BKC. Appendix A: LargeNcoarse-graining for the model presented in Sec. VD Beyond perturbative metho...

    work page

This paper was first reviewed by glm-5.2 on July 10, 2026.