Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 55 references

L\'evy Light Cones and Critical Causality in Fractional Multiscale Quantum Ising Models

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that the dynamical critical exponent of the fractional multiscale transverse-field Ising model is z=q/2, giving a continuously tunable family of entanglement light cones.

desk verdict Genuinely novel model and solid numerics, but the central z=q/2 claim is undermined by an unverified derivation and an untested finite-size escape hatch. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.05645 v1 pith:YEERNOVY submitted 2025-05-08 quant-ph

Joshua M Lewis , Zhexuan Gong , Lincoln D Carr This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords fractionalderivativeLévyflightsquantumIsingmodellong-rangeinteractionsdynamicalcriticalexponentlightconematrixproductstatesentanglemententropy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

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 paper claims that a one-dimensional transverse-field Ising chain with couplings generated by a fractional (Riesz) derivative has a dynamical critical exponent set directly by the fractional order q: z=q/2. If true, one control knob sweeps the model through three dynamical regimes—sublinear entanglement light cones for q<2, a faint superlinear cone with z<1 for 2

What carries the argument

The central object is the Riesz fractional derivative, a Fourier multiplier -|k|^q that discretizes into the sign-alternating binomial coupling J(r)=(-1)^{r+1} binom(q, q/2+r). The analytical argument runs through a truncated Jordan-Wigner transformation, a Fourier transform, and a Bogoliubov diagonalization; the crux is Eq. (30), which turns the cosine sum over the coupling into |2 sin(k/2)|^q, so the excitation gap inherits a |k|^{q/2} power law. On the numerical side, the workhorse is an exponential-sum decomposition of J(r) into roughly 10-14 terms, which keeps matrix-product-operator bond dimension small and makes time-dependent variational principle evolution with nonlocal couplings practical. Dynamical exponents are extracted two independent ways: finite-size gap scaling with a subleading correction term, and bond-entropy light-cone contours fit to |j-j*| ~ $t^{{1/z}}$.

What would settle it

Perform the same gap and wavefront analysis on chains several times longer than L=200 at fixed q in, say, 0.7<q<2.5: if the measured z bends toward 1 as L grows, the continuously tunable z=q/2 is a finite-size crossover, not the asymptotic behavior. A trapped-ion or Rydberg implementation that measures an entanglement-front exponent consistent with z=1 for q>2 at accessible times would similarly contradict the superlinear-cone claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The authors establish that at the quantum critical point g_c = (1/2) binom(q, q/2), the Bogoliubov quasiparticle dispersion of the fractional multiscale Ising model scales as E_k ∝ |k|^{q/2} in the long-wavelength limit, yielding z=q/2. Their truncated Jordan-Wigner mapping replaces the nonlocal Jordan-Wigner strings by unity, Fourier transforms the bilinear Hamiltonian, and uses a closed-form hypergeometric identity to evaluate the coupling sums; an Euler transform then isolates the leading |k|^q term in the gap. The numerical simulations find a continuously tunable exponent over 0<q<2.5, with z close to q/2 up to q≈2, a superlinear cone for 2<q<2.5, and a return to z=1 for larger q. The paper explicitly notes that two-loop renormalization-group results predict z=q/2 only in the strictly long-range window q<2/3, and that the apparent agreement at larger q is hypothesized to come from finite-size effects.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that chains of 200 sites already expose the thermodynamic-limit dynamical exponent; the paper's own Section 5 states that accepted two-loop theory predicts z=q/2 only for q<2/3 and that the observed agreement for larger q is hypothesized, not tested, to be a finite-size effect.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For q<2, entanglement spreads sublinearly, so information propagates faster than in the nearest-neighbour model while still displaying a well-defined scaling front.
  • For 2<q<2.5, the sign-alternating frustrated tail produces a superlinear cone with z<1, outside the universality class of simple power-law models.
  • At q≳2.5 the model effectively becomes local again, recovering z=1 and linear light-cone propagation.
  • The same model reproduces the standard transverse-field Ising critical point at q=2 and a ballistic regime, making the fractional model a unifying interpolation rather than a separate theory.
  • If the mean-field exponent holds beyond numerical finite sizes, the model gives a one-parameter family of light cones that can be probed in trapped-ion or Rydberg simulators by engineering near-fractional kernels.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct test of the finite-size hypothesis is to compute the gap and wavefront exponents on chains several times longer than 200 sites; if z drifts toward 1 for q>2/3 at larger L, the continuously tunable z becomes a pre-asymptotic crossover rather than the asymptotic universality class.
  • The correspondence with Lévy flights suggests a quantitative link between the entanglement-front exponent 1/z and the classical transport exponent 2/q; this could be tested by engineering a single-site perturbation in a trapped-ion chain and measuring the front shape, not just the scaling exponent.
  • Because the mean-field derivation relies on dropping the Jordan-Wigner strings, a non-perturbative check—such as a fermionic simulation that keeps string terms or an independent entanglement-scaling calculation—would isolate whether z=q/2 is an artifact of the truncation.
  • In d≥2 the paper expects the frustrated superlinear regime to be more pronounced; extending the exponential-sum matrix-product-operator method to two-dimensional cylinder geometries would turn that expectation into a concrete prediction.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies a one-dimensional transverse-field Ising model with couplings generated by a discretized Riesz fractional derivative, J(r) ~ r^{-(1+q)} plus subleading corrections. It claims, via a truncated Jordan-Wigner mean-field calculation, that the dynamical critical exponent is z = q/2 (Eq. 41), and that MPS/TDVP simulations for 0 < q < 2.5 confirm a continuously tunable exponent: sublinear light cones for q < 2, a faint superlinear cone for 2 < q < 2.5, and a return to ballistic z = 1 for q ≳ 2.5. The numerical pipeline uses exponential-sum MPO fitting, finite-size gap scaling up to L = 200, and bond-entropy wavefront analysis.

Significance. If correct, the model would provide a one-parameter family of quantum light cones ranging from faster-than-linear to local, with a direct connection to Lévy statistics, and would be an interesting platform for near-term quantum simulators. The exponential-sum MPO representation and the dual extraction of z from gap scaling and wavefronts are reasonable technical contributions, and the comparison between these two estimators is a sensible cross-check. However, the central analytic derivation is internally inconsistent, and the numerical claim is not robust against the crossover predicted by the two-loop RG result the authors themselves cite. As it stands, the significance is not established.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4, Eqs. (27), (34)] Equation (27) does not follow from the preceding definition of ξ_k in Eq. (23). With ξ_k = 2g - 2J0 Σ J(r) cos(kr), the Bogoliubov dispersion is E_k^2/4 = (C_k - g)^2 + S_k^2 = C_k^2 + S_k^2 - 2g C_k + g^2, not C_k^2 + S_k^2 + 2g C_k + g^2 as written. Because of this sign error, at q = 2 and g_c = 1 the dispersion from Eq. (27) is 4|cos(k/2)|, which does not close at k = 0; the corrected sign gives 4|sin(k/2)| and closes at k = 0. Moreover, substituting Eq. (33) into Eq. (27) does not yield Eq. (34): the substitution produces cross terms linear in Re F that are absent from Eq. (34), and at q = 2 Eq. (34) gives E ∝ 3|sin(k/2)|, a factor mismatch with the direct evaluation. Thus the derivation of z = q/2 in Eq. (41) is not supported.
  2. [§4, Eqs. (36)–(38)] The key asymptotic step is the claim in Eq. (38) that |F(q,k)|^2 − (B/2)^2 ∝ |k|^{2q}, where B = binomial(q, q/2). This cancellation is asserted after invoking the Euler transformation in Eq. (37), but the required cancellation of the constant and linear terms is not demonstrated. Since this subtraction is the entire reason that the |sin(k/2)|^q term is claimed to dominate, the conclusion E_k ∝ |k|^{q/2} is not established. A direct check at q = 2 contradicts the formula, as noted in the previous comment.
  3. [§5, Fig. 6 and the RG comparison] The numerical evidence does not support the abstract's claim of a confirmed continuously tunable exponent z(q) for 0 < q < 2.5. The paper cites Ref. [46], whose two-loop RG gives z = q/2 only for q < 2/3 and drives z toward 1 for q > 2/3. The data in Fig. 6 show z ≈ q/2 up to about q ≈ 2 and then a drift back toward z = 1, and Section 5 states that the authors 'hypothesise that these discrepancies arise from finite-size effects' without simulating larger systems. With L ≤ 200, the apparent tunable plateau may be a pre-asymptotic finite-size artifact, and the observed behavior at q ≈ 2.2–2.5 is exactly the crossover the cited RG predicts. The claimed superlinear cone is described as 'subtle', and the return to z = 1 at q ≳ 2.5 is not tested against the expected fluctuation-driven crossover. This is load-bearing because the central claim is continuous tunability.
  4. [§4, Jordan-Wigner truncation] The truncation of Jordan-Wigner strings to unity in Eq. (18) is an uncontrolled approximation. The argument that higher-order vertices carry higher canonical dimension is a mean-field/RG statement, and in one dimension the cited two-loop RG shows that fluctuations do change the exponent. Therefore the analytic result z = q/2 should be regarded only as a mean-field prediction for the model, not as a derivation for the spin chain itself; the numerical comparison cannot be used to confirm the mean-field exponent unless the thermodynamic-limit convergence of the numerics is established.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2, Eq. (3)] The binomial coefficient with non-integer q and integer r, (q choose q/2 + r), is nonstandard; please state explicitly that it is the generalized binomial coefficient Γ(q+1)/(Γ(q/2+r+1)Γ(q/2−r+1)) and define J(0) when it first appears in Eq. (29).
  2. [§3.2 and §5, Fig. 6] The green markers in Fig. 6 are described as the exponent for the 'asymptotic power law of the fractional interactions', but the fitting procedure for this quantity is not described in the text; please add a sentence or a reference to the relevant equation.
  3. [§4, Eq. (32)] The relationship between the hypergeometric sum F(q,k) and the physical sums C_k and S_k should be stated more carefully, including the sign of S_k: with J(r) = (−1)^{r+1} binom(q, q/2+r), the sine sum J0 Σ J(r) sin(kr) equals −J0 Im F, not J0 Im F as written in Eq. (33). The spectrum is insensitive to this sign because S_k appears squared, but the formula as written is inconsistent with Eq. (3).
  4. [§3.2, Eq. (10)] The finite-size fits use several free parameters (a, b, ω, z, and similarly for g_c) on systems L = 10 to L = 200; please report the number of system sizes, the fit ranges, and the resulting parameter uncertainties so that the robustness of the extracted z(q) can be assessed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the mean-field prediction z=q/2 is derived from an explicit Bogoliubov diagonalization and is then independently compared with MPS-extracted exponents.

full rationale

The paper's core claim is the mean-field dynamical exponent z=q/2, obtained in Section 4 by an explicit derivation chain: Jordan-Wigner truncation to quadratic fermions, Fourier transform, Bogoliubov diagonalization (Eqs. 22-25), the closed-form hypergeometric summation for the couplings (Eqs. 30-33), and a small-k asymptotic expansion (Eqs. 36-40) yielding Ek ~ |k|^{q/2}. This is an analytic consequence of the model Hamiltonian, not a restatement of a fitted parameter or of the simulation output. The numerical extraction is also independent: finite-size gap scaling (Eq. 10) and bond-entropy wavefront contours (Eq. 14) treat z as a free fitting parameter, and the paper reports agreement with z=q/2 only after the fits. The exponential-sum MPO representation (Eq. 6) is a numerical approximation to the Hamiltonian's coupling J(r); it does not presuppose the critical exponent. The citation of the authors' prior work (Ref. [33]) appears in the introduction as context for the fractional multiscale framework and is not load-bearing for the derivation. The acknowledged discrepancy with the two-loop RG result of Ref. [46] in Section 5 is a validity and finite-size concern -- the paper explicitly hypothesizes that deviations arise from finite-size effects without testing larger L -- but this is not circularity: it does not reduce the derived exponent to the simulation inputs. Accordingly, no circular step meeting the evidentiary standard is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central prediction z=q/2 rests on a mean-field truncation of Jordan-Wigner strings; the numerical confirmation rests on finite-size scaling fits with nuisance parameters. No new physical entities are introduced; the main assumptions are the fractional discretization, string truncation, and finite-size extrapolation.

free parameters (3)
  • Exponential-sum coefficients {a_alpha, b_alpha} = Nexp approximately 10-14; values not reported
    Used to approximate J(r) in Eq (6) to 1e-9; these are numerical representation parameters, not theory constants, but the MPO dynamics depend on them.
  • Finite-size fit parameters a, b, omega (gap) and a, b, omega-prime (critical field) = Not tabulated
    Introduced in Eqs (10) and (11) to extract z and gc; the central exponent z is sensitive to these nuisance parameters.
  • Critical field gc(q) = Monotonic increase with q, Fig 5; values not tabulated
    Estimated via entanglement-entropy peak and extrapolated; all subsequent dynamics are run at this fitted point, so errors propagate into z.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Riesz fractional derivative discretized by Ortigueira yields the coupling J(r)=(-1)^(r+1) binom(q, q/2+r), including its use for non-integer q.
    Invoked in Sec 2, Eq (3); the model's connection to fractional derivatives rests on this discretization.
  • ad hoc to paper Jordan-Wigner strings may be truncated to unity for determining the mean-field dynamical exponent.
    Stated in Sec 4 after Eq (17); the paper argues the neglected higher-order vertices are irrelevant under RG [42], but this is exactly the approximation whose validity is in question for q>2/3.
  • ad hoc to paper Finite-size scaling on chains up to L=200 gives the thermodynamic-limit z.
    Section 5 explicitly hypothesizes that deviations from two-loop RG are finite-size artifacts; this assumption is load-bearing.
  • standard math The Ortigueira identity Eq (30) holds with the signs used to connect J(r) to |2 sin(k/2)|^q.
    The identity as printed with (-1)^r is ambiguous for negative r; the paper's application to J(|r|) requires (-1)^|r|, so the sign handling is an assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of L\'evy Light Cones and Critical Causality in Fractional Multiscale Quantum Ising Models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YEERNOVY

@misc{pith2026250505645,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: L\'evy Light Cones and Critical Causality in Fractional Multiscale Quantum Ising Models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YEERNOVY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.05645}
}
abstract

We study causality and criticality in a one-dimensional fractional multiscale transverse-field Ising model, where fractional derivatives generate long range interactions beyond the scope of standard power laws. Such fractional responses are common in classical systems including the anomalous stress-strain behaviour of viscoelastic polymers, L\'evy-like contaminant transport in heterogeneous porous media, and the non-Debye dielectric relaxation of glassy dielectrics. Furthermore, these unique interactions can be implemented in current quantum information architectures, with intriguing consequences for the many-body dynamics. Using a truncated Jordan-Wigner approach, we show that in the long wavelength limit of the mean field, the dynamical critical exponent is set by the fractional order q as $z=q/2$. To probe genuine many-body dynamics, we apply matrix-product-state simulations with the time-dependent variational principle adapted to nonlocal couplings. Tracking the entanglement-entropy light cone and performing finite-size scaling of the many-body gap for $0<q<2.5$, we confirm a continuously tunable exponent $z(q)$: for $q<2$ the entanglement front broadens with a sublinear light cone; for $2<q<2.5$ we observe a faint superlinear cone indicative of $z<1$; and for $q \gtrsim 2.5$ the system reverts to the ballistic nearest-neighbour regime with $z=1$. The correspondence between quantum entanglement fronts that spread as $t^{1/z}$ and classical L\'evy flights whose mean-square displacement grows as $t^{2/q}$ provides a direct physical link between fractional interactions and L\'evy statistics. Fractional derivatives therefore offer a unified framework in which short-range, power-law, and frustrated long-range interactions emerge as limiting cases, enabling controlled exploration of nonlocal causality bounds and exotic entanglement dynamics within current quantum information platforms.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.05645 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Example of the iterative exponential decomposition for a fractional order q = 1.5 on a chain of 1000 sites with a final finite sum of 12 decaying exponentials. (a) Comparison of the original coupling J(r) (circles) and its fitted sum of exponentials (solid line). (b) Pointwise error ∆(r) between the exact and approximated profiles, showing that the error remains safely below the chosen threshold for all site separat… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Bipartite entanglement entropy SL/2 versus transverse field g for a chain of L = 400 sites at fractional order q = 1.5. A clear maximum signals the critical point gc. The solid line is a Gaussian process regression fit used to pinpoint the entropy peak from the discrete data points, providing a refined numerical estimate of gc. Uncertainty associated with individual measurements was produced via repeated measurement… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Example fitting routine shown for a fractional order of 1.5 and linear system sizes from 10 to 200. (a) Energy gap ∆(L) versus transverse field g for various chain lengths L. (b) Extracted dynamical exponent z from a global fit of ∆(L) across multiple system sizes. Data points show numerical results, while the solid lines are fits to the leading power law and its subleading correction, as described in (9) and (10). … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Bond-entropy contours Sbond(j, t) revealing the light-cone structure for fractional orders (a) q = 1.5 and (b) q = 2.2. In each panel, color indicates Sbond(j, t) as a function of position j (horizontal axis) and time t (vertical axis), measured after applying a local …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Thermodynamic critical transverse field gc versus fractional order q, determined by finite-size scaling of chains up to L = 200. The data points show a monotonic increase in gc with growing q. Beyond q > 2, where frustration emerges from sign-alternating long-range int…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Dynamical critical exponent z as a function of the fractional order q. Blue markers denote data from finite-size gap scaling, while red markers come from local-perturbation wavefront analysis (bond-entropy contours). The black dashed line indicates the mean field predi…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages

  1. [46]

    Crosswhite G M, Doherty A C and Vidal G 2008 Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 78 035116

    work page 2008

  2. [1]

    Introduction Understanding how quantum information propagates in many-body systems is a central theme in quantum information science and technology (QIST), motivated by both foundational questions on non-equilibrium physics and practical considerations for quantum simulators/emulators. In systems with short-range interactions, Lieb and Robinson establishe...

    work page

  3. [2]

    In cases dominated by Brownian motion, the resulting interaction kernels are effectively local or rapidly decaying, allowing them to be approximated by second-derivative terms

    The Fractional Ising Model Historically, many classical and quantum field theories can be derived from the stochastic motion of virtual particles mediating interactions in a many-body system. In cases dominated by Brownian motion, the resulting interaction kernels are effectively local or rapidly decaying, allowing them to be approximated by second-deriva...

    work page

  4. [3]

    Their chief advantage lies in the ability to compactly represent states obeying area-law entanglement, such as the ground states of most gapped, one-dimensional Hamiltonians

    Numerically Extracting the Dynamical Critical Exponent One-dimensional matrix product states (MPS) have become a powerful tool for studying quantum many-body systems. Their chief advantage lies in the ability to compactly represent states obeying area-law entanglement, such as the ground states of most gapped, one-dimensional Hamiltonians. As a result, MP...

    work page

  5. [4]

    In a mean-field approach, fractional interactions manifest as momentum-dependent dispersion terms, clarifying how nonlocal couplings modify the quasiparticle spectrum

    Truncated Jordan-Wigner Mapping: Mean Field Diagonalization To gain further insight into how low-energy excitations shape the dynamical critical exponent, we transform the fractional Ising model via the Jordan–Wigner transformation, followed by Fourier and Bogoliubov transformations. In a mean-field approach, fractional interactions manifest as momentum-d...

    work page

  6. [5]

    Anomalous Dynamical Scaling and L´ evy Causality Figure 5 traces the critical transverse field gc in the thermodynamic limit as a function of the fractional order q. The threshold rises monotonically: for q < 2 the chain retains genuine power-law couplings, while at q = 2 it reduces to the nearest-neighbour transverse-field Ising model and reproduces the ...

    work page

  7. [6]

    For q > 2, z initially exceeds 1, producing superlinear light cones arising from the frustration from sign-alternating interactions

    Finally, green markers denote the calculated dynamical critical exponent for the asymptotic power law of the fractional interactions. For q > 2, z initially exceeds 1, producing superlinear light cones arising from the frustration from sign-alternating interactions. However, at larger q, the antiferromagnetic couplings cease to affect the critical scaling...

    work page

  8. [7]

    Conclusion Fractional derivatives establish a connection between heavy-tailed L´ evy-flight statistics and quantum criticality, extending single-particle formulations [11, 13] to many-body spin systems. For q < 2, our simulations confirm that the effective quasiparticle dispersion reconstructs the dynamical exponent within 5% of z =q/2, matching known res...

    work page

Show all 55 references
  1. [8]

    Lieb E H and Robinson D W 1972 Communications in mathematical physics 28 251–257

    1972

  2. [9]

    Jurcevic P, Lanyon B P, Hauke P, Hempel C, Zoller P, Blatt R and Roos C F 2014 Nature 511 202–205

    2014

  3. [10]

    Zhang Y, Wang R, Zhong H, Zhang J, Beli´ c M R and Zhang Y 2017 Scientific Reports 7 17872

    2017

  4. [11]

    Richerme P, Gong Z X, Lee A, Senko C, Smith J, Foss-Feig M, Michalakis S, Gorshkov A V and Monroe C 2014 arXiv preprint arXiv:1401.5088

    2014 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Hauke P and Tagliacozzo L 2013 Physical review letters 111 207202

    2013

  6. [13]

    Gong Z X, Foss-Feig M, Brand˜ ao F G and Gorshkov A V 2017Physical review letters 119 050501

  7. [14]

    Foss-Feig M, Gong Z X, Clark C W and Gorshkov A V 2015 Physical review letters 114 157201

    2015

  8. [15]

    Yang L and Feiguin A 2021 SciPost Physics 10 110

    2021

  9. [16]

    Yang L, Weinberg P and Feiguin A 2022 SciPost Physics 13 060

    2022

  10. [17]

    Yang L, Hamad I, Manuel L O and Feiguin A E 2022 Physical Review B 105 195104

    2022

  11. [19]

    Laskin N 2000 Physical Review E 62 3135

    2000

  12. [20]

    Laskin N 2002 Physical Review E 66 056108

    2002

  13. [21]

    Stickler B 2013 Physical Review E 88 012120

    2013

  14. [22]

    Hasan M and Mandal B P 2018 Physics Letters A 382 248–252

    2018

  15. [23]

    2015 Physical review letters 115 180403

    Zhang Y, Liu X, Beli´ c M R, Zhong W, Zhang Y, Xiao M et al. 2015 Physical review letters 115 180403

    2015

  16. [24]

    Mendl C B and Spohn H 2015 Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2015 P03007

    2015

  17. [25]

    Van Beijeren H 2012 Physical review letters 108 180601

    2012

  18. [26]

    Dhar A, Saito K and Derrida B 2013 Physical Review E 87 010103

    2013

  19. [27]

    Kundu A, Bernardin C, Saito K, Kundu A and Dhar A 2019 Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2019 013205

    2019

  20. [28]

    Solomon T, Weeks E R and Swinney H L 1993 Physical Review Letters 71 3975

    1993

  21. [29]

    Pandey V and Holm S 2016 Physical Review E 94 032606

    2016

  22. [30]

    Brockmann D, Hufnagel L and Geisel T 2006 Nature 439 462–465

    2006

  23. [31]

    Benhamou S 2007 Ecology 88 1962–1969

    2007

  24. [32]

    Murakami H, Feliciani C and Nishinari K 2019 Journal of The Royal Society Interface 16 20180939

    2019

  25. [33]

    Liu Y, Long X, Martin P R, Solomon S G and Gong P 2021 Communications Biology 4 739

    2021

  26. [34]

    Yarahmadi H and Saberi A A 2022 Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science 32

    2022

  27. [35]

    Iomin A 2021 Modern Physics Letters A 36 2140003

    2021

  28. [36]

    Zeng L and Zeng J 2019 Optics Letters 44 2661–2664

    2019

  29. [37]

    Xin W, Song L and Li L 2021 Optics Communications 480 126483

    2021

  30. [38]

    He S, Malomed B A, Mihalache D, Peng X, He Y and Deng D 2021 Physics Letters A 404 127403

    2021

  31. [39]

    Liu S, Zhang Y, Malomed B A and Karimi E 2023 Nature Communications 14 222

    2023

  32. [40]

    Lewis J M and Carr L D 2025 arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.14134

    2025 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Wall M L and Carr L D 2009 New Journal of Physics 11 055027

    2009

  34. [42]

    Fr¨ owis F, Nebendahl V and D¨ ur W 2010Physical Review A 81 062337

  35. [43]

    Barthelemy P, Bertolotti J and Wiersma D S 2008 Nature 453 495–498

    2008

  36. [44]

    Ortigueira M D 2006 International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences 2006 048391

    2006

  37. [45]

    Wall M L and Wall M L 2015 Quantum Many-Body Physics of Ultracold Molecules in Optical Lattices: Models and Simulation Methods 177–222

    2015

  38. [47]

    Jaschke D, Wall M L and Carr L D 2018 Computer Physics Communications 225 59–91

    2018

  39. [48]

    Harris F J 2005 Proceedings of the IEEE 66 51–83

    2005

  40. [49]

    Defenu N, Enss T and Halimeh J C 2019 Physical Review B 100 014434

    2019

  41. [50]

    Jaschke D, Maeda K, Whalen J D, Wall M L and Carr L D 2017 New Journal of Physics 19 L´ evy Light Cones and Critical Causality in Fractional Multiscale Quantum Ising Models20 033032

    2017

  42. [51]

    Vodola D, Lepori L, Ercolessi E, Gorshkov A V and Pupillo G 2014 Physical review letters 113 156402

    2014

  43. [52]

    Pfeuty P 1970 ANNALS of Physics 57 79–90

    1970

  44. [53]

    Maghrebi M F, Gong Z X, Foss-Feig M and Gorshkov A V 2016 Physical Review B 93 125128

    2016

  45. [54]

    Richerme P, Gong Z X, Lee A, Senko C, Smith J, Foss-Feig M, Michalakis S, Gorshkov A V and Monroe C 2014 Nature 511 198–201

    2014

  46. [55]

    Bernien H, Schwartz S, Keesling A, Levine H, Omran A, Pichler H, Choi S, Zibrov A S, Endres M, Greiner M, Vuleti´ c V and Lukin M D 2017Nature 551 579–584

  47. [56]

    Sundaresan N M, Lundgren R, Zhu G, Gorshkov A V and Houck A A 2019 Physical Review X 9 011021

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.