Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 57 references

Role of particle density in the Hall response of synthetic fermionic ladders: Lifshitz and Meissner-vortex transitions

T0 review · 4 major / 0 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The Hall response of synthetic fermionic ladders is strongly density-dependent at large flux, vanishing, flipping sign, or diverging at specific fluxes.

desk verdict A useful map of density-dependent Hall response in fermionic ladders, but Eq. (19) is wrong as printed and the 4-Fermi-point formulas built on it need correction before the analytic apparatus is reliable. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.26615 v1 pith:Z5NHGK76 submitted 2026-07-29 cond-mat.quant-gas

Matteo Ferraretto , Matteo Acciai , Massimo Capone This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gas
keywords HallimbalancesyntheticdimensionfermionicladderartificialgaugefieldLifshitztransitionmagicfluxMeissner-vortexcoldatoms
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

This paper shows that the Hall imbalance of non-interacting fermionic ladders pierced by a synthetic magnetic flux is not always the universal, density-independent quantity previously reported. At sufficiently large synthetic flux, the Hall imbalance depends sharply on particle density: it can be greatly enhanced at low density, vanish at special 'magic' fluxes, change sign as the flux or density is varied, and even diverge at critical Lifshitz fluxes in the zero-density or near-full-density limit. The mechanism is traced to Lifshitz transitions, where the number of Fermi points changes as the band structure is reshaped by flux and density. The paper also examines bond currents and argues that, unlike in bosonic ladders, fermionic ladders do not show a strict Meissner-vortex transition connected to the Lifshitz transition.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Hall imbalance Delta_H = 2t lim_{phi->0} (P_y/J_x), a ratio of second derivatives of the ground-state energy with respect to a piercing Aharonov-Bohm flux phi and a synthetic-dimension polarizing field nu. The argument is carried by second-order perturbation theory in t/Omega for the energy bands, which yields explicit formulas for the band dispersion, the magic fluxes gamma0 = 2 pi q/(M+1) where the imbalance vanishes, and the Lifshitz fluxes where the number of Fermi points changes; these formulas are complemented by exact diagonalization for M=2,3,4.

What would settle it

Measure the Hall imbalance of a 4-leg fermionic ladder at a fixed density while sweeping the synthetic flux: the paper predicts it passes through zero at gamma = 4pi/5 and at gamma = pi, and changes sign in between, with sharp non-analytic kinks at density-dependent Lifshitz fluxes; alternatively, for a 2-leg ladder, measure |Delta_H| at the Lifshitz flux as density n approaches zero and check the predicted 1/n^2 divergence.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For an M-leg fermionic ladder with strong inter-leg tunneling (Omega >> t), the Hall imbalance Delta_H, defined as the ratio of polarization along the synthetic dimension to the real-direction current in linear response, becomes a strong function of density and flux. The paper derives analytical expressions showing that Delta_H vanishes exactly at magic fluxes gamma0 = 2 pi q/(M+1), where a band-reflection symmetry enforces zero polarization, and that it develops non-analytic features at Lifshitz fluxes where the Fermi-surface topology changes. In the 2-leg case, Delta_H diverges as 1/n^2 in the zero-density limit at the Lifshitz flux; in the 3-leg ladder it diverges as (n-1)^-2 toward unit

Load-bearing premise

The main analytical results assume the synthetic tunneling Omega is much larger than the real-direction tunneling t, so second-order perturbation theory in t/Omega is valid; the paper itself notes that for the central band of odd-leg ladders this approximation predicts a strictly vanishing Hall imbalance for 1<n<2 and fails in a narrow flux interval.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Experimental measurements of the Hall imbalance at large synthetic flux should reveal strong density dependence, contrasting with the previously observed universal low-flux regime.
  • The predicted vanishing at magic fluxes gamma0 = 2 pi q/(M+1) offers a direct, parameter-free signature to test the theory in cold-atom ladders.
  • In a 4-leg ladder, the Hall imbalance is expected to change sign as the flux is increased at fixed density, a qualitative effect that can be detected without fine-tuning.
  • The divergence of the Hall imbalance at the Lifshitz flux in the low-density (or near-unit-filling) limit provides a sharp experimental probe of the Lifshitz transition.
  • Unlike in bosonic ladders, fermionic ladders should not exhibit a clear Meissner-vortex phase transition accompanying the Lifshitz transition, so the Hall imbalance is a more robust diagnostic than current-pattern modulations.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the density dependence is confirmed, the Hall imbalance could serve as a practical thermometer or probe for Fermi-surface topology changes in synthetic-dimension quantum simulators.
  • The same perturbative machinery could be extended to interacting fermions or to ladders with more legs, where new magic fluxes and richer Lifshitz sequences are likely to appear.
  • The finding that the modulation amplitude of persistent currents is O(1/L) while the background current is O(1) implies that detecting vortex-like patterns in fermionic ladders requires either very low densities or carefully engineered finite-size systems; this may explain why such patterns have been elusive.
  • The paper's result that the universal Hall response breaks down at large flux suggests that the boundary of the 'universal regime' is set by the distance to the nearest magic flux rather than by the bare flux magnitude, offering a practical criterion for future experiments.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper studies the Hall imbalance Delta_H of non-interacting fermionic M-leg synthetic ladders in a uniform synthetic flux, focusing on the breakdown of the previously reported density-independent 'universal' Hall response at large flux. Using exact diagonalization for M=2, a second-order perturbative expansion in t/Omega for general M, and an analysis of Lifshitz transitions of the band structure, the authors derive analytical expressions for Delta_H near the magic fluxes where Delta_H vanishes (gamma_0 = 2 pi q/(M+1)) and at the Lifshitz flux gamma* where Delta_H can diverge in the low- or high-density limits (Secs. III and IV, Eqs. (10), (15), (20)-(24)). They also compute bond currents and compare the fermionic behavior to the bosonic Meissner-vortex transition, concluding that the fermionic current modulation is not tied to the Lifshitz transition in the same way (Sec. V).

Significance. If the results hold, the paper makes a useful contribution to the cold-atom synthetic-ladder literature: it identifies density-dependent and sign-changing Hall responses at large synthetic flux, provides a systematic perturbative framework (magic fluxes, Lifshitz fluxes) and exact M=2 closed forms, and clarifies that fermionic ladders do not show a strict Meissner-vortex transition. The manuscript ships exact numerical diagonalization data and explicit analytical formulas for M=2,3,4, which are testable in current experiments with alkaline-earth atoms.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV A, Eq. (19) vs Sec. IV C] The text below Eq. (17) states 'the first term at the denominator is non-vanishing and dominant... the final result is thus independent of the density'. It would help to spell out the order of the correction in t/Omega that is dropped, since the density dependence of Delta_H near gamma_0 is a central claim.
  2. [Sec. IV D] The estimated Omega_c = t omega [1+cos(n pi)] with 'numerical prefactor omega approx 23.02' is stated without derivation or a reference; either give the equation solved or label it as a numerical estimate with the fitting procedure.
  3. [Sec. V] Equation (28) is written for a two-fold degenerate ground state with momenta +/- k_F, but the text also discusses cases where the band has a double minimum and the Fermi level can cross in different ways. A short explanation of which k_F applies for the 4-intersection phase would improve clarity.
  4. [Typos / references] Reference [12] is duplicated and there are typographical artifacts in the text (e.g., 'Let I_1 = 2 pi/L sum cos k' missing parentheses in the displayed text; 'Eq. (10) at large Omega' after Eq. (21) should cite Eq. (20)'s limiting form instead). These do not affect the results.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the Hall imbalance is computed parameter-free from the Hamiltonian via Hellmann-Feynman; only a minor non-load-bearing self-citation appears.

full rationale

I find no circular step of any enumerated kind. Delta_H is defined by Eq. (3) as a derivative ratio of the ground-state energy, computed from the Hamiltonian (1) via Hellmann-Feynman; no parameter is fitted to Delta_H or to the Fermi-point data that enter the analytical predictions. The M=2 exact bands (4) and the perturbation theory (12) are derived from the same Hamiltonian, and the I1/I2 sums (18)-(19) follow from the Fermi-point equations, so the claims in Eqs. (20)-(24) are parameter-free predictions that are then compared with exact numerics. The acknowledged failure of second-order perturbation theory for the central band of odd-M ladders (Sec. IV C) is a stated limitation of the approximation, not a circularity. Ref. [24], the only same-author citation, supports the side remark that interactions can enhance chiral edge currents and is not load-bearing. The algebraic concern about Eq. (19) noted in the review, if confirmed, would be an internal correctness issue rather than circular reasoning.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claims are built with no fitted free parameters. The analysis relies on the standard tight-binding Hamiltonian with synthetic flux, PBC, and Hellmann-Feynman; the only non-trivial load-bearing assumption is the validity of the second-order perturbation theory in t/Omega for M>2, which the paper itself qualifies. The invented-entity count is zero.

free parameters (1)
  • none
    The model has only fixed parameters t, Omega, gamma, M, and n. No free parameters are fitted to the data; all results are parameter-free derivations or perturbation theory.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Periodic boundary conditions along the real direction with flux quantization gamma L = 2 pi m (or 4 pi m/L for even M)
    Section II, Eq. (1) and footnote 1. The quantization condition is required for the unitary transformation to be consistent with PBC, and it restricts the allowed gamma values in finite-size calculations.
  • standard math Ground-state energy derivatives via Hellmann-Feynman theorem
    Section II, Eq. (2). Standard theorem used to define Jx and Py; assumption that the ground state is non-degenerate in the perturbed region.
  • domain assumption The density is in the regime where the bands are gapped and not partially filled at the same time
    Section II: 'we only focus on the case where the bands are always separated by a gap and they are never partially filled at the same time.' This restricts the analysis to integer-filled lower bands plus one partially filled band.
  • domain assumption Perturbative expansion in t/Omega to second order for M>2 ladders
    Section IV A, Eq. (12). The perturbation is the diagonal T_ss term. The paper acknowledges the failure of this expansion for the central band of odd M ladders in Sec. IV C.
invented entities (1)
  • none
    purpose:
    The paper introduces no new particles, forces, dimensions, or conservation laws. The 'magic fluxes' are a derived property of the band structure, not a new physical entity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Role of particle density in the Hall response of synthetic fermionic ladders: Lifshitz and Meissner-vortex transitions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Z5NHGK76

@misc{pith2026260726615,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Role of particle density in the Hall response of synthetic fermionic ladders: Lifshitz and Meissner-vortex transitions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Z5NHGK76}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.26615}
}
abstract

We characterize the Hall response of non-interacting fermionic $M$-leg ladders in the presence of an artificial magnetic flux, that can be realized in one-dimensional optical lattices supplemented with a synthetic dimension. We focus on the Hall imbalance, which can be directly measured in experiments with ultracold fermionic atoms. At relatively large synthetic flux we find a dependence of the density that contrasts with previously reported density-independent behavior. In particular, the Hall imbalance can be significantly enhanced in the limit of small density of particles (or holes), or it can vanish and change sign at specific fluxes, which we obtain analytically in the large inter-leg coupling regime. This behavior is explained in terms of Lifshitz transitions of the band structure, where the number of Fermi points changes as a function of the flux and density. Finally, we explore the connection between these transitions and the so-called Meissner-vortex transition for fermionic ladders by computing the site-resolved leg and rung currents and discussing the similarities and differences with the bosonic counterpart.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.26615 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Sketch of a synthetic ladder with real PBC subject [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Hall imbalance as a function of the synthetic flux [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Hall imbalance for the 2-leg ladder (top panel) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Evolution of the band structure of the 4-leg ladder as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Hall imbalance ∆H of a 4-leg ladder computed numerically as a function of the particle density n = N/L and the magnetic flux γ/π for Ω = 5t. The Lifshitz transitions predicted with perturbation theory occur along the dashed lines. If 1 < n < 2 the three Lifshitz tr…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Evolution of the pattern of leg currents in a 2-legs ladder with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Bloch, J

    I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Many-body physics with ultracold gases, Reviews of modern physics 80, 885 (2008)

    2008

  2. [2]

    magic fluxes

    In the figure, we observe several important features of Eq. (28). First of all, in a band with a single minimum, when the number of parti- cles is such that L N ≡λ∈N(e.g.,N= 2,6), we observe a commensurate oscillation with exactlyNrepeated pe- riods. IfNdoes not divideLexactly butL−Ndoes (e.g.,N= 24,28), even thoughλis not an integer mul- tiple of the lat...

    2020

  3. [3]

    Bloch, J

    I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and S. Nascimbene, Quantum sim- ulations with ultracold quantum gases, Nature Physics 8, 267 (2012)

    2012

  4. [4]

    Amico, D

    L. Amico, D. Anderson, M. Boshier, J.-P. Brantut, L.-C. Kwek, A. Minguzzi, and W. von Klitzing, Colloquium: Atomtronic circuits: From many-body physics to quan- tum technologies, Rev. Mod. Phys.94, 041001 (2022)

    2022

  5. [5]

    Aidelsburger, M

    M. Aidelsburger, M. Atala, M. Lohse, J. T. Barreiro, B. Paredes, and I. Bloch, Realization of the Hofstadter hamiltonian with ultracold atoms in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 185301 (2013)

    2013

  6. [6]

    Aidelsburger, M

    M. Aidelsburger, M. Lohse, C. Schweizer, M. Atala, J. T. Barreiro, S. Nascimbene, N. Cooper, I. Bloch, and N. Goldman, Measuring the Chern number of Hofstadter bands with ultracold bosonic atoms, Nature Physics11, 162 (2015)

    2015

  7. [7]

    Miyake, G

    H. Miyake, G. A. Siviloglou, C. J. Kennedy, W. C. Bur- ton, and W. Ketterle, Realizing the Harper Hamiltonian with laser-assisted tunneling in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 185302 (2013)

    2013

  8. [8]

    A. Celi, P. Massignan, J. Ruseckas, N. Goldman, I. B. Spielman, G. Juzeli¯ unas, and M. Lewenstein, Synthetic gauge fields in synthetic dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 043001 (2014)

    2014

Show all 57 references
  1. [9]

    Mancini, G

    M. Mancini, G. Pagano, G. Cappellini, L. Livi, M. Rider, J. Catani, C. Sias, P. Zoller, M. Inguscio, M. Dalmonte, and L. Fallani, Observation of chiral edge states with neutral fermions in synthetic Hall ribbons, Science349, 1510 (2015). 13

    2015

  2. [10]

    B. K. Stuhl, H.-I. Lu, L. M. Aycock, D. Genkina, and I. B. Spielman, Visualizing edge states with an atomic Bose gas in the quantum Hall regime, Science349, 1514 (2015)

    2015

  3. [11]

    M. E. Tai, A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, R. Schittko, T. Menke, D. Borgnia, P. M. Preiss, F. Grusdt, A. M. Kauf- man, and M. Greiner, Microscopy of the interacting Harper–Hofstadter model in the two-body limit, Nature 546, 519 (2017)

    2017

  4. [13]

    L. F. Livi, G. Cappellini, M. Diem, L. Franchi, C. Clivati, M. Frittelli, F. Levi, D. Calonico, J. Catani, M. Inguscio, and L. Fallani, Synthetic dimensions and spin-orbit cou- pling with an optical clock transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 220401 (2016)

    2016

  5. [14]

    Goldman, J

    N. Goldman, J. C. Budich, and P. Zoller, Topological quantum matter with ultracold gases in optical lattices, Nat. Phys.12, 639 (2016)

    2016

  6. [15]

    Kitagawa, K

    M. Kitagawa, K. Enomoto, K. Kasa, Y. Takahashi, R. Ciury lo, P. Naidon, and P. S. Julienne, Two-color photoassociation spectroscopy of ytterbium atoms and the precise determinations ofs-wave scattering lengths, Phys. Rev. A77, 012719 (2008)

    2008

  7. [16]

    Zhang, M

    X. Zhang, M. Bishof, S. L. Bromley, C. V. Kraus, M. S. Safronova, P. Zoller, A. M. Rey, and J. Ye, Spectroscopic observation of SU(N)-symmetric interactions in Sr orbital magnetism, Science345, 1467 (2014)

    2014

  8. [17]

    A. V. Gorshkov, M. Hermele, V. Gurarie, C. Xu, P. S. Julienne, J. Ye, P. Zoller, E. Demler, M. D. Lukin, and A. Rey, Two-orbital SU(N) magnetism with ultracold alkaline-earth atoms, Nature physics6, 289 (2010)

    2010

  9. [18]

    M. A. Cazalilla and A. M. Rey, Ultracold Fermi gases with emergent SU(N) symmetry, Reports on Progress in Physics77, 124401 (2014)

    2014

  10. [19]

    Del Re and M

    L. Del Re and M. Capone, Selective insulators and anomalous responses in three-component fermionic gases with broken SU(3) symmetry, Physical Review A98, 063628 (2018)

    2018

  11. [20]

    D. Tusi, L. Franchi, L. F. Livi, K. Baumann, D. Bene- dicto Orenes, L. Del Re, R. E. Barfknecht, T.-W. Zhou, M. Inguscio, G. Cappellini, M. Capone, J. Catani, and L. Fallani, Flavour-selective localization in interacting lattice fermions, Nat. Phys.18, 1201 (2022)

    2022

  12. [21]

    Scazza, C

    F. Scazza, C. Hofrichter, M. H¨ ofer, P. De Groot, I. Bloch, and S. F¨ olling, Observation of two-orbital spin-exchange interactions with ultracold SU(N)-symmetric fermions, Nature Physics10, 779 (2014)

    2014

  13. [22]

    Pagano, M

    G. Pagano, M. Mancini, G. Cappellini, L. Livi, C. Sias, J. Catani, M. Inguscio, and L. Fallani, Strongly interact- ing gas of two-electron fermions at an orbital Feshbach resonance, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 265301 (2015)

    2015

  14. [23]

    Zhang, Y

    R. Zhang, Y. Cheng, H. Zhai, and P. Zhang, Orbital fes- hbach resonance in alkali-earth atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 135301 (2015)

    2015

  15. [24]

    H¨ ugel and B

    D. H¨ ugel and B. Paredes, Chiral ladders and the edges of quantum hall insulators, Phys. Rev. A89, 023619 (2014)

    2014

  16. [25]

    Ferraretto, A

    M. Ferraretto, A. Richaud, L. D. Re, L. Fallani, and M. Capone, Enhancement of chiral edge currents in (d+1)-dimensional atomic Mott-band hybrid insulators, SciPost Phys.14, 048 (2023)

    2023

  17. [26]

    Barbarino, L

    S. Barbarino, L. Taddia, D. Rossini, L. Mazza, and R. Fazio, Synthetic gauge fields in synthetic dimen- sions: interactions and chiral edge modes, New Journal of Physics18, 035010 (2016)

    2016

  18. [27]

    Greschner, M

    S. Greschner, M. Filippone, and T. Giamarchi, Universal Hall response in interacting quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 083402 (2019)

    2019

  19. [28]

    Buser, S

    M. Buser, S. Greschner, U. Schollw¨ ock, and T. Gia- marchi, Probing the Hall voltage in synthetic quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 030501 (2021)

    2021

  20. [29]

    Citro, T

    R. Citro, T. Giamarchi, and E. Orignac, Hall Response in Interacting Bosonic and Fermionic Ladders, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 056501 (2025)

    2025

  21. [30]

    T.-W. Zhou, G. Cappellini, D. Tusi, L. Franchi, J. Par- ravicini, C. Repellin, S. Greschner, M. Inguscio, T. Gia- marchi, M. Filippone, J. Catani, and L. Fallani, Obser- vation of universal Hall response in strongly interacting Fermions, Science381, 427 (2023)

    2023

  22. [31]

    T.-W. Zhou, T. Beller, G. Masini, J. Parravicini, G. Cap- pellini, C. Repellin, T. Giamarchi, J. Catani, M. Filip- pone, and L. Fallani, Measuring Hall voltage and Hall re- sistance in an atom-based quantum simulator, Nat. Com- mun.16, 10247 (2025)

    2025

  23. [32]

    Orignac and T

    E. Orignac and T. Giamarchi, Meissner effect in a bosonic ladder, Phys. Rev. B64, 144515 (2001)

    2001

  24. [33]

    Petrescu and K

    A. Petrescu and K. Le Hur, Bosonic Mott Insulator with Meissner Currents, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 150601 (2013)

    2013

  25. [34]

    Atala, M

    M. Atala, M. Aidelsburger, M. Lohse, J. T. Barreiro, B. Paredes, and I. Bloch, Observation of chiral currents with ultracold atoms in bosonic ladders, Nat. Phys.10, 588 (2014)

    2014

  26. [35]

    Piraud, F

    M. Piraud, F. Heidrich-Meisner, I. P. McCulloch, S. Greschner, T. Vekua, and U. Schollw¨ ock, Vortex and Meissner phases of strongly interacting bosons on a two- leg ladder, Phys. Rev. B91, 140406 (2015)

    2015

  27. [36]

    Di Dio, R

    M. Di Dio, R. Citro, S. De Palo, E. Orignac, and M.-L. Chiofalo, Meissner to vortex phase transition in a two-leg ladder in artificial gauge field, Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 224, 525 (2015)

    2015

  28. [37]

    Di Dio, S

    M. Di Dio, S. De Palo, E. Orignac, R. Citro, and M.-L. Chiofalo, Persisting Meissner state and incommensurate phases of hard-core boson ladders in a flux, Phys. Rev. B92, 060506 (2015)

    2015

  29. [38]

    Kolley, M

    F. Kolley, M. Piraud, I. P. McCulloch, U. Schollw¨ ock, and F. Heidrich-Meisner, Strongly interacting bosons on a three-leg ladder in the presence of a homogeneous flux, New J. Phys.17, 092001 (2015)

    2015

  30. [39]

    Greschner, M

    S. Greschner, M. Piraud, F. Heidrich-Meisner, I. P. Mc- Culloch, U. Schollw¨ ock, and T. Vekua, Spontaneous In- crease of Magnetic Flux and Chiral-Current Reversal in Bosonic Ladders: Swimming against the Tide, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 190402 (2015)

    2015

  31. [40]

    Orignac, R

    E. Orignac, R. Citro, M. D. Dio, S. D. Palo, and M.- L. Chiofalo, Incommensurate phases of a bosonic two-leg ladder under a flux, New Journal of Physics18, 055017 (2016)

    2016

  32. [41]

    Impertro, S

    A. Impertro, S. Huh, S. Karch, J. F. Wienand, I. Bloch, and M. Aidelsburger, Strongly interacting Meissner phases in large bosonic flux ladders, Nat. Phys.21, 895 (2025)

    2025

  33. [42]

    D. J. Scalapino, S. R. White, and S. Zhang, Insulator, metal, or superconductor: The criteria, Phys. Rev. B47, 7995 (1993). 14

    1993

  34. [43]

    G. Roux, E. Orignac, S. R. White, and D. Poilblanc, Diamagnetism of doped two-leg ladders and probing the nature of their commensurate phases, Phys. Rev. B76, 195105 (2007)

    2007

  35. [44]

    Prelovˇ sek, M

    P. Prelovˇ sek, M. Long, T. Markeˇ z, and X. Zotos, Hall Constant of Strongly Correlated Electrons on a Ladder, Phys. Rev. Lett.83, 2785 (1999)

    1999

  36. [45]

    Zotos, F

    X. Zotos, F. Naef, M. Long, and P. Prelovˇ sek, Reactive Hall Response, Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 377 (2000)

    2000

  37. [46]

    Filippone, C.-E

    M. Filippone, C.-E. Bardyn, S. Greschner, and T. Gia- marchi, Vanishing Hall response of charged fermions in a transverse magnetic field, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 086803 (2019)

    2019

  38. [47]

    B. N. Narozhny, S. T. Carr, and A. A. Nersesyan, Frac- tional charge excitations in fermionic ladders, Phys. Rev. B71, 161101 (2005)

    2005

  39. [48]

    S. T. Carr, B. N. Narozhny, and A. A. Nersesyan, Spinless fermionic ladders in a magnetic field: Phase diagram, Phys. Rev. B73, 195114 (2006)

    2006

  40. [49]

    Lifshitzet al., Anomalies of electron characteristics of a metal in the high pressure region, Sov

    I. Lifshitzet al., Anomalies of electron characteristics of a metal in the high pressure region, Sov. Phys. JETP11, 1130 (1960)

    1960

  41. [50]

    G. E. Volovik, Topological Lifshitz transitions, Low Tem- perature Physics43, 47 (2017)

    2017

  42. [51]

    Huang, M

    C.-H. Huang, M. Tezuka, and M. A. Cazalilla, Topologi- cal Lifshitz transitions, orbital currents, and interactions in low-dimensional Fermi gases in synthetic gauge fields, New J. Phys.24, 033043 (2022)

    2022

  43. [52]

    Zhao, X.-W

    Y.-J. Zhao, X.-W. Xu, H. Wang, Y.-x. Liu, and W.- M. Liu, Vortex-Meissner phase transition induced by a two-tone-drive-engineered artificial gauge potential in the fermionic ladder constructed by superconducting qubit circuits, Phys. Rev. A102, 053722 (2020)

    2020

  44. [53]

    Amaricci, A

    A. Amaricci, A. Richaud, M. Capone, N. Darkwah Op- pong, and F. Scazza, Engineering the kondo impurity problem with alkaline-earth-atom arrays, Phys. Rev. A 112, 043301 (2025)

    2025

  45. [54]

    Beradze and A

    B. Beradze and A. Nersesyan, Spectrum, Lifshitz transi- tions and orbital current in frustrated fermionic ladders with a uniform flux, Eur. Phys. J. B96, 2 (2023)

    2023

  46. [55]

    Beradze, M

    B. Beradze, M. Tsitsishvili, E. Tirrito, M. Dalmonte, T. Chanda, and A. Nersesyan, Emergence of non-Abelian SU(2) invariance in Abelian frustrated fermionic ladders, Phys. Rev. B108, 075146 (2023)

    2023

  47. [56]

    Y. Li, H. Du, Y. Wang, J. Liang, L. Xiao, W. Yi, J. Ma, and S. Jia, Observation of frustrated chiral dynamics in an interacting triangular flux ladder, Nat. Commun.14, 7560 (2023)

    2023

  48. [57]

    Halati and T

    C.-M. Halati and T. Giamarchi, Exploring frustration ef- fects of strongly interacting bosons via the Hall response, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 013199 (2025)

    2025

  49. [58]

    Halati and T

    C.-M. Halati and T. Giamarchi, Interaction dependence of the Hall response for the Bose-Hubbard triangular lad- der, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 023112 (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.