Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 54 references

Fermionic Lattice Supersolidity in the Attractive Three-Color Fermi-Hubbard Model

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The half-filled attractive three-color Fermi-Hubbard model on a square lattice hosts a Fermi supersolid when a weakly coupled third color lifts the degeneracy between charge-density-wave and color-superfluid order.

desk verdict A promising finite-size observation of coexisting CDW and superfluid correlations, but the thermodynamic-limit supersolid claim violates Mermin–Wagner and needs reframing. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.08178 v1 pith:ZWEEEZKA submitted 2026-08-08 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.quant-gas

Xiang Li , Yu Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.quant-gas
keywords three-colorFermi-HubbardmodelfermionicsupersolidcolorsuperfluidchargedensitywavedeterminantquantumMonteCarlotrionCDWsquareopticallatticeattractiveHubbard
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 Fermi supersolid—simultaneous charge-density-wave (CDW) and color-superfluid (CSF) order—exists in the half-filled attractive three-color Fermi-Hubbard model on a square lattice. The mechanism is asymmetric attraction: colors 1 and 2 form moderately to strongly bound pairs, and a weakly coupled third color acts as a sublattice pinning field that lifts the degeneracy between CDW and CSF. Using determinant quantum Monte Carlo at $T=1/12$ on lattices $L=6$ through $12$, the authors find a finite interaction window in which both order parameters survive extrapolation to the thermodynamic limit. If correct, this gives a concrete cold-atom route to fermionic lattice supersolidity using only on-site attractive interactions and a simple square optical lattice.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the color-superfluid correlation ratio $R_{\mathrm{CSF}}$ of Eq. (3), whose finite-size crossings locate the CSF phase boundary, and the CDW order parameter $D_{123}$ of Eq. (2), whose $1/L$ extrapolation maps the density order. The microscopic mechanism is captured by the mean-field quasiparticle spectrum $E_k=\sqrt{\epsilon_k^2+(|U|\Delta)^2+(|U|D)^2}$: the CDW field $D$ couples the $\vec k$ and $\vec k+\vec Q$ sectors, and although increasing $D$ opens a gap, the density of states stays peaked at the gap edges, so the pairing kernel $I(\epsilon)$ remains large and CSF order survives. The third color's weak attraction acts as the sublattice potential that lifts the SU(2) pseudospin degeneracy and selects the coexistence direction.

What would settle it

Recompute the CSF correlation ratio and the CDW order parameter on lattices of linear size 16 and 18 at $T=1/12$ for $|U|=2.0$ and $|U'|=0.05$ to $0.15$; if the correlation-ratio crossing disappears or the extrapolated order parameters tend to zero, the claimed thermodynamic supersolid is not there. A complementary check is the superfluid stiffness: a genuine two-dimensional finite-temperature superfluid coexisting with CDW should exhibit quasi-long-range algebraic order rather than a conventional nonzero order parameter.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery, stated as the authors would state it, is that weak coupling $U'$ between color 3 and the paired color-1/color-2 subsystem converts the mutually exclusive superfluid and density-wave orders of the isolated two-color model into coexisting orders. The CDW background of 12-pairs produces a sublattice potential that slightly modulates the color-3 density, which in turn deepens the potential for the pairs; this enhances CDW while the localized wells weaken but do not destroy the color superfluid. The quantitative evidence is the coexistence of an extrapolated CDW order parameter $D_{123}$ with a finite CSF correlation ratio over a window around $|U|=2.0$--$3.5$ and $|U'|$ up to roughly $0.15$, with a crossover from 12-CDW to trion 123-CDW inside the supersolid. The authors support the mechanism with a mean-field theory in which the CDW field opens a gap while the density of states near the gap edges keeps the pairing kernel substantial.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the determinant quantum Monte Carlo data at $T=1/12$ on lattices $L=6$, $8$, $10$, and $12$, extrapolated with linear or quadratic curves in $1/L$, correctly identify a thermodynamic supersolid in two dimensions at finite temperature rather than a quasi-long-range algebraic state.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A fermionic supersolid can be reached in a half-filled square lattice with only on-site attractions, without the off-site interactions required by bosonic and Rydberg supersolid proposals.
  • The supersolid occupies a finite pocket of the phase diagram, bounded by the loss of CSF order at $|U'_c|\approx0.09$--$0.14$ for $|U|=2.0$--$3.5$ and by thermal suppression at large $|U|$.
  • Within the supersolid, increasing $|U'|$ continuously transfers spectral weight from superfluid to density order, and eventually the density order crosses over from 12-CDW to trion 123-CDW.
  • The predicted regime is experimentally plausible: at $|U|=2.0$ the triple occupancy stays below 0.20, within the stability window of current three-color lattice experiments.
  • If the coexistence is genuine, the same pairing plus pinning mechanism should be visible in both the CDW structure factor and the pair coherence of the same experimental cloud, giving two independent detection channels.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The authors leave implicit that the same 'third color as pinning bath' idea could be tested in other geometries or fillings; a natural next calculation is whether the gap-edge density-of-states effect survives on lattices with different Van Hove singularities.
  • Because the numerical case rests on finite-size extrapolation at one temperature, a decisive extension would be a superfluid-stiffness or algebraic-order analysis of the CSF channel, which the paper does not provide.
  • An immediate experimental discriminator is simultaneous measurement of the $(\pi,\pi)$ density structure factor and pair coherence in one cloud; both appearing together in the predicted interaction window would confirm the coexistence, and either alone would falsify the supersolid interpretation.
  • The mean-field picture suggests a spectral prediction: the single-particle gap should open with CDW order while pairing remains, which could be probed by momentum-resolved spectroscopy as a sharper test of the proposed mechanism.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the half-filled attractive three-color Fermi-Hubbard model on a square lattice at T=1/12 using sign-problem-free determinant quantum Monte Carlo. It defines CDW and CSF structure factors, extrapolates the corresponding order parameters to the thermodynamic limit, and constructs a phase diagram with liquid-like, CDW, and 'supersolid' regions. The central claim is that weak coupling of a third color to a strongly paired color-1/color-2 subsystem produces a lattice Fermi supersolid with coexisting CDW and color-superfluid order. A mean-field argument is offered as a mechanistic explanation, and triple-occupancy data are used to argue experimental feasibility.

Significance. If correct, the result would identify a new finite-temperature supersolid phase in a simple fermionic lattice model that is directly accessible to current ultracold-atom experiments, going beyond the bosonic and Rydberg-based proposals. The manuscript has notable strengths: the DQMC simulations are sign-free, the order parameters are measured directly rather than inferred from a fitting target, finite-size data are reported for several lattice sizes, and the triple-occupancy analysis addresses a real experimental constraint. However, the central thermodynamic interpretation is undermined by the fact that the putative CSF order is a continuous U(1) order in two dimensions at finite temperature, where true long-range order is forbidden and only quasi-long-range (BKT-type) order is possible. The paper neither acknowledges this nor performs the scaling analysis needed to distinguish the two scenarios.

major comments (3)
  1. [Three-color Fermi Supersolidity, Eqs. (3)-(4); SM §S4] The nonzero thermodynamic-limit values of P_CSF obtained from 1/L polynomial extrapolations are incompatible with the Mermin-Wagner-Hohenberg theorem: at T=1/12>0 in two dimensions with short-range interactions, the continuous U(1) symmetry associated with the 12-pair superfluid cannot be spontaneously broken, so P_CSF, defined in Eq. (4) as sqrt(S_CSF(L,Γ)/N), must tend to zero in the thermodynamic limit. The finite-size data for L=6, 8, 10, and 12 cannot distinguish exponential decay from algebraic decay of the CSF correlation function. The authors should either perform a BKT-style analysis of the CSF correlations (e.g., extracting the power-law exponent at the transition) or explicitly reframe the claim as quasi-long-range order, and revise the abstract, the phase diagram in Fig. 1, and the word 'supersolid' accordingly.
  2. [SM §S1, Eq. (S1), and Fig. S1] The correlation-ratio crossing of R_CSF is interpreted as locating a conventional continuous transition into a CSF-ordered phase. For a two-dimensional U(1) system at finite temperature, the expected transition is of BKT type, where the correlation ratio exhibits different finite-size behavior and the ordered phase is characterized by algebraic correlations rather than a nonzero order parameter. Without an analysis of the real-space or momentum-space decay of the CSF correlations, the extrapolated critical couplings |U'_c|=0.14(3), 0.10(2), and 0.09(3) do not establish a phase boundary to a state with true off-diagonal long-range order.
  3. [Origin of robust supersolidity, Eq. (6)] The mean-field Hamiltonian H_MF_12 is constructed by hand with nonzero order parameters Δ and D inserted as inputs, so the coexistence found in the self-consistent solution is imposed rather than emergent. Moreover, the mean-field treatment spontaneously breaks the U(1) symmetry at finite temperature in two dimensions, so it cannot rescue the DQMC extrapolation or serve as evidence for a true supersolid. The section is useful as a qualitative explanation of why pairing survives in the presence of CDW order, but it should be repositioned accordingly and should not be used to justify the thermodynamic-limit interpretation of P_CSF.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction] There are several typographical errors, including 'relaization' in the Introduction and 'clor 3' in the Model section; these should be corrected.
  2. [Fig. 3 caption] The caption contains 'fuction' instead of 'function', and the notation Δ and D is easy to confuse with the density of states D(ε) in Eq. (8) and Fig. 4; a clearer notation would improve readability.
  3. [Fig. 1 and SM §S4] The liquid-like phase is defined by the arbitrary threshold D123<0.03, and the crossover criterion in Eq. (S5) also uses an ad hoc threshold. These thresholds should be justified or shown not to affect the qualitative phase boundaries.
  4. [Model and Eq. (1)] The Hamiltonian is written with U_αβ<0, but the text and figures use |U| and |U'|; please make the sign convention consistent throughout, especially in Eq. (6) where |U|D multiplies the density term.
  5. [Fig. 1] The phase diagram is generated by interpolating discrete DQMC data points, but the interpolation procedure and the absence of error bars on the interpolated color map are not described; this should be clarified in the Supplemental Material.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the supersolid claim rests on independent DQMC measurements of CDW and CSF observables, and the mean-field and cited auxiliary results are not load-bearing inputs to the central prediction.

full rationale

The central supersolid claim is obtained from determinant quantum Monte Carlo measurements of two independently defined observables: the CDW structure factor (Eq. 2, with D123 = sqrt(S123/N)) and the CSF correlation ratio (Eq. 3), with the CSF order parameter PCSF = sqrt(SCSF(L,Gamma)/N) (Eq. 4). The finite-size extrapolations (SM Eq. S2) and correlation-ratio crossings are standard scaling analyses applied to the raw simulation data, not fitted to enforce the claimed coexistence; the supersolid region is then identified as the parameter region where the two independently measured orders are simultaneously finite. The mean-field treatment in Eqs. (6)-(8) is an explanatory model that introduces both Delta and D as variational fields and self-consistently checks that the pairing equation has a nonzero solution for imposed CDW order; even if this model is an idealization, it is not the source of the numerical prediction, so the derivation chain does not reduce to its inputs. The self-citations [39-42] are used for the sign-problem-free decomposition, a standard extrapolation form, and trion interpretation; these are auxiliary, and the sign-problem-free property and extrapolation practice are independently established (e.g., Ref. [47] and [52]), so they are not load-bearing. Concerns about the validity of a finite-temperature U(1) order parameter in two dimensions are physics and finite-size-scaling questions, not circularity. No quoted step in the paper exhibits a reduction of a predicted quantity to a fitted or self-cited input.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central numerical claim rests on the sign-free DQMC property (imported from earlier work), standard finite-size extrapolation, and several hand-chosen thresholds. The mean-field explanation introduces an ad hoc model that omits the third color. No new physical entities are invented.

free parameters (2)
  • Liquid phase threshold D123 < 0.03 = 0.03
    Hand-chosen contour used to define the liquid-like phase and delimit the supersolid region; not derived from first principles.
  • Crossover threshold max[sigma(D123), sigma(D12)] = one-sigma of the larger order parameter
    Threshold in Eq. (S5) for the 12-CDW to 123-CDW crossover; manually overridden at |U|=3.5.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Hubbard-Stratonovich decomposition in the spin-flip channel yields a sign-problem-free DQMC for this three-color model with unequal interactions.
    Invoked in the Model section with citations [39-42,47]; correctness of all simulations depends on this unproved-in-text property.
  • standard math At half filling on the square lattice, the nesting vector Q=(pi,pi) supports checkerboard CDW order that survives in the thermodynamic limit.
    Used to define S123 and D123 in Eq. (2); standard band-structure fact for the square lattice at half filling.
  • domain assumption The finite-size forms A+B/L+C/L^2 (for order parameters) and |U'_c|+aL^{-b} (for crossings) correctly capture the thermodynamic limit.
    Stated in SM Eq. (S2) and (S1); the authors acknowledge the leading correction is not universal and choose linear or quadratic fits by eye.
  • ad hoc to paper P_CSF can be extrapolated to a nonzero value at T=1/12 in 2D, implying long-range or effectively long-range CSF order despite the continuous U(1) symmetry.
    Implicit in the thermodynamic-limit extrapolation and phase diagram; no discussion of Mermin-Wagner or algebraic order.
  • ad hoc to paper Tracing out color 3 is faithfully represented by a mean-field Hamiltonian in Eq. (6) that contains only 12-subsystem orders.
    The section says color 3 is integrated out, but no U' or color-3 expectation values appear; this is an unverified modeling step.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fermionic Lattice Supersolidity in the Attractive Three-Color Fermi-Hubbard Model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZWEEEZKA

@misc{pith2026260808178,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fermionic Lattice Supersolidity in the Attractive Three-Color Fermi-Hubbard Model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZWEEEZKA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.08178}
}
read the original abstract

The recent experimental realization of the half-filled three-color Fermi-Hubbard model on a square optical lattice provides a novel platform for exploring exotic states of matter beyond conventional SU(2) systems. In this Letter, we investigate the three-color Fermi-Hubbard model with color-dependent attractive interactions using determinant quantum Monte Carlo simulations. We find that, at quantum degenerate temperatures, a lattice Fermi supersolid state emerges from the interplay between a moderately-to-strongly interacting two-color subsystem and a weakly coupled third-color environment. This supersolid state, characterized by the coexistence of charge-density-wave and color-superfluid orders, is highly promising for experimental detection with current techniques. Our results demonstrate that the attractive three-color Fermi-Hubbard model on a square optical lattice offers an experimentally accessible system for exploring the supersolidity of ultracold lattice fermions, requiring only a simple lattice geometry and easily tunable onsite interactions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.08178 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Phase diagram of the half-filled three-color Hubbard [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Interplay between CDW and CSF orders at half [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) The mean-field CSF order ∆ as a fuction of mean [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Normalized density of states [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    E. P. Gross, Unified theory of interacting bosons, Phys. Rev. 106, 161 (1957)

    1957

  2. [2]

    Andreev and I

    A. Andreev and I. Lifshits, Quantum theory of defects in crystals, Zhur Eksper Teoret Fiziki 56, 2057 (1969)

    work page 1969

  3. [3]

    G. V. Chester, Speculations on Bose-Einstein condensa- tion and quantum crystals, Phys. Rev. A 2, 256 (1970)

    1970

  4. [4]

    superfluid

    A. J. Leggett, Can a solid be “superfluid”? Phys. Rev. Lett. 25, 1543 (1970)

    work page 1970

  5. [5]

    Boninsegni and N

    M. Boninsegni and N. V. Prokof’ev, Collo- quium: Supersolids: What and where are they? Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 759 (2012)

    2012

  6. [6]

    yields H MF 12 = 1 2 ∑ ⃗k ⃗ψ† ⃗kH⃗k ⃗ψ⃗k, with H⃗k =    ǫ⃗k −|U |D −|U |∆ 0 −|U |D −ǫ⃗k 0 −|U |∆ −|U |∆ 0 −ǫ⃗k −|U |D 0 −|U |∆ −|U |D ǫ ⃗k   , (7) where ⃗ψk = (c⃗k,1,c ⃗k+ ⃗Q,1,c † −⃗k,2,c † −(⃗k+ ⃗Q),2)T is the Nambu FIG. 3. (a) The mean-field CSF order ∆ as a fuction of mean- field CDW order D at T = 1/12 and |U | = 2.0. (b) Schematic illustration o...

    work page

  7. [7]

    via a Bogoliubov trans- formation yields the quasiparticle spectrum Ek =√ ǫ2 k + (|U |∆)2 + (|U |D)2. The self-consistent equation for ∆ reads ∆ = 1 N ∑ ⃗k |U |∆ 2E⃗k [1 − 2f (E⃗k)] = 1 N ∫ ǫmax ǫmin dǫD(ǫ) |U |∆ 2E⃗k [1 − 2f (E⃗k)], (8) where f (E⃗k) is the Fermi-Dirac distribution and D(ǫ) is the density of states associated with the CDW- renormalized d...

    work page

  8. [8]

    Chomaz, D

    L. Chomaz, D. Petter, P. Ilzh¨ ofer, G. Natale, A. Traut- mann, C. Politi, G. Durastante, R. M. W. van Bijnen, A. Patscheider, M. Sohmen, M. J. Mark, and F. Ferlaino, Long-lived and transient supersolid behaviors in dipolar quantum gases, Phys. Rev. X 9, 021012 (2019)

    2019

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    Tanzi, E

    L. Tanzi, E. Lucioni, F. Fam` a, J. Catani, A. Fioretti, C. Gabbanini, R. N. Bisset, L. Santos, and G. Modugno, Observation of a dipolar quan- tum gas with metastable supersolid properties, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 130405 (2019)

    2019

  2. [10]

    B¨ ottcher, J.-N

    F. B¨ ottcher, J.-N. Schmidt, M. Wenzel, J. Hertkorn, M. Guo, T. Langen, and T. Pfau, Transient super- solid properties in an array of dipolar quantum droplets, Phys. Rev. X 9, 011051 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    Pollet, Quantum gases show flashes of a supersolid, Nature(London) 569, 494 (2019)

    L. Pollet, Quantum gases show flashes of a supersolid, Nature(London) 569, 494 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    M. A. Norcia, C. Politi, L. Klaus, E. Poli, M. Sohmen, M. J. Mark, R. N. Bisset, L. Santos, and F. Ferlaino, Two-dimensional supersolidity in a dipolar quantum gas, Nature(London) 596, 357 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    L´ eonard, A

    J. L´ eonard, A. Morales, P. Zupancic, T. Esslinger, and T. Donner, Supersolid formation in a quan- tum gas breaking a continuous translational symmetry, Nature(London) 543, 87 (2017)

    2017

  6. [14]

    Landig, L

    R. Landig, L. Hruby, N. Dogra, M. Landini, R. Mottl, T. Donner, and T. Esslinger, Quantum phases from com- peting short- and long-range interactions in an optical lattice, Nature(London) 532, 476 (2016)

    2016

  7. [15]

    Klinder, H

    J. Klinder, H. Keßler, M. R. Bakhtiari, M. Thor- wart, and A. Hemmerich, Observation of a super- radiant Mott insulator in the Dicke-Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 230403 (2015)

    2015

  8. [16]

    J.-R. Li, J. Lee, W. Huang, S. Burchesky, B. Shtey- nas, F. C. Top, A. O. Jamison, and W. Ket- terle, A stripe phase with supersolid proper- ties in spin–orbit-coupled Bose–Einstein condensates, Nature(London) 543, 91 (2017)

    2017

  9. [17]

    Y. He, H. Zhen, M. K. Parit, M. Huang, N. Defenu, J. Boronat, J. S´ anchez-Baena, and G.-B. Jo, Observa- tion of a supersolid stripe state in two-dimensional dipo- lar gases, arXiv:2512.13280

  10. [18]

    Boninsegni, Hard-core bosons on a triangular lattice, J

    M. Boninsegni, Hard-core bosons on a triangular lattice, J. Low Temp. Phys. 132, 39 (2003)

    2003

  11. [19]

    R. G. Melko, A. Paramekanti, A. A. Burkov, A. Vish- wanath, D. N. Sheng, and L. Balents, Supersolid order from disorder: Hard-core bosons on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 127207 (2005)

    2005

  12. [20]

    Heidarian and K

    D. Heidarian and K. Damle, Persistent supersolid phase of hard-core bosons on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 127206 (2005)

    2005

  13. [21]

    Wessel and M

    S. Wessel and M. Troyer, Supersolid hard- core bosons on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 127205 (2005)

    2005

  14. [22]

    Boninsegni and N

    M. Boninsegni and N. Prokof’ev, Supersolid phase of hard-core bosons on a triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 237204 (2005)

    2005

  15. [23]

    Murthy, D

    G. Murthy, D. Arovas, and A. Auerbach, Superfluids and supersolids on frustrated two-dimensional lattices, Phys. Rev. B 55, 3104 (1997)

    1997

  16. [24]

    Y. Li, A. Geißler, W. Hofstetter, and W. Li, Supersolid- ity of lattice bosons immersed in strongly correlated Ry- dberg dressed atoms, Phys. Rev. A 97, 023619 (2018)

    2018

  17. [25]

    Homeier, S

    L. Homeier, S. Hollerith, S. Geier, N.-C. Chiu, A. Browaeys, and L. Pollet, Supersolidity in Rydberg tweezer arrays, Phys. Rev. A 111, L011305 (2025)

    2025

  18. [26]

    K. Chen, Y. Qi, Z. Yan, and X. Li, Double supersolid phase in a bosonic t−J−V model with Rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 266003 (2025)

    2025

  19. [27]

    Schauß, M

    P. Schauß, M. Cheneau, M. Endres, T. Fukuhara, S. Hild, A. Omran, T. Pohl, C. Gross, S. Kuhr, and I. Bloch, Observation of spatially or- dered structures in a two-dimensional Rydberg gas, Nature(London) 491, 87 (2012)

    2012

  20. [28]

    Ebadi, T

    S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Se- meghini, A. Omran, D. Bluvstein, R. Samajdar, H. Pich- 6 ler, W. W. Ho, S. Choi, S. Sachdev, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simula- tor, Nature(London) ...

    2021

  21. [29]

    Weckesser, K

    P. Weckesser, K. Srakaew, T. Blatz, D. Wei, D. Adler, S. Agrawal, A. Bohrdt, I. Bloch, and J. Zeiher, Re- alization of a Rydberg-dressed extended Bose-Hubbard model, Science 390, 849 (2025)

    2025

  22. [30]

    Tsurkan, S

    V. Tsurkan, S. Zherlitsyn, L. Prodan, V. Felea, P. T. Cong, Y. Skourski, Z. Wang, J. Deisenhofer, H.-A. K. von Nidda, J. Wosnitza, and A. Loidl, Ultra-robust high- field magnetization plateau and supersolidity in bond- frustrated MnCr 2S4, Sci. Adv. 3, e1601982 (2017)

    2017

  23. [31]

    Xiang, C

    J. Xiang, C. Zhang, Y. Gao, W. Schmidt, K. Schmalzl, C.-W. Wang, B. Li, N. Xi, X.-Y. Liu, H. Jin, G. Li, J. Shen, Z. Chen, Y. Qi, Y. Wan, W. Jin, W. Li, P. Sun, and G. Su, Giant magnetocaloric effect in spin supersolid candidate Na 2BaCo(PO4)2, Nature(London) 625, 270 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    T. Chen, A. Ghasemi, J. Zhang, L. Shi, Z. Tagay, Y. Chen, L. Chen, E.-S. Choi, M. Jaime, M. Lee, Y. Hao, H. Cao, B. L. Winn, A. A. Podlesnyak, D. M. Pajerowski, R. Zhong, X. Xu, N. P. Armitage, R. Cava, and C. Bro- holm, Phase diagram and spectroscopic signatures of a supersol...

    2026

  25. [33]

    M. Zhu, V. Romerio, N. Steiger, S. D. Nabi, N. Mu- rai, S. Ohira-Kawamura, K. Y. Povarov, Y. Skourski, R. Sibille, L. Keller, Z. Yan, S. Gvasaliya, and A. Zhe- ludev, Continuum excitations in a spin supersolid on a triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 186704 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    M. Shu, X. Xu, N. Xi, M. He, J. Xiang, G. Qu, D. Khalyavin, P. Manuel, J. G. Nakamura, J. Jiao, Y. Liu, G. Wu, K. Guo, H. Zhao, W. Xu, Q. Duan, R. Zhong, X. Wang, Y. Han, L. Ling, X. Sun, D. Song, Y. Gao, Z. Wang, X. Chen, T. Qian, S. Jia, H. Du, G. Su, W. Li, J. Ma, and Z. Qu...

    2026

  27. [35]

    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 interactin g lattice fermions, Nat. Phys. 18, 1201 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Mongkolkiattichai, L

    J. Mongkolkiattichai, L. Liu, S. Dasgupta, K. R. A. Haz- zard, and P. Schauss, Quantum gas microscopy of three- flavor Hubbard systems, arXiv:2503.05687

    arXiv

  29. [37]

    Okanami, N

    Y. Okanami, N. Takemori, and A. Koga, Stability of the superfluid state in three-component fermionic optical lattice systems, Phys. Rev. A 89, 053622 (2014)

    2014

  30. [38]

    Miyatake, K

    S. Miyatake, K. Inaba, and S. Suga, Color superfluidity and trionic state of three-component lattice fermionic atoms, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 273, 012008 (2011)

    2011

  31. [39]

    Kantian, M

    A. Kantian, M. Dalmonte, S. Diehl, W. Hofstetter, P. Zoller, and A. J. Daley, Atomic color superfluid via three-body loss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 240401 (2009)

    2009

  32. [40]

    Azaria, S

    P. Azaria, S. Capponi, and P. Lecheminant, Three- component Fermi gas in a one-dimensional optical lattice, Phys. Rev. A 80, 041604(R) (2009)

    2009

  33. [41]

    H. Xu, X. Li, Z. Zhou, X. Wang, L. Wang, C. Wu, and Y. Wang, Trion states and quan- tum criticality of attractive SU(3) Dirac fermions, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 023180 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    X. Li, H. Xu, and Y. Wang, Quantum Monte Carlo sim- ulations of thermodynamic properties of attractive SU(3) Dirac fermions, Phys. Rev. B 108, 165102 (2023)

    2023

  35. [43]

    Li and Y

    X. Li and Y. Wang, Coexisting N´ eel and charge density wave orders in attractive three-color fermions, Phys. Rev. B 110, 115105 (2024)

    2024

  36. [44]

    X. Li, Y. Li, Q. Fu, and Y. Wang, Trion ordering in the attractive three-color Hubbard model on a π-flux square lattice, Phys. Rev. A 112, 063319 (2025)

    2025

  37. [45]

    Stepp, E

    J. Stepp, E. Ibarra-Garc ´ ıa-Padilla, R. T. Scalettar, and K. R. A. Hazzard, Trion formation and order- ing in the attractive SU(3) Fermi-Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 250402 (2026)

    2026

  38. [46]

    T. B. Ottenstein, T. Lompe, M. Kohnen, A. N. Wenz, and S. Jochim, Collisional stabil- ity of a three-component degenerate Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 203202 (2008)

    2008

  39. [47]

    J. H. Huckans, J. R. Williams, E. L. Hazlett, R. W. Stites, and K. M. O’Hara, Three-body recombination in a three-state Fermi gas with widely tunable interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 165302 (2009)

    2009

  40. [48]

    C. H. Schunck, M. W. Zwierlein, C. A. Stan, S. M. F. Raupach, W. Ketterle, A. Simoni, E. Tiesinga, C. J. Williams, and P. S. Julienne, Feshbach resonances in fermionic 6Li, Phys. Rev. A 71, 045601 (2005)

    2005

  41. [49]

    Wang, Y.-H

    L. Wang, Y.-H. Liu, M. Iazzi, M. Troyer, and G. Harcos, Split orthogonal group: A guiding principle for sign-problem-free fermionic simulations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 250601 (2015)

    2015

  42. [50]

    See Supplemental Material at [URL] for additional nu- merical results, including finite-size scalings of charge o r- ders, correlation-ratio crossings of the CSF order, and occupation number

  43. [51]

    Shao, Y.-X

    H.-J. Shao, Y.-X. Wang, D.-Z. Zhu, Y.-S. Zhu, H.-N. Sun, S.-Y. Chen, C. Zhang, Z.-J. Fan, Y. Deng, X.- C. Yao, Y.-A. Chen, and J.-W. Pan, Antiferromag- netic phase transition in a 3D fermionic Hubbard model, Nature(London) 632, 267 (2024)

    2024

  44. [52]

    J. K. Chin, D. E. Miller, Y. Liu, C. Stan, W. Setiawan, C. Sanner, K. Xu, and W. Ketterle, Evidence for superfluidity of ultracold fermions in an optical lattice, Nature(London) 443, 961 (2006)

    2006

  45. [53]

    X. Li, S. Wang, X. Luo, Y.-Y. Zhou, K. Xie, H.-C. Shen, Y.-Z. Nie, Q. Chen, H. Hu, Y.-A. Chen, X.- C. Yao, and J.-W. Pan, Observation and quan- tification of the pseudogap in unitary Fermi gases, Nature(London) 626, 288 (2024)

    2024

  46. [54]

    A. W. Sandvik, Finite-size scaling of the ground-state parameters of the two-dimensional Heisenberg model, Phys. Rev. B 56, 11678 (1997) . 7 Supplemental Material: Fermionic Lattice Supersolidity i n the Attractive Three-Color Fermi–Hubbard Model In this Supplemental Material,...

    1997

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.