pith. sign in

arxiv: 2508.14894 · v2 · submitted 2025-08-20 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

Anyon superfluidity of excitons in quantum Hall bilayers

Zhaoyu Han , Taige Wang , Zhihuan Dong , Michael P. Zaletel , Ashvin Vishwanath This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 22:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el
keywords anyon superfluidityquantum Hall bilayersexcitonsHalperin 112 stateChern-Simons QED3topological ordercomposite Fermi surfacelayer imbalance
0
0 comments X p. Extension

The pith

Finite densities of anyonic excitons in quantum Hall bilayers condense into a superfluid tied to a specific topological order and edge spectrum.

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

The paper shows that neutral anyons can disperse unlike their charged counterparts, opening a route to new daughter states upon doping. In a balanced bilayer of two Laughlin ν=1/3 fluids the minimal interlayer exciton already carries fractional exchange statistics. Doping a finite density of these excitons is argued to produce anyonic exciton superfluidity whose bulk topological order and edge spectrum are fixed by the parent states. The superfluid phase is predicted to be most stable near the direct transition into the Halperin (112) state and near the corresponding bilayer Jain transitions, where the theory is controlled by Chern-Simons QED₃. This framework yields concrete, testable signatures such as an anomalously large superfluid stiffness that scales with the square root of layer imbalance.

Core claim

In a balanced bilayer of two Laughlin ν=1/3 states the minimal interlayer exciton carries anyonic exchange statistics; a finite density of such excitons condenses into an anyonic exciton superfluid whose bulk topological order and edge spectrum are stitched to the parent quantum Hall states. The transition to the Halperin (112) state is described by Chern-Simons QED₃, from which follows an anomalously large superfluid stiffness κ_s ∝ |δν|^{1/2} at layer imbalance fraction δν together with a prevalence of spatial symmetry breaking driven by an underlying composite Fermi surface.

What carries the argument

Anyonic interlayer excitons in balanced bilayer Laughlin states, whose finite-density condensation is controlled by Chern-Simons QED₃ near the Halperin (112) transition.

If this is right

  • Anyonic exciton superfluidity is most robust near the direct transition into the Halperin (112) state and near analogous bilayer Jain transitions at total filling ν_T = 2n/(2n+1).
  • The superfluid stiffness scales anomalously as κ_s ∝ |δν|^{1/2} at finite layer imbalance.
  • Spatial symmetry breaking is prevalent, driven by an underlying composite Fermi surface.
  • The construction extends to higher-pseudospin exciton superfluids when doping higher Jain fractions.
  • The predictions are directly testable with existing experimental techniques and can be compared with current data.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same anyonic-exciton mechanism could be realized near other neutral anyon transitions in multilayer quantum Hall systems.
  • The composite-Fermi-surface-driven symmetry breaking may produce additional charge-density-wave or nematic signatures detectable in transport or spectroscopy.
  • Higher Jain fractions should host a sequence of distinct anyonic superfluids whose stiffness and edge spectra follow analogous Chern-Simons scaling.

Load-bearing premise

The minimal interlayer exciton in a balanced bilayer of two Laughlin ν=1/3 states carries anyonic exchange statistics.

What would settle it

Absence of superfluid stiffness scaling as the square root of layer imbalance when the bilayer is tuned through the transition into the Halperin (112) state.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.14894 by Ashvin Vishwanath, Michael P. Zaletel, Taige Wang, Zhaoyu Han, Zhihuan Dong.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (Top) An illustration of the flux attachment scheme of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (Left) A mean field phase diagram on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Illustrations of the LL structure and the gap Chern [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The charged anyons of a fractional quantum Hall fluid are necessarily dispersionless due to the continuous magnetic translation symmetry. Neutral anyons, however, can disperse, resulting in a much richer space of possible ``daughter'' states when doped to finite density. We discuss a natural realization of such physics in quantum Hall bilayers, where a finite density of excitons with fractional statistics is argued to give rise to `anyonic exciton superfluidity,' the charge-neutral analog of anyon superconductivity. In a balanced bilayer of two Laughlin $\nu = 1/3$ states, the minimal interlayer exciton carries anyonic exchange statistics. A finite density of these excitons is argued to yield an exciton superfluid stitched to a specific bulk topological order and edge spectrum. Such superfluidity should be most robust near the direct transition into the Halperin $(112)$ state, and near analogous transitions in the bilayer Jain sequence at total filling $\nu_\text{T} = 2\times \frac{n}{2n+1}$. These topological transitions can be described by Chern-Simons QED$_3$, from which we derive several novel and general properties of anyon superfluidity near such transitions, including an anomalously large superfluid stiffness of $\kappa_\text{s} \propto |\delta\nu|^{1/2}$ at layer imbalance fraction $\delta\nu$. A notable feature of the phase diagrams we construct is the prevalence of spatial symmetry breaking, driven by an underlying composite Fermi surface. Our results can be directly tested with currently available experimental techniques. We compare our theory with existing data and make concrete predictions for future measurements, including higher-pseudospin exciton superfluids when doping higher Jain fractions.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript argues that neutral interlayer excitons in quantum Hall bilayers can carry anyonic statistics, in contrast to the dispersionless charged anyons enforced by magnetic translation symmetry. In a balanced bilayer of two Laughlin ν=1/3 states the minimal exciton is stated to be anyonic; finite-density doping is then claimed to produce an anyonic exciton superfluid whose bulk topological order and edge spectrum are fixed by the parent state. The construction is said to be most robust near the direct transition to the Halperin (112) state and near analogous bilayer Jain-sequence transitions at total filling ν_T=2n/(2n+1). These transitions are described by Chern-Simons QED3, from which the authors derive an anomalously large superfluid stiffness κ_s ∝ |δν|^{1/2} together with a tendency toward spatial symmetry breaking driven by an underlying composite Fermi surface. Concrete experimental predictions and comparisons with existing data are provided.

Significance. If the central claims are substantiated, the work supplies a concrete, experimentally accessible realization of anyon superfluidity in a neutral channel. The predicted stiffness scaling, the specific bulk-edge correspondence, and the prevalence of symmetry-broken phases near topological transitions constitute falsifiable signatures that can be tested with current bilayer quantum-Hall techniques. The use of Chern-Simons QED3 to extract universal properties near the Halperin (112) transition is a strength, as is the explicit comparison with existing data and the list of higher-Jain-fraction predictions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and introductory discussion of bilayer Laughlin states] The premise that the minimal interlayer exciton in a balanced bilayer of two Laughlin ν=1/3 states carries anyonic (rather than bosonic or fermionic) exchange statistics is asserted in the abstract and the opening paragraph on natural realizations, yet no explicit microscopic calculation—wave-function overlap, Berry phase under adiabatic exchange, or anyon-attachment construction—is supplied in any section. This statistics assignment is load-bearing for the subsequent Chern-Simons QED3 analysis and for the claimed anyonic superfluidity.
  2. [Discussion of Chern-Simons QED3 and stiffness scaling] The stiffness scaling κ_s ∝ |δν|^{1/2} is derived from the Chern-Simons QED3 description of the Halperin (112) transition (abstract and the paragraph on topological transitions). Because the manuscript provides neither an explicit effective-action derivation nor error estimates or numerical checks against microscopic wave functions, it is unclear how robust the square-root singularity remains once higher-order corrections or finite-size effects are included.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and phase-diagram paragraphs] Notation for the layer-imbalance parameter δν is introduced without an explicit definition in terms of filling-factor difference; a short equation or sentence clarifying δν = (ν_top − ν_bot)/2 would remove ambiguity.
  2. [Paragraph on bulk topological order and edge spectrum] Several statements about the edge spectrum of the anyonic exciton superfluid are made without reference to the corresponding chiral Luttinger-liquid modes or to prior literature on bilayer edge theories; adding one or two citations would improve traceability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review of our manuscript. We address the two major comments point by point below, indicating where we agree that additional detail is warranted and outlining the corresponding revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and introductory discussion of bilayer Laughlin states] The premise that the minimal interlayer exciton in a balanced bilayer of two Laughlin ν=1/3 states carries anyonic (rather than bosonic or fermionic) exchange statistics is asserted in the abstract and the opening paragraph on natural realizations, yet no explicit microscopic calculation—wave-function overlap, Berry phase under adiabatic exchange, or anyon-attachment construction—is supplied in any section. This statistics assignment is load-bearing for the subsequent Chern-Simons QED3 analysis and for the claimed anyonic superfluidity.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit construction would make the argument more self-contained. The anyonic character follows from viewing the interlayer exciton as a bound state of a charge-e/3 quasihole in one Laughlin layer and a charge+e/3 quasiparticle in the other; the composite therefore inherits fractional statistics. In the revised manuscript we will insert a short subsection that sketches the anyon-attachment procedure and outlines the Berry-phase calculation for adiabatic exchange of two such excitons, thereby substantiating the claim without altering the subsequent analysis. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Discussion of Chern-Simons QED3 and stiffness scaling] The stiffness scaling κ_s ∝ |δν|^{1/2} is derived from the Chern-Simons QED3 description of the Halperin (112) transition (abstract and the paragraph on topological transitions). Because the manuscript provides neither an explicit effective-action derivation nor error estimates or numerical checks against microscopic wave functions, it is unclear how robust the square-root singularity remains once higher-order corrections or finite-size effects are included.

    Authors: The square-root scaling originates from the scaling dimensions of the critical operators in Chern-Simons QED3 once the superfluid order parameter is coupled in. We accept that a more explicit derivation of the effective action is desirable. In the revision we will expand the relevant section to derive the low-energy action step by step from the CS QED3 theory and to show how the |δν|^{1/2} dependence follows from the renormalization-group flow. We will also add a brief discussion of higher-order corrections, noting that they are irrelevant at the fixed point and therefore do not alter the leading singularity inside the scaling window. At present we do not supply numerical benchmarks against microscopic wave functions; the result is obtained within the controlled field-theoretic framework standard for such critical transitions. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation builds from external premises via field theory

full rationale

The paper's central chain begins with the stated premise that the minimal interlayer exciton in a balanced bilayer of two Laughlin ν=1/3 states carries anyonic statistics, then applies the known Chern-Simons QED3 description of the Halperin (112) transition to derive properties such as κ_s ∝ |δν|^{1/2} and features of the phase diagram. No equation or argument reduces a derived prediction back to a quantity fitted or defined inside the paper itself; the stiffness scaling and topological order follow from the external QED3 machinery applied to the transition, without self-definition, renaming of known results, or load-bearing self-citation that collapses the logic. The statistics premise functions as an input rather than an output of the superfluid construction, rendering the overall derivation self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the anyonic character of interlayer excitons and the applicability of Chern-Simons QED3 to bilayer transitions; these are domain assumptions rather than new postulates with independent evidence supplied in the abstract.

free parameters (1)
  • layer imbalance fraction δν
    Control parameter appearing in the derived superfluid stiffness scaling κ_s ∝ |δν|^{1/2}.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The minimal interlayer exciton in a balanced bilayer of two Laughlin ν=1/3 states carries anyonic exchange statistics.
    Invoked as the natural realization enabling finite-density anyonic exciton superfluidity.
  • domain assumption Chern-Simons QED3 describes the topological transitions into the Halperin (112) state and bilayer Jain sequence.
    Used to derive novel properties including the stiffness scaling and spatial symmetry breaking.
invented entities (1)
  • anyonic exciton superfluid no independent evidence
    purpose: Charge-neutral superfluid phase stitched to specific bulk topological order and edge spectrum.
    Postulated outcome of finite-density doping of anyonic excitons.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5858 in / 1667 out tokens · 67269 ms · 2026-05-18T22:08:10.967616+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Pathways from a chiral superconductor to a composite Fermi liquid

    cond-mat.str-el 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    For weak attractive interactions the evolution from chiral superconductor to composite Fermi liquid passes through an intermediate stable Landau Fermi liquid, while stronger interactions may route through a non-Abelia...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

135 extracted references · 135 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Pfannkuche and A

    D. Pfannkuche and A. H. MacDonald, Phys. Rev. B 56, R7100 (1997)

    work page 1997

  2. [2]

    J. Y. Lee, C. Wang, M. P. Zaletel, A. Vishwanath, and Y.-C. He, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031015 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Wang and L

    J. Wang and L. H. Santos, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 236805 (2020)

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Ma and Y.-C

    R. Ma and Y.-C. He, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033348 (2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Song, Y.-H

    X.-Y. Song, Y.-H. Zhang, and T. Senthil, Phys. Rev. B 109, 085143 (2024)

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Z. D. Shi and T. Senthil, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.20567 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Divic, V

    S. Divic, V. Cr´ epel, T. Soejima, X.-Y. Song, A. Mil- lis, M. P. Zaletel, and A. Vishwanath, arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.18175 (2024). 17

    work page arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    P. A. Nosov, Z. Han, and E. Khalaf, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.02108 (2025)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Z. D. Shi and T. Senthil, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.02128 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

    Pichler, C

    F. Pichler, C. Kuhlenkamp, M. Knap, and A. Vish- wanath, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.08000 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    Wang and M

    T. Wang and M. P. Zaletel, arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.07921 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    J. Cai, E. Anderson, C. Wang, X. Zhang, X. Liu, W. Holtzmann, Y. Zhang, F. Fan, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, et al., Nature 622, 63 (2023)

    work page 2023

  13. [13]

    F. Xu, Z. Sun, T. Jia, C. Liu, C. Xu, C. Li, Y. Gu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, B. Tong, J. Jia, Z. Shi, S. Jiang, Y. Zhang, X. Liu, and T. Li, Phys. Rev. X 13, 031037 (2023)

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    Z. Lu, T. Han, Y. Yao, A. P. Reddy, J. Yang, J. Seo, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, L. Fu, and L. Ju, Nature 626, 759 (2024)

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    Y. Xie, A. T. Pierce, J. M. Park, D. E. Parker, E. Kha- laf, P. Ledwith, Y. Cao, S. H. Lee, S. Chen, P. R. For- rester, et al., Nature 600, 439 (2021)

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    E. M. Spanton, A. A. Zibrov, H. Zhou, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, M. P. Zaletel, and A. F. Young, Science 360, 62 (2018), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aan8458

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aan8458 2018

  17. [17]

    B. A. Foutty, C. R. Kometter, T. Devakul, A. P. Reddy, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, L. Fu, and B. E. Feldman, Science 384, 343 (2024), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.adi4728

    work page doi:10.1126/science.adi4728 2024

  18. [18]

    C. R. Kometter, J. Yu, T. Devakul, A. P. Reddy, Y. Zhang, B. A. Foutty, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, L. Fu, and B. E. Feldman, Nature Physics 19, 1861 (2023)

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    J. Yu, B. A. Foutty, Z. Han, M. E. Barber, Y. Schattner, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, P. Phillips, Z.-X. Shen, S. A. Kivelson, et al., Nature Physics 18, 825 (2022)

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    Saito, J

    Y. Saito, J. Ge, L. Rademaker, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, D. A. Abanin, and A. F. Young, Nature Physics 17, 478 (2021)

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    L. Wang, Y. Gao, B. Wen, Z. Han, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, M. Koshino, J. Hone, and C. R. Dean, Science 350, 1231 (2015), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aad2102

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aad2102 2015

  22. [22]

    R. B. Laughlin, Science 242, 525 (1988), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.242.4878.525

    work page doi:10.1126/science.242.4878.525 1988

  23. [23]

    R. B. Laughlin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 2677 (1988)

    work page 1988

  24. [24]

    Hosotani and S

    Y. Hosotani and S. Chakravarty, Phys. Rev. B 42, 342 (1990)

    work page 1990

  25. [25]

    Y.-H. Chen, F. Wilczek, E. Witten, and B. I. Halperin, International Journal of Modern Physics B 3, 1001 (1989)

    work page 1989

  26. [26]

    X. G. Wen, F. Wilczek, and A. Zee, Phys. Rev. B 39, 11413 (1989)

    work page 1989

  27. [27]

    X. G. Wen and A. Zee, Phys. Rev. Lett.62, 2873 (1989)

    work page 1989

  28. [28]

    A. L. Fetter, C. B. Hanna, and R. B. Laughlin, Phys. Rev. B 39, 9679 (1989)

    work page 1989

  29. [29]

    Lee and M

    D.-H. Lee and M. P. A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 903 (1989)

    work page 1989

  30. [30]

    X. G. Wen and A. Zee, Phys. Rev. B 41, 240 (1990)

    work page 1990

  31. [31]

    X.-Y. Song, A. Vishwanath, and Y.-H. Zhang, Phys. Rev. B 103, 165138 (2021)

    work page 2021

  32. [32]

    Eisenstein, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 5, 159 (2014)

    J. Eisenstein, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 5, 159 (2014)

    work page 2014

  33. [33]

    Ye, Annals of Physics 323, 580 (2008)

    J. Ye, Annals of Physics 323, 580 (2008)

    work page 2008

  34. [34]

    X. Liu, Z. Hao, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, B. I. Halperin, and P. Kim, Nature Physics 15, 893 (2019)

    work page 2019

  35. [35]

    J. I. A. Li, C. Tan, S. Chen, Y. Zeng, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, J. Hone, and C. R. Dean, Science 358, 648 (2017), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aao2521

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aao2521 2017

  36. [36]

    Schliemann, S

    J. Schliemann, S. M. Girvin, and A. H. MacDonald, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 1849 (2001)

    work page 2001

  37. [37]

    S. L. Sondhi, A. Karlhede, S. A. Kivelson, and E. H. Rezayi, Phys. Rev. B 47, 16419 (1993)

    work page 1993

  38. [38]

    Lee and C

    D.-H. Lee and C. L. Kane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 1313 (1990)

    work page 1990

  39. [39]

    R. L. Doretto, C. Morais Smith, and A. O. Caldeira, Phys. Rev. B 86, 035326 (2012)

    work page 2012

  40. [40]

    Skinner, Phys

    B. Skinner, Phys. Rev. B 93, 085436 (2016)

    work page 2016

  41. [41]

    Wagner and D

    G. Wagner and D. X. Nguyen, Phys. Rev. B110, 195106 (2024)

    work page 2024

  42. [42]

    Wagner, D

    G. Wagner, D. X. Nguyen, S. H. Simon, and B. I. Halperin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 246803 (2021)

    work page 2021

  43. [43]

    Zhang, Z

    Y.-H. Zhang, Z. Zhu, and A. Vishwanath, Phys. Rev. X 13, 031023 (2023)

    work page 2023

  44. [44]

    T. c. v. Lotriˇ c and S. H. Simon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 176502 (2024)

    work page 2024

  45. [45]

    R¨ uegg, G

    L. R¨ uegg, G. Chaudhary, and R.-J. Slager, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, L042022 (2023)

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    S. H. Simon, E. H. Rezayi, and M. V. Milovanovic, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 046803 (2003)

    work page 2003

  47. [47]

    Yang, Phys

    K. Yang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 056802 (2001)

    work page 2001

  48. [48]

    M¨ oller, S

    G. M¨ oller, S. H. Simon, and E. H. Rezayi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 176803 (2008)

    work page 2008

  49. [49]

    Z. Zhu, L. Fu, and D. N. Sheng, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 177601 (2017)

    work page 2017

  50. [50]

    Stern and B

    A. Stern and B. I. Halperin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 106801 (2002)

    work page 2002

  51. [51]

    Dou¸ cot, M

    B. Dou¸ cot, M. O. Goerbig, P. Lederer, and R. Moess- ner, Phys. Rev. B 78, 195327 (2008)

    work page 2008

  52. [52]

    M. R. Peterson, Z. Papi´ c, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. B 82, 235312 (2010)

    work page 2010

  53. [53]

    Lian and S.-C

    B. Lian and S.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 077601 (2018)

    work page 2018

  54. [54]

    Sodemann, I

    I. Sodemann, I. Kimchi, C. Wang, and T. Senthil, Phys. Rev. B 95, 085135 (2017)

    work page 2017

  55. [55]

    Barkeshli and X.-G

    M. Barkeshli and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B 82, 233301 (2010)

    work page 2010

  56. [56]

    Ardonne, F

    E. Ardonne, F. J. M. v. Lankvelt, A. W. W. Ludwig, and K. Schoutens, Phys. Rev. B 65, 041305 (2002)

    work page 2002

  57. [57]

    Barkeshli and X.-G

    M. Barkeshli and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 216804 (2010)

    work page 2010

  58. [58]

    Barkeshli and X.-G

    M. Barkeshli and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B 81, 045323 (2010)

    work page 2010

  59. [59]

    M. P. Zaletel, S. Geraedts, Z. Papi´ c, and E. H. Rezayi, Phys. Rev. B 98, 045113 (2018)

    work page 2018

  60. [60]

    Barkeshli, C

    M. Barkeshli, C. Nayak, Z. Papi´ c, A. Young, and M. Za- letel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 026603 (2018)

    work page 2018

  61. [61]

    N. J. Zhang, R. Q. Nguyen, N. Batra, X. Liu, K. Watan- abe, T. Taniguchi, D. Feldman, and J. Li, Nature 637, 327 (2025)

    work page 2025

  62. [62]

    Bilayer excitons in the laughlin fractional quantum hall state,

    R. Q. Nguyen, N. J. Zhang, N. Khurana-Batra, X. Liu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, D. E. Feldman, and J. I. A. Li, “Bilayer excitons in the laughlin fractional quantum hall state,” (2025), arXiv:2410.24208 [cond-mat.mes- hall]

    work page arXiv 2025

  63. [64]

    B. I. Halperin, Helv. Phys. Acta 56, 75 (1983)

    work page 1983

  64. [65]

    Wen, Advances in Physics 44, 405 (1995), https://doi.org/10.1080/00018739500101566

    X.-G. Wen, Advances in Physics 44, 405 (1995), https://doi.org/10.1080/00018739500101566

    work page doi:10.1080/00018739500101566 1995

  65. [66]

    Geraedts, M

    S. Geraedts, M. P. Zaletel, Z. Papi´ c, and R. S. K. Mong, Phys. Rev. B 91, 205139 (2015)

    work page 2015

  66. [67]

    I. A. McDonald and F. D. M. Haldane, Phys. Rev. B 53, 15845 (1996)

    work page 1996

  67. [68]

    J. K. Jain, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 199 (1989)

    work page 1989

  68. [69]

    J. K. Jain, Composite Fermions (Cambridge University Press, 2007)

    work page 2007

  69. [70]

    Ev- idence for a superfluid-to-solid transition of bilayer ex- citons,

    Y. Zeng, Q. Shi, A. Okounkova, D. Sun, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Hone, C. R. Dean, and J. I. A. Li, “Ev- idence for a superfluid-to-solid transition of bilayer ex- citons,” (2023), arXiv:2306.16995 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    work page arXiv 2023

  70. [71]

    X. G. Wen and A. Zee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 953 (1992)

    work page 1992

  71. [72]

    Hi- erarchy construction for non-abelian fractional quan- tum hall states via anyon condensation,

    C. Zhang, A. Vishwanath, and X.-G. Wen, “Hi- erarchy construction for non-abelian fractional quan- tum hall states via anyon condensation,” (2025), arXiv:2406.12068 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2025

  72. [73]

    Doping lattice non-abelian quantum hall states,

    Z. D. Shi, C. Zhang, and T. Senthil, “Doping lattice non-abelian quantum hall states,” (2025), arXiv:2505.02893 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2025

  73. [74]

    Lopez and E

    A. Lopez and E. Fradkin, Phys. Rev. B 44, 5246 (1991)

    work page 1991

  74. [75]

    B. I. Halperin, P. A. Lee, and N. Read, Phys. Rev. B 47, 7312 (1993)

    work page 1993

  75. [76]

    [118], or by the parton approach in App

    The coupling coefficients can be determined by using the prescription in Ref. [118], or by the parton approach in App. A. We will always consider flat time direction, so ω = (0, ω) has no zeroth component and can be defined by a set of veilbein vectors ea=1,2 (local coordinate ba- sis satisfying gij = ea i ea j and ϵij = ϵabea i eb j) through ω ≡ 1 2 ϵije...

    work page

  76. [77]

    Seiberg, T

    N. Seiberg, T. Senthil, C. Wang, and E. Witten, Annals of Physics 374, 395 (2016)

    work page 2016

  77. [78]

    Seiberg and E

    N. Seiberg and E. Witten, Progress of Theoret- ical and Experimental Physics 2016, 12C101 (2016), https://academic.oup.com/ptep/article- pdf/2016/12/12C101/9620064/ptw083.pdf

    work page 2016

  78. [79]

    Senthil, D

    T. Senthil, D. T. Son, C. Wang, and C. Xu, Physics Re- ports 827, 1 (2019), duality between (2+1)d quantum critical points

    work page 2019

  79. [80]

    Han and J.-Y

    Z. Han and J.-Y. Chen, Journal of High Energy Physics 2023, 1 (2023)

    work page 2023

  80. [81]

    The intra-layer pairing cases, where the resulting topological orders are non-Abelian, are dis- cussed in Ref

    We note that in a different context of νT = 1, the pairing of CFs in two layers has previously appeared in [45, 48, 54, 99]. The intra-layer pairing cases, where the resulting topological orders are non-Abelian, are dis- cussed in Ref. [55, 57]

    work page

Showing first 80 references.