arxiv: 2601.04640 · v4 · submitted 2026-01-08 · ❄️ cond-mat.stat-mech · cond-mat.quant-gas· cond-mat.str-el· quant-ph

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Construction of asymptotic quantum many-body scar states in the SU(N) Hubbard model

Daiki Hashimoto , Masaya Kunimi , Tetsuro Nikuni

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 16:47 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.stat-mech cond-mat.quant-gascond-mat.str-elquant-ph

keywords asymptotic quantum many-body scarsSU(N) Hubbard modelparent Hamiltonianferromagnetic Heisenberg modelmagnonsdoublon-holon subspaceentanglement entropyspectrum-generating algebra

0 comments

The pith

Embedding the scar subspace of the SU(N) Hubbard model into an auxiliary space maps its parent Hamiltonian to the SU(N) ferromagnetic Heisenberg model, whose gapless magnons become explicit asymptotic scars.

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

The paper constructs asymptotic quantum many-body scars in one-dimensional SU(N) Hubbard chains for N at least three by embedding the scar subspace into an auxiliary Hilbert space H_P. Inside this space the effective parent Hamiltonian is exactly the SU(N) ferromagnetic Heisenberg model, so its gapless magnon excitations serve as the scars of the original Hubbard chain. Working in the doublon-holon subspace the authors obtain the explicit mapping and the one-magnon dispersion for both periodic and open boundaries. They prove that the resulting states remain orthogonal to the scars, exhibit vanishing energy variance in the thermodynamic limit, and obey subvolume entanglement entropy with matrix-product-state bounds.

Core claim

The scar subspace of the SU(N) Hubbard model can be embedded into an auxiliary Hilbert subspace H_P in which the parent Hamiltonian restricts precisely to the SU(N) ferromagnetic Heisenberg model. The gapless magnons of this Heisenberg model then realize explicit asymptotic quantum many-body scars for the Hubbard chain. Within the doublon-holon subspace the mapping is derived explicitly, the one-magnon dispersion is obtained for periodic and open boundaries, and the states are shown to be orthogonal to the scars, to have vanishing energy variance in the thermodynamic limit, and to satisfy subvolume entanglement entropy bounds controlled by matrix-product-operator norms.

What carries the argument

The embedding of the scar subspace into the auxiliary Hilbert subspace H_P, which converts the parent Hamiltonian into the SU(N) ferromagnetic Heisenberg model and extends the restricted spectrum-generating algebra to the multi-ladder case.

If this is right

The one-magnon states furnish analytic, low-entanglement excitations with rigorously bounded subvolume entanglement entropy.
The construction applies for any N greater than or equal to three and yields explicit dispersion relations under periodic and open boundary conditions.
The vanishing energy variance in the thermodynamic limit confirms that the magnons remain scars of the Hubbard model at large size.
The parent-Hamiltonian family for asymptotic scars is extended beyond the spin-1/2 case to full SU(N) symmetry.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same embedding technique could be applied to SU(N)-symmetric models on higher-dimensional lattices or different geometries where a doublon-holon subspace can be isolated.
Because the parent magnons are gapless, the scars may remain approximately stable under weak perturbations that preserve the SU(N) symmetry.
Direct diagonalization or tensor-network simulations on small chains for N=3 or N=4 could provide an immediate numerical check of the entanglement and variance bounds.

Load-bearing premise

The scar subspace admits an embedding into an auxiliary space where the parent Hamiltonian becomes exactly the SU(N) ferromagnetic Heisenberg model and the restricted spectrum-generating algebra extends to multiple ladders.

What would settle it

Numerical computation showing that the energy variance of the proposed magnon states in the original SU(N) Hubbard Hamiltonian fails to approach zero as system size increases would falsify the asymptotic scar property.

read the original abstract

We construct asymptotic quantum many-body scars (AQMBS) in one-dimensional SU($N$) Hubbard chains ($N\geq 3$) by embedding the scar subspace into an auxiliary Hilbert subspace $\mathcal{H}_P$ and identifying a parent Hamiltonian within it, together with a corresponding extension of the restricted spectrum-generating algebra to the multi-ladder case. Unlike previous applications of the parent-Hamiltonian scheme, we show that the parent Hamiltonian becomes the SU($N$) ferromagnetic Heisenberg model rather than the spin-1/2 case, so that its gapless magnons realize explicit AQMBS of the original model. Working in the doublon-holon subspace, we derive this mapping, obtain the one-magnon dispersion for periodic and open boundaries, and prove (i) orthogonality to the scar states, (ii) vanishing energy variance in the thermodynamic limit, and (iii) subvolume entanglement entropy with rigorous MPS/MPO bounds. Our results broaden the parent-Hamiltonian family for AQMBS beyond spin-1/2 and provide analytic, low-entanglement excitations in SU($N$)-symmetric systems.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper maps the SU(N) Hubbard doublon-holon subspace exactly onto the ferromagnetic Heisenberg model to produce explicit gapless magnon scars with proved orthogonality and subvolume entanglement.

read the letter

The core advance is the parent-Hamiltonian construction for N greater than or equal to 3. They embed the scar subspace into an auxiliary space where the restricted dynamics become the SU(N) ferromagnetic Heisenberg chain, so the gapless magnons are exact asymptotic scars of the original Hubbard model. This moves the method past the spin-1/2 limit and supplies a multi-ladder spectrum-generating algebra plus explicit one-magnon dispersions for open and periodic chains. They also give rigorous proofs of orthogonality to the scar subspace, vanishing energy variance in the thermodynamic limit, and subvolume entanglement entropy via MPS/MPO bounds. Those steps are the parts that actually add something new to the literature on scars in higher-symmetry Hubbard systems. The work is useful for anyone studying ultracold atoms with SU(N) symmetry or looking for analytic low-entanglement excitations. The mapping is presented as derived rather than fitted, which removes the usual circularity worry. The main soft spot is whether the embedding really eliminates all residual interaction terms for N greater than 2; any non-vanishing commutator with the projector would lift the magnon degeneracy or spoil the algebra. The abstract claims the derivation works, but the load-bearing algebra steps need close checking in the full text. Minor gaps could be fixed with extra commutator calculations or explicit checks for small N. This paper is for specialists in many-body scars and quantum magnetism who already know the parent-Hamiltonian literature. It is concrete enough and formally grounded enough to deserve a serious referee, even if the review will focus on verifying the exactness of the mapping.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript constructs asymptotic quantum many-body scars (AQMBS) in one-dimensional SU(N) Hubbard chains (N≥3) by embedding a scar subspace into an auxiliary Hilbert subspace H_P in the doublon-holon sector. Within H_P the parent Hamiltonian is identified with the SU(N) ferromagnetic Heisenberg model whose gapless magnons are shown to be exact AQMBS of the original Hubbard model. The authors derive the one-magnon dispersion for periodic and open boundaries and prove orthogonality to the scar states, vanishing energy variance in the thermodynamic limit, and subvolume entanglement entropy via rigorous MPS/MPO bounds. The work extends the parent-Hamiltonian construction beyond the spin-1/2 case.

Significance. If the central embedding and mapping hold exactly, the result is significant: it supplies the first analytic, low-entanglement AQMBS family for SU(N)-symmetric fermionic chains, enlarges the parent-Hamiltonian repertoire, and furnishes explicit gapless excitations whose properties are controlled by the SU(N) Heisenberg spectrum. The proofs of orthogonality, variance vanishing, and entanglement bounds are valuable technical contributions that could be reused in related models.

major comments (2)

[§3] §3 (mapping derivation): the central claim that the restricted Hubbard Hamiltonian inside H_P is exactly the SU(N) ferromagnetic Heisenberg model (no residual density-density or hopping corrections) is load-bearing for the gapless-magnon AQMBS. The manuscript must exhibit the explicit expansion of the Hubbard terms under the embedding projector and demonstrate that all commutators with the projector vanish identically for N≥3; otherwise the magnon degeneracy and spectrum-generating algebra are lifted.
[§4.2] §4.2 (multi-ladder extension): the restricted spectrum-generating algebra is stated to extend to the multi-ladder case, but the proof that the algebra closes without additional terms generated by the embedding must be supplied in full; any non-vanishing commutator would invalidate the claim that the magnons remain exact AQMBS.

minor comments (2)

Notation for the auxiliary subspace H_P and the embedding projector should be introduced once with a clear diagram or equation reference rather than repeated inline.
The one-magnon dispersion formulas for open boundaries contain several typographical inconsistencies in the summation limits; these should be aligned with the periodic-boundary expressions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and valuable comments on our manuscript. We appreciate the recognition of the significance of our results on asymptotic quantum many-body scars in SU(N) Hubbard models. Below, we address each major comment point by point, providing clarifications and indicating the revisions we will make to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [§3] §3 (mapping derivation): the central claim that the restricted Hubbard Hamiltonian inside H_P is exactly the SU(N) ferromagnetic Heisenberg model (no residual density-density or hopping corrections) is load-bearing for the gapless-magnon AQMBS. The manuscript must exhibit the explicit expansion of the Hubbard terms under the embedding projector and demonstrate that all commutators with the projector vanish identically for N≥3; otherwise the magnon degeneracy and spectrum-generating algebra are lifted.

Authors: We agree that an explicit demonstration of the mapping is crucial for the validity of our claims. In the original manuscript, we derived the mapping by projecting the Hubbard Hamiltonian onto the doublon-holon subspace H_P, but we acknowledge that the expansion of individual terms and the verification of commutator vanishing could be presented more explicitly. In the revised version, we will add a detailed appendix or subsection showing the term-by-term expansion of the hopping and interaction terms under the embedding projector P, explicitly computing [H_Hubbard, P] = 0 within the relevant sectors for N ≥ 3, and confirming the absence of residual density-density or hopping corrections. This will rigorously establish that the restricted Hamiltonian is indeed the SU(N) ferromagnetic Heisenberg model. revision: yes
Referee: [§4.2] §4.2 (multi-ladder extension): the restricted spectrum-generating algebra is stated to extend to the multi-ladder case, but the proof that the algebra closes without additional terms generated by the embedding must be supplied in full; any non-vanishing commutator would invalidate the claim that the magnons remain exact AQMBS.

Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this point. The manuscript states that the spectrum-generating algebra extends to the multi-ladder case, but we agree that a complete proof of closure under the embedding is necessary. In the revision, we will provide the full algebraic proof, including explicit computation of the commutators of the generators with the embedding projector to show that no additional terms arise, thereby confirming that the magnons remain exact AQMBS in the multi-ladder extension. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; mapping to SU(N) FM Heisenberg parent Hamiltonian is explicitly derived

full rationale

The paper states it derives the parent Hamiltonian mapping inside the embedded subspace H_P from the original Hubbard terms restricted to the doublon-holon subspace, then proves orthogonality, vanishing energy variance in the thermodynamic limit, and subvolume entanglement entropy via MPS/MPO bounds. These steps are presented as direct consequences of the embedding and restricted spectrum-generating algebra extension rather than fitted parameters, self-definitions, or load-bearing self-citations. The abstract explicitly contrasts the SU(N) case with prior spin-1/2 applications without invoking uniqueness theorems or ansatzes from the authors' own prior work as the sole justification. The central claim therefore remains independent of its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The construction rests on standard quantum-mechanical assumptions about Hilbert-space embeddings and spectrum-generating algebras; no free parameters, new particles, or ad-hoc entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)

domain assumption An auxiliary Hilbert subspace H_P exists that contains the scar subspace and admits a parent Hamiltonian identical to the SU(N) ferromagnetic Heisenberg model
Invoked to realize the scars as magnons of the parent model
domain assumption The restricted spectrum-generating algebra extends to the multi-ladder case
Required for the SU(N) generalization beyond spin-1/2

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5514 in / 1502 out tokens · 45973 ms · 2026-05-16T16:47:24.655816+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

the parent Hamiltonian becomes the SU(N) ferromagnetic Heisenberg model rather than the spin-1/2 case, so that its gapless magnons realize explicit AQMBS
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

multi-ladder extension of the restricted spectrum-generating algebra

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.

Scar subspaces stabilized by algebraic closure: Beyond equally-spaced spectra and exact solvability
cond-mat.stat-mech 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

Algebraic closure from local constraints stabilizes su(3) scar subspaces with non-equally-spaced multidirectional spectra and multifrequency oscillations, independent of exact solvability.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 73 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Detailed proofs of Lemmas 1, 2, and 3 are given in Refs

Review of single ladder RSGA We briefly review the RSGA for single-ladder systems. Detailed proofs of Lemmas 1, 2, and 3 are given in Refs. [23, 24]. Let ˆHbe a Hamiltonian and let|S 0⟩be a normalized eigenstate of ˆHwith eigenvalueE 0. We refer to|S 0⟩as aroot eigenstate, meaning that it serves as the starting point of the ladder construction introduced ...

work page
[2]

round-trip

Multi-ladder extension of RSGA We extend the RSGA from the single-ladder case to systems with multiple ladder operators, which refer to as the multi-ladder RSGA-m(MLRSGA-m). We con- sider a nonintegrable Hamiltonian ˆHand a finite set of nonhermitian operators{ ˆQ† l }N l=1. We assume the exis- tence of a normalized reference state|S 0⟩. The operators ˆQ†...

work page
[3]

J. M. Deutsch, Phys. Rev. A43, 2046 (1991)

work page 2046
[4]

Srednicki, Phys

M. Srednicki, Phys. Rev. E50, 888 (1994)

work page 1994
[5]

Rigol, V

M. Rigol, V. Dunjko, and M. Olshanii, Nature452, 854 (2008)

work page 2008
[6]

I. V. Gornyi, A. D. Mirlin, and D. G. Polyakov, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 206603 (2005). 12

work page 2005
[7]

D. M. Basko, I. L. Aleiner, and B. L. Altshuler, Phys. Rev. B76, 052203 (2007)

work page 2007
[8]

Nandkishore and D

R. Nandkishore and D. A. Huse, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. , 15 (2015)

work page 2015
[9]

D. A. Abanin, E. Altman, I. Bloch, and M. Serbyn, Rev. Mod. Phys.91, 021001 (2019)

work page 2019
[10]

P. Sala, T. Rakovszky, R. Verresen, M. Knap, and F. Poll- mann, Phys. Rev. X10, 011047 (2020)

work page 2020
[11]

Khemani, M

V. Khemani, M. Hermele, and R. Nandkishore, Phys. Rev. B101, 174204 (2020)

work page 2020
[12]

Moudgalya, B

S. Moudgalya, B. A. Bernevig, and N. Regnault, Rep. Prog. Phys.85, 086501 (2022)

work page 2022
[13]

Bernien, S

H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. Keesling, H. Levine, A. Om- ran, H. Pichler, S. Choi, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Nature551, 579 (2017)

work page 2017
[14]

C. J. Turner, A. A. Michailidis, D. A. Abanin, M. Serbyn, and Z. Papi´ c, Nat. Phys.14, 745 (2018)

work page 2018
[15]

C. J. Turner, A. A. Michailidis, D. A. Abanin, M. Serbyn, and Z. Papi´ c, Phys. Rev. B98, 155134 (2018)

work page 2018
[16]

Serbyn, D

M. Serbyn, D. A. Abanin, and Z. Papi´ c, Nat. Phys.17, 675 (2021)

work page 2021
[17]

Chandran, T

A. Chandran, T. Iadecola, V. Khemani, and R. Moessner, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys.14, 443 (2023)

work page 2023
[18]

Schecter and T

M. Schecter and T. Iadecola, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 147201 (2019)

work page 2019
[19]

Shibata, N

N. Shibata, N. Yoshioka, and H. Katsura, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 180604 (2020)

work page 2020
[20]

Bluvstein, A

D. Bluvstein, A. Omran, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Se- meghini, S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, A. A. Michailidis, N. Maskara, W. W. Ho, S. Choi, M. Serbyn, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Science371, 1355 (2021)

work page 2021
[21]

Zhang, H

P. Zhang, H. Dong, Y. Gao, L. Zhao, J. Hao, J.-Y. De- saules, Q. Guo, J. Chen, J. Deng, B. Liu, W. Ren, Y. Yao, X. Zhang, S. Xu, K. Wang, F. Jin, X. Zhu, B. Zhang, L. Hekang, C. Song, Z. Wang, F. Liu, Z. Papi´ c, L. Ying, H. Wang, and Y.-C. Lai, Nat. Phys.19, 120 (2023)

work page 2023
[23]

L. Zhao, P. R. Datla, W. Tian, M. M. Aliyu, and H. Loh, Phys. Rev. X15, 011035 (2025)

work page 2025
[24]

Batista, Phys

C. Batista, Phys. Rev. B80, 180406 (2009)

work page 2009
[25]

D. K. Mark and O. I. Motrunich, Phys. Rev. B102, 075132 (2020)

work page 2020
[26]

Moudgalya, N

S. Moudgalya, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, Phys. Rev. B102, 085140 (2020)

work page 2020
[27]

O’Dea, F

N. O’Dea, F. Burnell, A. Chandran, and V. Khemani, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 043305 (2020)

work page 2020
[28]

Pakrouski, P

K. Pakrouski, P. N. Pallegar, F. K. Popov, and I. R. Klebanov, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 230602 (2020)

work page 2020
[29]

Pakrouski, P

K. Pakrouski, P. N. Pallegar, F. K. Popov, and I. R. Klebanov, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 043156 (2021)

work page 2021
[30]

J. Ren, C. Liang, and C. Fang, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 120604 (2021)

work page 2021
[31]

J. Ren, C. Liang, and C. Fang, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 013155 (2022)

work page 2022
[32]

Gotta, S

L. Gotta, S. Moudgalya, and L. Mazza, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 190401 (2023)

work page 2023
[33]

Mandelstam and I

L. Mandelstam and I. Tamm, J. Phys. (USSR)9, 249 (1945)

work page 1945
[34]

Moudgalya and O

S. Moudgalya and O. I. Motrunich, PRX Quantum5, 040330 (2024)

work page 2024
[35]

Kunimi, Y

M. Kunimi, Y. Kato, and H. Katsura, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 043107 (2025)

work page 2025
[36]

Ren, Y.-P

J. Ren, Y.-P. Wang, and C. Fang, Phys. Rev. B110, 245101 (2024)

work page 2024
[37]

Iadecola and M

T. Iadecola and M. Schecter, Phys. Rev. B101, 024306 (2020)

work page 2020
[38]

Kodama, A

S. Kodama, A. Tanaka, and Y. Kato, Phys. Rev. B107, 024403 (2023)

work page 2023
[39]

Kunimi, T

M. Kunimi, T. Tomita, H. Katsura, and Y. Kato, Phys. Rev. A110, 043312 (2024)

work page 2024
[40]

Tamura and H

K. Tamura and H. Katsura, Phys. Rev. B106, 144306 (2022)

work page 2022
[41]

Wei and L

W. Wei and L. Zhang, Chin. Phys. Lett.42, 020502 (2025)

work page 2025
[42]

Gotta, arXiv:2509.18023 (2025)

L. Gotta, arXiv:2509.18023 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[43]

Gioia, S

L. Gioia, S. Moudgalya, and O. I. Motrunich, arXiv:2510.24713 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[44]

In these cases, the parent Hamiltoni- ans ultimately reduces to the ferromagnetic Heisenberg model after nontrivial mappings [71, 72]

For some models, such as the DH model, the domain-wall conserving model, and the Onsager scar model, the par- ent Hamiltonian is not manifestly of the ferromagnetic Heisenberg type. In these cases, the parent Hamiltoni- ans ultimately reduces to the ferromagnetic Heisenberg model after nontrivial mappings [71, 72]

work page
[45]

Affleck and J

I. Affleck and J. B. Marston, Phys. Rev. B37, 3774 (1988)

work page 1988
[46]

J. B. Marston and I. Affleck, Phys. Rev. B39, 11538 (1989)

work page 1989
[47]

Honerkamp and W

C. Honerkamp and W. Hofstetter, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 170403 (2004)

work page 2004
[48]

Hermele, V

M. Hermele, V. Gurarie, and A. M. Rey, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 135301 (2009)

work page 2009
[49]

M. A. Cazalilla, A. F. Ho, and M. Ueda, New J. Phys. 11, 103033 (2009)

work page 2009
[50]

A. V. Gorshkov, M. Hermele, V. Gurarie, C. Xu, P. S. Julienne, J. Ye, P. Zoller, E. Demler, M. D. Lukin, and A. M. Rey, Nat. Phys.6, 289 (2010)

work page 2010
[51]

S. Taie, R. Yamazaki, S. Sugawa, and Y. Takahashi, Nat. Phys.8, 825 (2012)

work page 2012
[52]

Scazza, C

F. Scazza, C. Hofrichter, M. H¨ ofer, P. De Groot, I. Bloch, and S. F¨ olling, Nat. Phys.10, 779 (2014)

work page 2014
[53]

Capponi, P

S. Capponi, P. Lecheminant, and K. Totsuka, Ann. Phys. 367, 50 (2016)

work page 2016
[54]

Nakagawa, H

M. Nakagawa, H. Katsura, and M. Ueda, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 043259 (2024)

work page 2024
[55]

In the case of ˆC= 0, Lie algebraGneed not be semisim- ple

work page
[56]

C. N. Yang, Phys. Rev. Lett.63, 2144 (1989)

work page 1989
[57]

F. H. Essler, H. Frahm, F. G¨ ohmann, A. Kl¨ umper, and V. E. Korepin,The one-dimensional Hubbard model (Cambridge University Press, 2005)

work page 2005
[58]

Futami, arXiv:2507.20106 (2025)

M. Futami, arXiv:2507.20106 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[59]

M. A. Cazalilla and A. M. Rey, Rep. Prog. Phys.77, 124401 (2014)

work page 2014
[60]

Auerbach,Interacting Electrons and Quantum Mag- netism(Springer, Berlin, 1998)

A. Auerbach,Interacting Electrons and Quantum Mag- netism(Springer, Berlin, 1998)

work page 1998
[61]

Schollw¨ ock, Ann Phys.326, 96 (2011)

U. Schollw¨ ock, Ann Phys.326, 96 (2011)

work page 2011
[62]

G. M. Crosswhite and D. Bacon, Phys. Rev. A78, 012356 (2008)

work page 2008
[63]

Motruk, M

J. Motruk, M. P. Zaletel, R. S. Mong, and F. Pollmann, Phys. Rev. B93, 155139 (2016)

work page 2016
[64]

Paeckel, T

S. Paeckel, T. K¨ ohler, and S. R. Manmana, SciPost Phys. 3, 035 (2017)

work page 2017
[65]

Moudgalya, N

S. Moudgalya, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, Phys. Rev. B98, 235156 (2018). 13

work page 2018
[66]

D. K. Mark, C.-J. Lin, and O. I. Motrunich, Phys. Rev. B101, 195131 (2020)

work page 2020
[67]

Omiya and M

K. Omiya and M. M¨ uller, Phys. Rev. B108, 054412 (2023)

work page 2023
[68]

O’Dea and A

N. O’Dea and A. Sriram, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 210402 (2025)

work page 2025
[69]

Kantian, A

A. Kantian, A. J. Daley, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 240406 (2010)

work page 2010
[70]

Nakagawa, N

M. Nakagawa, N. Tsuji, N. Kawakami, and M. Ueda, arXiv:2103.13624 (2021)

work page arXiv 2021
[71]

G.-X. Su, H. Sun, A. Hudomal, J.-Y. Desaules, Z.-Y. Zhou, B. Yang, J. C. Halimeh, Z.-S. Yuan, Z. Papi´ c, and J.-W. Pan, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 023010 (2023)

work page 2023
[72]

Honda, Y

K. Honda, Y. Takasu, S. Goto, H. Kazuta, M. Kunimi, I. Danshita, and Y. Takahashi, Sci. Adv.11, eadv3255 (2025)

work page 2025
[73]

G´ omez-Santos, Phys

G. G´ omez-Santos, Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 3780 (1993)

work page 1993
[74]

Cheong and C

S.-A. Cheong and C. L. Henley, Phys. Rev. B80, 165124 (2009)

work page 2009