Quantum Many-Body Harness

Widely-used models

The harness's model zoo: 29 canonical quantum lattice models, each with its Hamiltonian, a structured A1–D16 property table, phases, canonical observables, and the methods that work on it. Every row is generated from the model's knowledge-base card.

29 of 29
Family Sign problem Method

spins Spin chains & magnets 6

nearest-neighbor quantum magnets — critical chains, Néel order, Haldane physics

heisenbergSU(2) quantum magnet; Néel to spin liquidmixedDMRGMPSQMC
$$H = J \sum_{\langle ij\rangle} \mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_j$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain / quasi-1D ladder / 2D square (Z=4), triangular, kagome / 3DGeometry is the master axis: it sets entanglement scaling and frustration.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (DMRG default) · PBC (ED/QMC) · cylinder (2D DMRG)Cylinder width caps the 2D-DMRG bond-dim budget.
A3 statistics & local dimspin-S; d = 2S+1 (d=2 for S=1/2)Maps to hard-core bosons via Matsubara–Matsuda; no statistics sign by itself.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (nearest-neighbor)Local — area-law-compatible.
B5 entanglement scaling1D gapless: area+log, S=(c/3)log ℓ, c=1 · 2D ordered: area law (∝ L)1D AFM chain is critical (c=1); 2D Néel state obeys area law.
B6 spectral gap1D S=1/2 AFM: gapless (power-law correlations) · 2D square AFM: gapless Goldstone magnons over ordered GSHalf-integer 1D chain gapless (LSM); 2D has long-range order + gapless spin waves.
B7 ground-state order1D S=1/2: quasi-long-range (no SSB, Mermin–Wagner) · 2D square/3D: Néel SSB · frustrated 2D: candidate spin liquid / VBSBipartite unfrustrated lattices order (2D/3D); 1D and frustrated cases do not.
B8 frustrationnone on bipartite (chain, square, cubic) · geometric on triangular/kagome/pyrochloreFrustration is what turns on the QMC sign problem for spins.
C9 global symmetrySU(2) (total S), U(1) (S^z_tot)Full SU(2) at the isotropic point; a field breaks SU(2)→U(1).
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k), point group (D_4 square, D_6 triangular)Block-diagonalizes ED sectors.
C11 integrability1D S=1/2 chain: Bethe-ansatz integrable · 2D / S≥1 / frustrated: non-integrableExact 1D thermodynamics via TBA; everything else numerical.
C12 sign problemsign-free on bipartite (Marshall rule) · sign-ful on frustrated latticesUnfrustrated → exact QMC at scale; frustrated → QMC blocked.
D13 regimeground state (T=0) default; finite-T and dynamics out of card scopeGS energy / order parameter are the canonical targets.
D14 filling / dopingN/A (spin model, no charge)Doping appears only after fermionization (t-J / Hubbard).
D15 disorderclean (translation-invariant) by defaultBond/site disorder → random-singlet physics (out of scope).
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • 1D S=1/2 AFM chain : quasi-long-range order, no SSB; spin–spin correlations decay as a power law ⟨S_0·S_r⟩ ∼ (-1)^r / r (log corrections).
  • 2D square / 3D AFM : Néel order; staggered (sublattice) magnetization m_s and structure-factor peak S(π,π).
  • Frustrated (triangular/kagome) : 120° order (triangular) or candidate spin liquid / VBS (kagome) — diagnose via spin-liquid.

Canonical observables

  • Ground-state energy per site E/N.
  • Staggered magnetization m_s / sublattice magnetization (order parameter).
  • Static structure factor S(q), peaked at the ordering wavevector.
  • Spin–spin correlation function ⟨S_i·S_j⟩; central charge c (1D, from entanglement scaling).

Recommended methods

  • Primary: DMRG/MPS for 1D chains, ladders, and 2D cylinders — near-exact in 1D area-law/area+log regimes; SU(2)/U(1) quantum-number conservation cuts cost (per method-property-map.md §MPS).
  • Primary (unfrustrated 2D/3D, large N): sign-free QMC (SSE) — bipartite Marshall sign rule makes it exact at scale (§QMC, C12).
  • Cross-check: ED on small clusters (exact spectrum, oracle); VMC/NQS for frustrated 2D where QMC is sign-blocked.

Benchmarks

  • 1D S=1/2 AFM chain (PBC, thermodynamic limit): E/N = 1/4 − ln 2 ≈ −0.443147 — exact Bethe ansatz (Hulthén 1938; convention H = J Σ S_i·S_j, J=1).
  • 2D square S=1/2 AFM: E/N ≈ −0.6694 (high-precision −0.669441857(7)), staggered magnetization m_s ≈ 0.3074 — QMC/SSE (Sandvik, Phys. Rev. B 56, 11678 (1997)).

Key reference: manousakis_1991_spin — the authoritative review of the spin-½ square-lattice Heisenberg antiferromagnet (spin-wave, Schwinger boson, series, QMC, ED) and its connection to the cuprate parents.

xxz-chainanisotropic chain; Néel–XY–ferro phasessign-freeDMRGMPS
$$H = J \sum_i \left( S^x_i S^x_{i+1} + S^y_i S^y_{i+1} + \Delta\, S^z_i S^z_{i+1} \right)$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain (Z=2)The defining 1D integrable spin chain.
A2 boundary conditionsPBC (Bethe ansatz / ED) · OBC (DMRG default)PBC needed for the clean Bethe-ansatz spectrum and momentum sectors.
A3 statistics & local dimspin-1/2; d = 2Jordan–Wigner maps to spinless fermions with NN hopping + NN interaction (the t-V chain).
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (nearest-neighbor)Local — area-law compatible.
B5 entanglement scalingcritical phase (−1<Δ≤1): area+log, S=(c/3)log ℓ, c=1 · gapped phases (Δ<−1, Δ>1): area law (constant S)Luttinger-liquid central charge c=1 in the whole XY/critical window.
B6 spectral gapgapless (−1<Δ≤1, power-law correlations) · gapped FM (Δ<−1) · gapped Ising-Néel AFM (Δ>1)Gap opens exponentially as Δ→1⁺ (BKT); FM transition at Δ=−1 is first-order.
B7 ground-state ordergapless XY/Luttinger liquid (quasi-long-range, no SSB) · ferromagnet (Δ<−1, fully polarized SSB) · Ising-Néel AFM (Δ>1, staggered SSB)Quasi-LRO in the critical phase (Mermin–Wagner forbids true LRO in 1D).
B8 frustrationnone (bipartite chain)NN-only on a bipartite lattice; the AFM case is sign-free (Marshall).
C9 global symmetryU(1) (S^z_tot); full SU(2) only at Δ=1; Z_2 spin-flipAnisotropy Δ≠1 breaks SU(2)→U(1).
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k), inversion/parityBlock-diagonalizes ED sectors; CDW/Néel image breaks translation by one site.
C11 integrabilityBethe-ansatz integrable for all ΔExact spectrum, ground-state energy, gap, and thermodynamics (TBA) at every anisotropy.
C12 sign problemsign-free for the bipartite AFM (Marshall sign rule)Unfrustrated bipartite chain → QMC-exact; DMRG is the practical workhorse.
D13 regimeground state (T=0) default; finite-T accessible via TBA / LTRG (out of card scope)E/N, gap, c, correlators are the canonical targets.
D14 filling / dopingN/A (spin model; S^z_tot plays the role of magnetization/filling)A longitudinal field tunes magnetization, staying integrable.
D15 disorderclean (translation-invariant) by defaultBond disorder → random-singlet phase (out of scope).
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Gapless XY / Luttinger liquid (−1 < Δ ≤ 1) : quasi-long-range order, no SSB; spin–spin correlations decay as a power law with Δ-dependent exponent; central charge c = 1.
  • Ising-Néel AFM (Δ > 1) : staggered magnetization m_s = (1/N)Σ_i (−1)^i ⟨S^z_i⟩, structure-factor peak S(π), finite gap. Onset is a BKT transition at Δ = 1.
  • Ferromagnet (Δ < −1) : fully polarized ⟨S^z_i⟩ = ±1/2. The transition at Δ = −1 is first-order (ground-state level crossing).

Canonical observables

  • Ground-state energy per site E/N.
  • Spin gap (Δ>1); central charge c and Luttinger parameter K (critical phase, from entanglement / correlation scaling).
  • Static structure factor S(q) (peaks at q=π in the Néel phase); spin–spin correlators ⟨S^z_0 S^z_r⟩, ⟨S^+_0 S^-_r⟩.

Recommended methods

  • Primary: DMRG/MPS — 1D area-law / area+log ground states; U(1) S^z conservation; converges fast in the gapped phases, χ-hungry but reliable in the critical phase (per method-property-map.md §MPS, B5).
  • Cross-check: ED on small clusters (exact spectrum, momentum sectors); exact Bethe ansatz for the energy/gap at any Δ (C11); sign-free QMC/SSE for the AFM side at scale.

Benchmarks

  • Isotropic point Δ = 1 (Heisenberg, PBC, thermodynamic limit): E/N = 1/4 − ln 2 ≈ −0.443147 — exact Bethe ansatz (convention H = J Σ S_i·S_j, J = 1).
  • XX point Δ = 0 (free fermions via Jordan–Wigner, half-filling, thermodynamic limit): E/N = −1/π ≈ −0.318310 (convention J = 1, in-plane terms only).

Key reference: franchini_2016_introduction — pedagogical all-details monograph on integrable techniques; works the XXZ chain explicitly from the coordinate Bethe ansatz to the algebraic Bethe ansatz, with the ground-state energy, the Δ-tuned phase structure, and finite-temperature thermodynamics.

spin-1-xxzHaldane gap; string ordersign-freeDMRGMPS
$$H = \sum_{\langle ij\rangle}\left[ S_i^x S_j^x + S_i^y S_j^y + \Delta\, S_i^z S_j^z \right] + D \sum_i (S_i^z)^2$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain (Z=2)Quasi-1D ladders extend the family but soften the topological order.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (DMRG default; exposes edge spins) · PBC (clean entanglement-spectrum cut)OBC reveals the S=1/2 Haldane edge modes.
A3 statistics & local dimspin-1; d = 3Larger d than S=1/2 → higher per-site MPS/ED cost.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (nearest-neighbor) + on-site DLocal.
B5 entanglement scalingHaldane phase: area law (constant S), entanglement spectrum doubly degenerateSPT signature lives in the entanglement spectrum, not a local order parameter.
B6 spectral gapHaldane phase: gapped (Haldane gap) · transitions (Ising/Gaussian): gap closesInteger-spin chain is gapped — Haldane's conjecture.
B7 ground-state orderHaldane = symmetry-protected topological (SPT) · large-D trivial · Néel (large Δ) SSBProtected by Z_2×Z_2 / inversion / time reversal; diagnose via string order.
B8 frustrationnone (default)NNN coupling could add competition (out of default scope).
C9 global symmetryU(1) (S^z_tot); full SU(2) only at Δ=1, D=0; Z_2×Z_2 (π-rotations) protects the Haldane SPTD breaks SU(2)→U(1) even at Δ=1.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation, inversion (protects SPT), reflectionInversion is one of the protecting symmetries.
C11 integrabilitynon-integrable (S=1 Heisenberg chain not Bethe-solvable; cf. exactly-solvable AKLT point with added biquadratic term)The pure Heisenberg S=1 chain has no exact solution; AKLT is a nearby solvable model.
C12 sign problemsign-free (unfrustrated bipartite chain → QMC applicable; DMRG is the workhorse)No frustration → no spin sign problem.
D13 regimeground state (T=0) defaultGap, string order, entanglement spectrum are the targets.
D14 filling / dopingN/A (spin model)
D15 disorderclean by default
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Haldane (SPT) : nonzero string order parameter O_string^z = −lim_{|i−j|→∞} ⟨S_i^z exp(iπ Σ_{i<k<j} S_k^z) S_j^z⟩; doubly-degenerate entanglement spectrum; fractional S=1/2 edge spins (OBC).
  • Large-D trivial : product-like Π|S^z=0⟩; string order vanishes; entanglement spectrum non-degenerate.
  • Néel (large Δ) : staggered magnetization, conventional SSB.

Canonical observables

  • E/N; Haldane gap Δ_H.
  • String order parameter (Haldane diagnostic) and conventional staggered magnetization.
  • Entanglement spectrum (degeneracy = SPT signature); edge magnetization (OBC).

Recommended methods

  • Primary: DMRG/MPS — 1D gapped area-law ground state; MPS natively measures string order and the entanglement spectrum (per method-property-map.md B7-SPT row).
  • Cross-check: ED on L ≲ 14 for exact gap/spectrum; TEBD imaginary-time route; sign-free QMC also available (unfrustrated).

Benchmarks

  • Haldane gap (S=1 isotropic Heisenberg chain, Δ=1, D=0): Δ_H/J ≈ 0.41048(6) — DMRG/QMC (White & Huse, Phys. Rev. B 48, 3844 (1993); Todo & Kato 2001).
  • Ground-state energy: E/N ≈ −1.401484039 per spin (White & Huse DMRG, same H with in-plane coupling 1).

Key reference: wierschem_2014_characterizing — concise review of the Haldane phase in spin-1 Heisenberg antiferromagnets: string order, SPT classification, entanglement spectrum, and quasi-1D phase diagram.

transverse-field-isingquantum-critical Ising; Wilson–Fisher 2Dsign-freeDMRGMPSQMC
$$H = -J \sum_{\langle ij\rangle} \sigma^z_i \sigma^z_j - \Gamma \sum_i \sigma^x_i$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain (Z=2) · 2D square (Z=4) · higher-DThe canonical 1D quantum-critical model; 2D is Wilson–Fisher 3D-Ising universality.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (DMRG) · PBC (ED, free-fermion) · cylinder (2D)PBC matters for the exact Jordan–Wigner mapping.
A3 statistics & local dimspin-1/2; d = 2Maps to free fermions in 1D via Jordan–Wigner.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (nearest-neighbor); long-range 1/r^α variantLong-range version inflates bond dimension (use TDVP).
B5 entanglement scalinggapped phases: area law (const in 1D) · 1D critical Γ=J: area+log, c=1/2c=1/2 is the Ising-CFT central charge (one Majorana).
B6 spectral gapgapped FM (Γ<J) and PM (Γ>J) · gapless at the QCP Γ=J (1D)Quantum critical point separates ordered and disordered phases.
B7 ground-state orderFM (Γ<J): Z_2 SSB · PM (Γ>J): trivial paramagnetOrder parameter ⟨σ^z⟩ onsets below the critical field.
B8 frustrationnone on bipartite FM · geometric if AFM on triangularDefault FM is unfrustrated.
C9 global symmetryZ_2 spin-flip (P = Π_i σ^x_i, parity)The symmetry whose breaking defines the FM phase.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k), inversion/parityConserved momentum in PBC.
C11 integrabilityfree-fermion / quadratic (1D, exact via Jordan–Wigner) · 2D non-integrable1D diagonalizable in O(N)/O(N³); the textbook exactly-solvable QPT.
C12 sign problemsign-free (ferromagnetic / bipartite → QMC applicable)SSE/QMC works at scale; 1D is exact anyway.
D13 regimeground state (T=0) + gap; dynamics/finite-T out of card scopeE/N and gap are canonical targets.
D14 filling / dopingN/A (spin model)After Jordan–Wigner: free fermions at fixed filling.
D15 disorderclean by default; random-bond/field → infinite-randomness fixed pointDisordered 1D TFIM is the canonical strong-disorder RG example.
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Ferromagnet (Γ < J) : Z_2-broken; order parameter ⟨σ^z⟩ ≠ 0 (magnetization).
  • Paramagnet (Γ > J) : trivial, field-polarized along x, ⟨σ^z⟩ = 0.
  • Quantum critical point (1D Γ = J) : Ising CFT, c = 1/2, exponents ν = 1, β = 1/8, z = 1.

Canonical observables

  • E/N; spectral gap Δ (closes at the QCP).
  • Magnetization ⟨σ^z⟩ (order parameter); longitudinal correlations ⟨σ^z_i σ^z_j⟩.
  • Central charge c from entanglement scaling at criticality.

Recommended methods

  • Primary (1D): DMRG/MPS — area-law / area+log ground state, near-exact; Z_2 parity sector reduces cost (per method-property-map.md §MPS).
  • Primary (2D): sign-free QMC (SSE) — unfrustrated, exact at scale; or DMRG on cylinders.
  • Cross-check: ED small clusters; 1D free-fermion exact diagonalization (Jordan–Wigner) as an analytic oracle.

Benchmarks

  • 1D chain QCP: Γ_c/J = 1 exactly (self-dual / Jordan–Wigner); at criticality c = 1/2, ν = 1, β = 1/8. Ground-state energy density at Γ = J = 1: E/N = −4/π ≈ −1.2732 (Pauli convention H = −J Σ σ^z σ^z − Γ Σ σ^x; from the free-fermion dispersion, consistent with this card's Verification note).
  • 2D square FM TFIM: critical field (Γ/J)_c = 3.04438(2), 3D-Ising universality (Blöte & Deng, Phys. Rev. E 66, 066110 (2002)).

Key reference: dutta_2010_quantum — comprehensive downloadable review of quantum phase transitions in transverse-field spin models (1D exact solution, scaling, higher-D, dynamics, quantum information), preferred over the Sachdev textbook for an all-details source.

akltexact VBS state; Haldane SPTsign-freeDMRGMPS
$$H = \sum_i \left[ \mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_{i+1} + \tfrac{1}{3}\left(\mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_{i+1}\right)^2 \right]$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain (Z=2)2D AKLT (e.g. honeycomb) variants exist but the chain is the canonical case.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (exposes the edge spins) · PBC (clean entanglement-spectrum cut)OBC gives the 4-fold-degenerate edge-state manifold.
A3 statistics & local dimspin-1; d = 3The ground state is an exact bond-dimension-2 MPS.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (nearest-neighbor, bilinear + biquadratic)Local.
B5 entanglement scalingarea law (constant S); entanglement spectrum exactly 2-fold degenerate; S = 2 ln 2 (open chain, two cut ends)Each cut contributes ln 2; the exact-degeneracy is the SPT fingerprint.
B6 spectral gapgapped (Haldane gap above the unique bulk ground state)Bulk gap ≈ 0.35 (numerical); the existence of a gap is rigorously established for AKLT.
B7 ground-state ordersymmetry-protected topological (SPT) — valence-bond solid in the Haldane phaseProtected by SO(3)/Z_2×Z_2 / time-reversal / inversion; diagnosed by hidden string order, not a local order parameter.
B8 frustrationnoneUnfrustrated bilinear-biquadratic chain.
C9 global symmetrySU(2) (total spin) — exact at the AKLT point; U(1) (S^z_tot); Z_2×Z_2 (π-rotations) protects the SPTThe VBS is an SU(2) singlet on a closed chain.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation, inversion (protects the SPT), reflectionInversion is one of the protecting symmetries.
C11 integrabilitynot Bethe-integrable, but the ground state is exactly constructed (VBS / MPS)Exact GS, energy, and correlators; the full spectrum is not solvable.
C12 sign problemsign-free (unfrustrated bipartite chain → QMC applicable; DMRG is the workhorse)No frustration.
D13 regimeground state (T=0) defaultEnergy, string order, gap, entanglement spectrum, edge states are the targets.
D14 filling / dopingN/A (spin model)
D15 disorderclean by default
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Haldane VBS (SPT) : nonzero string order parameter O_string^z = −lim_{|i−j|→∞} ⟨S^z_i exp(iπ Σ_{i<k<j} S^z_k) S^z_j⟩; doubly-degenerate entanglement spectrum; on an open chain, 4-fold ground-state degeneracy from emergent free spin-1/2 edge modes (the two ends carry S=1/2 each).
  • The AKLT point sits inside (and exemplifies) the Haldane phase of the broader bilinear-biquadratic / spin-1 XXZ family.

Canonical observables

  • Ground-state energy per site E/N (exactly −2/3).
  • String order parameter (Haldane diagnostic); exactly 4/9 for the AKLT state.
  • Bulk gap; entanglement spectrum (exact 2-fold degeneracy); edge magnetization (OBC).

Recommended methods

  • Primary: DMRG/MPS — the ground state is literally a bond-dimension-2 MPS, so DMRG is exact at tiny χ; MPS natively measures string order and the entanglement spectrum (per method-property-map.md B7-SPT row).
  • Cross-check: ED on L ≲ 14 for the exact spectrum/gap and edge-state degeneracy; the analytic VBS construction provides closed-form benchmarks (E/N, string order).

Benchmarks

  • Ground-state energy: E/N = −2/3exact (VBS construction; convention H = Σ [S_i·S_{i+1} + (1/3)(S_i·S_{i+1})²]).
  • String order parameter: O_string = 4/9 — exact for the AKLT VBS state.
  • Bulk gap: Δ ≈ 0.35 (numerical, units of J); two-point correlations decay with correlation length ξ = 1/ln 3 ≈ 0.91 sites (exact).

Key reference: affleck_1987_rigorous — the defining paper: rigorous construction of the valence-bond ground state, proof of the spectral gap, exponentially-decaying correlations, and the hidden topological order of the Haldane phase.

potts-clockq-state symmetry; BKT and orderingsign-freeDMRGMPS
$$H = -\sum_{\langle ij\rangle}\left(X_i X_j^\dagger + X_i^\dagger X_j\right) - h\sum_i\left(Z_i + Z_i^\dagger\right)$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain (Z=2) · 2D square1D q=3 is the canonical parafermion-CFT critical chain.
A2 boundary conditionsPBC ring (criticality work) · OBC · cylinder (2D)PBC preferred for finite-size scaling of the QPT.
A3 statistics & local dimqudit; d = q (3, 4, 5, …)Local dimension grows with q, raising ED/MPS cost.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (nearest-neighbor)Local.
B5 entanglement scalinggapped phases: area law · 1D critical (q≤4): area+log (c=4/5 at q=3, c=1 at q=4)Central charge set by the parafermion/Potts CFT; q=3 → c=4/5.
B6 spectral gapgapped FM (h<h_c) and PM (h>h_c) · gapless at QCP (q≤4) · q≥5: first-order (no gapless point)Order of transition changes at q=5 in 1D.
B7 ground-state orderFM (h<h_c): Z_q SSB, q-fold degenerate · PM (h>h_c): trivialZ_q clock order parameter ⟨Z⟩.
B8 frustrationnone on bipartite FM · possible on non-square (e.g. triangular Potts)Default square/chain FM unfrustrated.
C9 global symmetryZ_q clock symmetry (generator Π_i Z_i)The symmetry whose breaking defines the FM phase.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k), inversion/reflectionConserved momentum in PBC rings.
C11 integrabilitynon-integrable in general; q=2 free-fermion (TFIM); 1D critical point described by Z_q parafermion / Potts CFTSelf-dual critical point (Kramers–Wannier-type) located analytically.
C12 sign problemsign-free (ferromagnetic / bipartite)QMC/SSE applicable; DMRG-qudit is the default workhorse.
D13 regimeground state (T=0) + order parameter scanCriticality via finite-size scaling.
D14 filling / dopingN/A (spin/qudit model)
D15 disorderclean by default
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Ferromagnet (h < h_c) : Z_q-broken, q-fold degenerate; clock order parameter ⟨Z⟩ ≠ 0.
  • Paramagnet (h > h_c) : trivial, field-polarized; ⟨Z⟩ = 0.
  • Critical point (1D q ≤ 4) : continuous transition, parafermion/Potts CFT (q=3: c=4/5, ν=5/6). For q ≥ 5 (1D) the transition is first-order.

Canonical observables

  • E/N; Z_q order parameter ⟨Z⟩ across an h-scan.
  • Spectral gap; correlation function ⟨Z_i Z_j^†⟩.
  • Central charge c / critical exponent ν from finite-size collapse (q=3: ν=5/6).

Recommended methods

  • Primary: DMRG (qudit MPS) in 1D — area-law / area+log ground state, conserves the Z_q quantum number (per method-property-map.md §MPS, C9).
  • Cross-check: ED small clusters (N ≲ 16 for q=3) for exact spectrum and the order of the transition; TEBD imaginary-time; sign-free QMC also applicable.

Benchmarks

  • 1D q=3 Clock (= 3-state Potts) QCP: h_c = 1 (self-dual), Z_3 parafermion CFT c = 4/5, ν = 5/6 ≈ 0.833 (literature range ν ∈ [0.83, 0.85]).
  • 1D q=4: critical c = 1; q ≥ 5 (1D): first-order transition (no continuous critical point) — Wu RMP 1982.
  • Limit checks: h = 0q-fold-degenerate FM, E/N = −2; h → ∞ → PM, E/N = −2h; q = 2 → recovers TFIM.

Key reference: wu_1982_potts — the authoritative review of the Potts model (classical and quantum, all q, duality, order of transition, exact results, CFT connections).

frustrated Frustrated & topological spin systems 5

competing exchanges and Z₂ topological order — where QMC meets the sign problem

j1-j2frustrated chain/square; dimerized, spin-liquidsign-fuliPEPSDMRGPEPS
$$H = J_1 \sum_{\langle ij\rangle} \mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_j + J_2 \sum_{\langle\langle ij\rangle\rangle} \mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_j$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry2D square lattice (Z=4 NN + 4 NNN); also 1D zigzag chainNNN couplings span both sublattices, breaking bipartiteness for QMC.
A2 boundary conditionscylinder (2D DMRG default) · torus (ED) · OBCCylinder wrapping/width strongly affects the intermediate regime.
A3 statistics & local dimspin-1/2; d = 2Default S=1/2; the contested regime is specific to S=1/2.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (NN + NNN)Still local, but two competing couplings.
B5 entanglement scalingordered phases: 2D area law · intermediate g≈0.5: enhanced/area-violating (candidate gapless QSL → power-law)Entanglement growth in the window is what makes it method-limited.
B6 spectral gapNéel/stripe: gapless (Goldstone) over ordered GS · intermediate: gapped Z2 vs gapless U(1) QSL — unresolvedOrder-of-gap in the window is part of the open question.
B7 ground-state orderg≲0.4 Néel SSB · g≳0.6 stripe (collinear) SSB · g≈0.5 candidate spin liquid / VBS (contested)Two ordered phases flank a debated nonmagnetic window.
B8 frustrationinteraction-driven (competing J_1 vs J_2)The canonical interaction-frustrated benchmark.
C9 global symmetrySU(2) (total S), U(1) (S^z_tot)Isotropic Heisenberg couplings → full SU(2).
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation, C_4v point group; stripe phase breaks C_4 → C_2Lattice-rotation breaking is a stripe-order diagnostic.
C11 integrabilitynon-integrableNo exact solution at any g≠0.
C12 sign problemsevere (frustration breaks the Marshall sign rule)QMC blocked → DMRG/PEPS/VMC + PolyOpt bounds.
D13 regimeground state (T=0)Phase identification is the goal.
D14 filling / dopingN/A (spin model)
D15 disorderclean by default
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Néel (g ≲ 0.4) : staggered magnetization m_s, structure-factor peak at (π,π).
  • Stripe / collinear (g ≳ 0.6) : peak at (π,0)/(0,π), breaks C_4 lattice rotation.
  • Intermediate g ∈ [0.45,0.55] (frontier) : candidate gapless U(1) spin liquid vs gapped Z2 vs valence-bond solid — diagnose with spin-liquid; dimer order parameter / VBS structure factor and entanglement spectrum.

Canonical observables

  • E/N; spin structure factor S(q) (locating (π,π) vs (π,0) peaks).
  • Order parameters m_s (Néel), stripe magnetization, VBS/dimer order parameter.
  • Entanglement entropy / spectrum (cylinder topological-degeneracy diagnostics).

Recommended methods

  • Primary: DMRG on cylinders + PEPS/iPEPS — frustration sign-blocks QMC, so tensor networks carry the load in 2D (per method-property-map.md B8/C12 gate).
  • Cross-check: VMC/NQS (variational upper bound, compare ansatz families); ED on N ≤ 40 clusters; PolyOpt for a certified lower bound. Cross-method disagreement in the window is a known, reportable phenomenon — do not average it away.

Benchmarks

  • Phase boundaries (square lattice, S=1/2): Néel for g ≲ 0.4, nonmagnetic window g ∈ ~[0.4, 0.6], stripe for g ≳ 0.6 (Morita, Kaneko, Imada, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 84, 024720 (2015)).
  • Limit g = 0: reduces to NN square Heisenberg, E/N ≈ −0.6694 (Sandvik QMC benchmark) — a built-in limit check.

Key reference: morita_2014_quantum — many-variable VMC with quantum-number projection mapping the full square-lattice J_1J_2 phase diagram; a canonical, downloadable entry into the contested intermediate-regime debate.

shastry-sutherlandorthogonal dimers; SrCu₂(BO₃)₂ plateaussign-fulDMRGMPSED
$$H = J \sum_{\langle ij\rangle_{NN}} \mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_j \;+\; J' \sum_{\langle ij\rangle_{\text{dimer}}} \mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_j$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry2D square lattice with orthogonal diagonal-dimer bonds (Z=4 from the square + dimer bonds)The orthogonality of neighboring dimers is the defining structural feature.
A2 boundary conditionstorus / PBC (ED) · cylinder (DMRG)Torus for clean momentum sectors; cylinders for 2D DMRG.
A3 statistics & local dimspin-1/2; d = 2
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (NN square exchange J + dimer exchange J')Local.
B5 entanglement scalingdimer phase: area law (product of singlets, S → 0) · plaquette/Néel: 2D area law (∝ L)The exact dimer phase is essentially unentangled across dimer-respecting cuts.
B6 spectral gapgapped (dimer-singlet and plaquette phases) · gapless (Néel phase, Goldstone magnons)A spin gap protects the dimer/plaquette states; closes in the Néel phase.
B7 ground-state orderexact dimer-singlet product (small J/J') · plaquette-singlet (intermediate) · Néel AFM (large J/J')The dimer phase is a short-range-entangled product; the others are conventional.
B8 frustrationstrong geometric frustration (orthogonal dimers)Frustration stabilizes the dimer product and the magnetization plateaus.
C9 global symmetrySU(2) (total spin), U(1) (S^z_tot)A field breaks SU(2)→U(1), tuning the magnetization plateaus.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation, point group of the Shastry–Sutherland latticePlateau superstructures break translation.
C11 integrabilitynot integrable, but the dimer-singlet product is an exact ground state for small J/J' (Shastry–Sutherland 1981)Exact GS in a regime; the rest of the phase diagram is numerical.
C12 sign problemsign-ful (geometric frustration) → QMC blocked for the frustrated regime; the exact dimer state and DMRG/ED sidestep itFrustration turns on the spin sign problem; sign-free QMC is restricted.
D13 regimeground state (T=0) default; magnetization process in a fieldE/spin, spin gap, and the m(H) plateau structure are the targets.
D14 filling / dopingN/A (spin model; magnetization m/m_sat is the field-tuned analog)Plateaus appear at commensurate m/m_sat.
D15 disorderclean by default
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Exact dimer-singlet (small J/J', J/J' ≲ 0.675) : product of NN singlets on the dimer bonds — an exact eigenstate; full spin gap, no magnetic order.
  • Plaquette-singlet (intermediate, 0.675 ≲ J/J' ≲ 0.76) : resonating singlets on empty plaquettes; gapped, breaks lattice symmetry.
  • Néel AFM (large J/J', J/J' ≳ 0.76) : staggered magnetization, gapless Goldstone modes.
  • In a magnetic field: a cascade of magnetization plateaus at commensurate m/m_sat (e.g. 1/8, 1/4, 1/3, …) from crystallization of triplet excitations.

Canonical observables

  • Ground-state energy per spin E/spin; spin gap.
  • Phase-boundary locations in J/J'; plaquette / dimer order parameters.
  • Magnetization curve m(H) and plateau values m/m_sat; triplet dispersion (nearly flat → localized triplets).

Recommended methods

  • Primary: DMRG/MPS on cylinders and ED on finite clusters — QMC is sign-blocked by frustration, so tensor-network and exact-cluster methods carry the phase diagram and plateaus (per method-property-map.md B8/C12 frustrated-2D row).
  • Cross-check: the exact dimer-singlet energy anchors the small-J/J' regime; VMC/NQS for variational comparison; PolyOpt for a certified energy bound in the frustrated regime.

Benchmarks

  • Exact dimer phase (small J/J'): E/spin = −3J'/8 — exact dimer-singlet energy (each dimer singlet contributes −3J'/4 per bond = −3J'/8 per spin; convention H = J Σ_NN + J' Σ_dimer).
  • Magnetization plateaus at commensurate m/m_sat = 1/8, 1/3, … (and others such as 1/4, 1/2) observed in SrCu2(BO3)2 and reproduced by ED/DMRG.
  • Phase transitions near J/J' ≈ 0.675 (dimer→plaquette) and ≈ 0.76 (plaquette→Néel). The intermediate plaquette phase and these two boundaries are established by later studies (e.g. Corboz & Mila, PRB 87, 115144 (2013)); the cited 1998 Miyahara–Ueda paper reports a single dimer→Néel transition near J/J' ≈ 0.7.

Key reference: miyahara_1998_exact — Miyahara & Ueda, the foundational analysis identifying the Shastry–Sutherland (orthogonal-dimer) model as the description of SrCu2(BO3)2: the exact dimer ground state, the spin gap, and the critical J/J' for the dimer→Néel transition.

kitaev-honeycombKitaev spin liquid; Majorana partonssign-fulfree-fermion
$$H = -J_x \sum_{\langle ij\rangle_x}\sigma^x_i\sigma^x_j \;-\; J_y \sum_{\langle ij\rangle_y}\sigma^y_i\sigma^y_j \;-\; J_z \sum_{\langle ij\rangle_z}\sigma^z_i\sigma^z_j$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry2D honeycomb lattice (Z=3, two-site unit cell)Three inequivalent bond directions — the source of the compass exchange.
A2 boundary conditionstorus / PBC (flux sectors, exact solution) · cylinder (DMRG)Torus is needed for the Z2 ground-state degeneracy and flux sectors.
A3 statistics & local dimspin-1/2; d = 2; solved via Majorana fermions (4 Majoranas/site, projected)Fermionization is the engine of exact solvability.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (nearest-neighbor, bond-dependent)Local.
B5 entanglement scalingarea law + topological term; gapped phase has TEE γ = ln 𝒟 = ln 2 (total quantum dimension 𝒟 = 2)The toric-code (gapped) phase is a Z2 topological state.
B6 spectral gapgapless Z2 spin liquid (Dirac cones, isotropic regime) · gapped Z2 (anisotropic regime) · field-induced gap in the gapless phaseA magnetic field gaps the gapless phase into a chiral non-Abelian (Ising-anyon) phase.
B7 ground-state orderZ2 quantum spin liquid — no local order; fractionalized Majorana + static Z2 flux excitationsGapless (B-phase, Dirac) or gapped (A-phase, Abelian toric-code anyons); field → non-Abelian Ising anyons.
B8 frustrationbond-dependent (compass) exchange frustrationCompeting x/y/z Ising axes cannot be simultaneously satisfied → exchange frustration.
C9 global symmetryZ2 gauge structure (static flux W_p per plaquette, conserved); time-reversal; lattice-encodedEach plaquette flux W_p = ±1 is a constant of motion; ground state is flux-free (Lieb's theorem).
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation, C_3 rotation (permutes x/y/z bonds), inversionC_3 exchanges the three coupling channels.
C11 integrabilityexactly solvable (free Majorana fermions in a static Z2 gauge field)Quadratic after fermionization → exact spectrum, phase diagram, and anyon content.
C12 sign problemthe spin model has a sign problem; the exact Majorana solution sidesteps it entirelyDirect spin QMC is sign-blocked (frustration); the free-fermion mapping makes the model exactly tractable instead.
D13 regimeground state (T=0) default; the exact solution also gives finite-T and dynamicsFlux-sector energetics, gap, anyon statistics are the targets.
D14 filling / dopingN/A (spin model; the Majorana sector is at its natural filling)
D15 disorderclean by defaultBond disorder studied as a perturbation (out of scope).
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Gapless Z2 spin liquid (B phase) : isotropic / near-isotropic regime |J_x| ≤ |J_y|+|J_z| (and cyclic), Majorana Dirac cones; no local order parameter — diagnosed by the flux structure and gaplessness.
  • Gapped Z2 spin liquid (A phase, toric-code) : anisotropic regime, e.g. |J_z| > |J_x|+|J_y|; Abelian anyons (e, m), TEE γ = ln 2.
  • Non-Abelian (Ising-anyon) phase : the gapless B phase in a magnetic field acquires a gap with spectral Chern number ν = ±1; excitations are Ising (non-Abelian) anyons.

Canonical observables

  • Ground-state energy per site (flux-free sector, Lieb's theorem).
  • Phase boundary location; spectral gap; flux gap.
  • Topological entanglement entropy γ; spectral Chern number ν (field-induced phase); anyon braiding / fusion data.

Recommended methods

  • Primary: exact Majorana / free-fermion solution — the model is quadratic after fermionization (O(N³)), giving the spectrum, phase diagram, and anyon content exactly (per method-property-map.md C11 free-fermion row).
  • Cross-check: ED on small tori (exact spectrum, flux sectors); DMRG/MPS on cylinders for field-perturbed or material-extended (Kitaev–Heisenberg) versions where the exact solution breaks; VMC for extended models (QMC sign-blocked).

Benchmarks

  • Gapless↔gapped phase boundary (isotropic-coupling triangle): the gapless B phase occupies |J_x| ≤ |J_y|+|J_z| and cyclic permutations; the gapped A phases lie outside, e.g. the boundary |J_z| = |J_x|+|J_y| (convention H = −Σ J_a σ^a σ^a).
  • Field-induced B phase: spectral Chern number ν = ±1, Ising (non-Abelian) anyons; the gapped A phase has ν = 0, Abelian toric-code anyons with TEE γ = ln 2.

Key reference: kitaev_2005_anyons — the foundational paper: exact Majorana solution, the full phase diagram (gapless vs gapped Z2), Lieb's flux-free ground state, the field-induced non-Abelian phase, and the Chern-number classification of anyons.

spin-ice-pyrochloreice rules; emergent monopolesmixedDMRGVMCED
$$H = J_{\text{eff}} \sum_{\langle ij\rangle} S^{z_i}_i S^{z_j}_j \;\;\Big(\text{equivalently } H = -J \sum_{\langle ij\rangle} \mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_j \text{ with } \mathbf{S}_i \parallel \hat{z}_i\Big) \;+\; D \sum_{i<j} \frac{\hat{z}_i\cdot\hat{z}_j - 3(\hat{z}_i\cdot\hat{r}_{ij})(\hat{z}_j\cdot\hat{r}_{ij})}{|r_{ij}|^3}$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry3D pyrochlore lattice (corner-sharing tetrahedra, 4-site unit cell, Z=6)The canonical 3D frustrated geometry; FCC array of tetrahedra.
A2 boundary conditionsPBC (Monte Carlo on L×L×L cubic cells) · open (real crystals)Long-range dipolar sums use Ewald summation under PBC.
A3 statistics & local dimclassical Ising spin (d=2, S=±1 along local ⟨111⟩); quantum spin ice → effective spin-1/2Classical version is a statistical-mechanics model; quantum version is a genuine QMB problem.
A4 interaction rangeNN effective exchange (minimal model) · long-range dipolar 1/r^3 (realistic dipolar spin ice)Remarkably, the dipolar interaction "projects" onto essentially the same ice manifold (near self-screening).
B5 entanglement scalingclassical: n/a (thermal ensemble) · quantum spin ice: area law with emergent-gauge structureThe classical Coulomb phase is characterized by power-law (dipolar) *correlations*, not entanglement.
B6 spectral gapclassical: gapless ice manifold (macroscopic degeneracy) · monopole excitations cost a finite energy Δ above the ice rules · quantum spin ice: gapless emergent photonThe 2-in-2-out manifold is the degenerate ground space; flipping to 3-in-1-out creates a monopole pair.
B7 ground-state orderclassical spin liquid / Coulomb phase with an emergent U(1) gauge field (dipolar correlations, pinch points); excitations are fractionalized emergent magnetic monopoles. Quantum spin ice → U(1) quantum spin liquid with an emergent photonNo conventional symmetry-broken order; the "order" is the emergent gauge constraint (∇·B = 0 ice rule).
B8 frustrationstrong geometric frustration (corner-sharing tetrahedra)The ice rule cannot pick a unique state → extensive ground-state degeneracy (the defining feature).
C9 global symmetryglobal Ising Z_2 (classical); U(1) emergent gauge symmetry in the Coulomb phase; spin-rotation broken to the local ⟨111⟩ axesLocal axes are fixed by crystal field; the emergent U(1) is a *low-energy* gauge structure, not microscopic.
C10 spatial symmetrycubic point group Fd-3m; pyrochlore translations; large degenerate manifold per the symmetryThe structure factor's pinch points sit at high-symmetry zone-boundary points.
C11 integrabilitynot integrableSolved by Monte Carlo (classical) / numerics (quantum), not by exact ansatz; Pauling's count is an approximation.
C12 sign problemclassical → sign-free Monte Carlo (positive Boltzmann weights, loop/worm updates) · quantum spin ice has a sign problem (frustrated transverse terms)Classical dipolar spin ice is a Monte Carlo workhorse; the U(1) QSL needs sign-problem-aware methods.
D13 regimemostly finite-temperature thermodynamics (specific heat, residual entropy) + dynamics (monopole transport, neutron scattering); quantum spin ice → ground state + low-TThe residual-entropy plateau and pinch points are finite-T equilibrium signatures.
D14 filling / dopingn/a (localized moments); "doping" = nonmagnetic dilution (e.g. Y substitution) which modifies the residual entropyDilution studies probe the robustness of the Pauling count.
D15 disorderclean (ideal crystal) by default; real materials have stuffing/dilution disorderDilution and the slow-equilibration of Dy₂Ti₂O₇ are active experimental subtleties.
D16 hermiticityclassical (Boltzmann) / Hermitian quantum

Phases & order parameters

  • Paramagnet (high T) : thermally disordered, no ice correlations.
  • Spin-ice Coulomb phase (low T, above any ordering) : extensive 2-in-2-out manifold; residual Pauling entropy; emergent U(1) gauge field with dipolar spin correlations producing pinch points in the (neutron) structure factor; fractionalized magnetic monopole excitations (deconfined defects of the ice rule). No local order parameter — the "order" is the divergence-free emergent field ∇·B = 0.
  • Quantum spin ice (transverse coupling) : U(1) quantum spin liquid with an emergent gapless photon and gapped electric/magnetic monopole matter.
  • (Material-dependent low-T orderings, e.g. all-in-all-out, can pre-empt the ideal Coulomb phase.)

Canonical observables

  • Magnetic specific heat C(T) and the integrated residual entropy S(T→0).
  • Spin structure factor S(q) from (polarized) neutron scattering — the pinch-point singularities are the smoking gun of the Coulomb phase.
  • Monopole density and correlations; magnetization curves; ac susceptibility / spin-relaxation dynamics (monopole mobility).

Recommended methods

  • Primary (classical): Monte Carlo — sign-free; single-spin-flip plus loop/worm updates (needed because local moves cannot traverse the constrained ice manifold), with Ewald summation for the dipolar tail (per method-property-map.md §QMC/MCRG, C12 sign-free).
  • Primary (quantum spin ice): DMRG / ED on finite clusters and VMC/gauge-mean-field, since the transverse terms reintroduce a sign problem for QMC.
  • Cross-check: analytic Pauling/ice-rule entropy estimate; experimental specific-heat and neutron-scattering benchmarks.

Benchmarks

  • Residual (Pauling) entropy per spin: S ≈ (1/2) ln(3/2) ≈ 0.202 k_B per spin (≈ 0.202 R per mole of spins) — Pauling's ice-rule count, consistent with the residual entropy measured in Dy₂Ti₂O₇ by Ramirez et al. (Nature 399, 333 (1999)). Convention: nearest-neighbor / dipolar spin-ice. (Caveat: thermally well-equilibrated Dy₂Ti₂O₇ shows the residual entropy can be released at very low T — Pomaranski et al., Nat. Phys. 9, 353 (2013) — so the plateau is a quasi-equilibrium feature.)
  • Pinch points: sharp bow-tie singularities in the spin structure factor S(q) at high-symmetry zone-boundary points, the real-space dipolar-correlation signature of the emergent U(1) Coulomb phase (neutron scattering on Ho₂Ti₂O₇/Dy₂Ti₂O₇) castelnovo_2011_spin.
  • Monopole deconfinement: ice-rule defects behave as free magnetic charges interacting via an emergent (entropic + magnetic) Coulomb 1/r potential; their density and transport set the low-T dynamics castelnovo_2011_spin.

Key reference: castelnovo_2011_spin — Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics review "Spin Ice, Fractionalization, and Topological Order"; the all-details source for the ice rule and pyrochlore geometry, the Coulomb-phase emergent gauge field and pinch points, the residual Pauling entropy, and (centrally) the fractionalized magnetic-monopole excitations and their deconfinement. (The monopole-defining paper is Castelnovo-Moessner-Sondhi, Nature 2008, arXiv:0710.5515; this review subsumes it with the full Coulomb-phase / topological context.)

toric-codeZ₂ topological order; anyonsn/astabilizer
$$H = -\sum_v A_v \;-\; \sum_p B_p, \qquad A_v=\prod_{i\in v}\sigma^x_i,\quad B_p=\prod_{i\in p}\sigma^z_i$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry2D square lattice, qubits on edges (Z = 4 edges per star/plaquette)Generalizes to any 2D surface; genus controls the degeneracy.
A2 boundary conditionstorus (PBC×PBC) for the topological degeneracy · planar with boundaries for codesGround-state degeneracy is 2^{2g} on a genus-g surface.
A3 statistics & local dimspin-1/2 qubit; d = 2The qubit-on-edge layout is the defining feature.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (local 4-body stabilizers)Strictly local.
B5 entanglement scalingarea law with a topological correction: S = α L − γ, γ = ln 2 (𝒟 = 2)TEE γ = ln 2 is the entanglement signature of the Z2 order.
B6 spectral gapgapped (constant gap above the ground space)Excitations cost a fixed energy per violated stabilizer.
B7 ground-state orderintrinsic topological order (Z2 / long-range entangled)No local order parameter; characterized by GSD, anyons, TEE — not symmetry breaking.
B8 frustrationnone in the usual sense (commuting stabilizers)The model is exactly frustration-free (all terms minimized simultaneously).
C9 global symmetryZ2 × Z2 (1-form) symmetries; the conserved stabilizers A_v, B_pThe Wilson/'t Hooft loop operators generate the topological sectors.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation, square point group D_4Not needed for solvability; the topological structure is symmetry-independent.
C11 integrabilityexactly solvable (commuting stabilizer Hamiltonian)Entire spectrum known; ground states are common +1 eigenstates of all stabilizers.
C12 sign problemN/A — solved exactly; commuting projectors mean no Monte Carlo is neededThe exact stabilizer structure bypasses any sampling.
D13 regimeground state (T=0); finite-T destroys the order in 2D (no thermal stability)The 2D toric code has no finite-T topological order; 4D variant does.
D14 filling / dopingN/A (spin/qubit model)
D15 disorderclean by default; disorder/perturbations studied for code thresholdsStability under perturbation underlies its use as a quantum memory.
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Z2 topologically ordered phase : no local order parameter. Diagnostics are the ground-state degeneracy (GSD), the anyon content, and the topological entanglement entropy γ.
  • Anyons: e (electric charge, violated A_v), m (magnetic flux, violated B_p), and the composite fermion ε = e × m; e and m are mutual semions (braiding phase −1).

Canonical observables

  • Ground-state degeneracy: 4 on the torus (2^{2g} on genus g).
  • Topological entanglement entropy γ = ln 2 (total quantum dimension 𝒟 = 2).
  • Spectral gap; anyon braiding statistics; Wilson/'t Hooft loop expectation values.

Recommended methods

  • Primary: exact stabilizer analysis — the ground space and full spectrum follow directly from the commuting A_v, B_p (no numerics required).
  • Cross-check / pedagogy: ED on a small torus to exhibit GSD = 4 and measure γ; DMRG on cylinders to extract γ from the entanglement entropy as a benchmark of the topological-order toolkit.

Benchmarks

  • Ground-state degeneracy: GSD = 4 on the torus (exact; 2^{2g} on genus g).
  • Topological entanglement entropy: γ = ln 2 (exact; 𝒟 = 2).
  • Spectral gap: Δ = 2 (in units of the stabilizer coupling — one e plus one m excitation, or 2 per single anyon pair depending on convention).

Key reference: kitaev_1997_fault — the founding paper: introduces the toric code, the stabilizer formalism, topological degeneracy on surfaces, Abelian anyons, and fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyon braiding.

hubbard Hubbard & correlated fermions 8

itinerant fermions with on-site repulsion — Mott, pairing, Kondo physics

hubbardMott physics; d-wave pairing questionmixedDMRGMPSAFQMC
$$H = -t \sum_{\langle ij\rangle,\sigma} \left( c^\dagger_{i\sigma} c_{j\sigma} + \text{h.c.} \right) + U \sum_i n_{i\uparrow} n_{i\downarrow} - \mu \sum_i n_i$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain / quasi-1D ladder / 2D square (Z=4), triangular / 3D cubic / Z→∞ (DMFT)Geometry sets the difficulty; 2D square is the cuprate-parent target.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (DMRG) · PBC (ED/QMC) · cylinder (2D DMRG) · infinite (iDMRG/DMFT)Cylinder width caps the 2D-DMRG bond-dim budget.
A3 statistics & local dimfermion; d = 4 per site (∅, ↑, ↓, ↑↓)The four-state local space sets the ED 4^N wall and MPS per-site cost.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range: on-site U + NN hopping (extended Hubbard adds NN V, t')Local — area-law-compatible.
B5 entanglement scaling1D: area+log near criticality (c=1 charge + c=1 spin off half-filling; Mott-gapped charge at half-filling) · 2D: area lawSpin-charge separation gives two gapless modes in the 1D metal.
B6 spectral gaphalf-filling: Mott charge gap for any U>0 in 1D, for U≳U_c in 2D (gapless spin) · doped: gapless (metal)1D Mott gap opens at infinitesimal U (Lieb–Wu); spin sector stays gapless.
B7 ground-state orderhalf-filled bipartite: AF Mott insulator (Néel SSB in 2D/3D) · doped 2D: stripes / d-wave SC candidate / pseudogapDoped 2D ground state is the central open problem; stripes vs uniform SC nearly degenerate.
B8 frustrationnone on bipartite (chain, square, cubic) · geometric on triangular/t'≠0 · fermionic sign always presentFermionic antisymmetry is the intrinsic frustration.
C9 global symmetryU(1)_charge × SU(2)_spin (N↑, N↓ separately conserved; S^z) · half-filled bipartite: SO(4) = spin SU(2) × η-pairing SU(2)SO(4) (Yang–Zhang) adds pseudospin/η-pairing at half-filling on bipartite lattices.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k), point group (D_4 square), inversionBlock-diagonalizes ED sectors.
C11 integrability1D: Bethe-ansatz integrable (Lieb–Wu) · 2D / 3D: non-integrable1D has exact spectrum and thermodynamics (TBA); higher D fully numerical.
C12 sign problemhalf-filled bipartite: sign-free in DQMC (particle-hole) · attractive U<0: sign-free at any filling · doped repulsive: severe sign problemSign-free at half-filling is what makes that regime numerically exact at scale.
D13 regimeground state (T=0) default; finite-T (DQMC/DMFT) and dynamics out of card scopeE/N + double occupancy are canonical GS targets.
D14 filling / dopinghalf-filling (Mott) is the symmetric reference; doping is the key axis (turns on sign problem, opens competing orders)Mott→doped is the decisive control parameter.
D15 disorderclean by default; disorder → Anderson–Hubbard / MIT (out of scope)
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Half-filled bipartite (2D/3D) : antiferromagnetic Mott insulator — staggered magnetization m_s, spin structure-factor peak S(π,π), charge (Mott) gap Δ_c.
  • 1D at half-filling : Mott insulator, no SSB (Mermin–Wagner); power-law spin correlations, gapped charge sector.
  • Doped 2D : competing stripe order (charge/spin density modulation), d_{x²−y²} superconducting pairing, pseudogap — diagnose via pair-field and charge/spin structure factors.

Canonical observables

  • Ground-state energy per site E/N; double occupancy ⟨n↑ n↓⟩.
  • Staggered magnetization m_s, spin structure factor S(q); charge gap Δ_c.
  • d-wave pair correlations and charge/spin stripe order parameters (doped 2D).
  • Momentum distribution n(k); central charge c (1D, entanglement scaling).

Recommended methods

  • Primary (1D / ladder / cylinder): DMRG/MPS — near-exact in 1D, U(1)×SU(2) quantum-number conservation cuts cost (per method-property-map.md §MPS).
  • Primary (half-filled bipartite, large N): sign-free DQMC/AFQMC — particle-hole symmetry makes it numerically exact at scale (§QMC, C12).
  • Doped 2D (sign-blocked): DMRG cylinders + AFQMC (constrained-path/phaseless) + VMC/NQS + iPEPS, cross-checked (§B8/C12); ED as small-cluster oracle; DMFT for local self-energy / Mott transition.

Benchmarks

  • 1D chain, half-filling, thermodynamic limit (U/t=4): exact ground-state energy per site E/N ≈ −0.5737 t from the Lieb–Wu integral equations (Lieb & Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 20, 1445 (1968); convention H = -tΣc†c + UΣn↑n↓). At U→∞ half-filling, E/N → 4 ln 2 · (−t²/U) (Heisenberg AFM, J=4t²/U).
  • 2D square, U/t=8, δ=1/8 doping (t'=0): ground state is a period-8 stripe with E/N = −0.767 ± 0.004 t — four-method agreement (DMRG, AFQMC, iPEPS, DMET), reported in the Qin review qin_2021_hubbard from the Simons-collaboration benchmark (Zheng et al., Science 358, 1155 (2017)).

Key reference: qin_2021_hubbard — the authoritative multi-method computational review of the Hubbard model (DMRG, AFQMC, DMFT/DCA, tensor networks) covering half-filling and the doped 2D problem, with cross-method consensus benchmarks.

attractive-hubbards-wave pairing; BCS–BEC crossoversign-freeDQMC
$$H = -t \sum_{\langle ij\rangle,\sigma} \left( c^\dagger_{i\sigma} c_{j\sigma} + \text{h.c.} \right) \;-\; |U| \sum_i n_{i\uparrow} n_{i\downarrow} \;-\; \mu \sum_i n_i$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain / 2D square (Z = 4) / 3D cubic; bipartite lattices are the canonical setting2D square is the standard testbed for the superconducting T_c dome.
A2 boundary conditionsPBC (ED / QMC) · OBC / cylinder (DMRG) · infinite (iDMRG)Bipartite PBC clusters used for sign-free DQMC.
A3 statistics & local dimfermion; d = 4 per site (∅, ↑, ↓, ↑↓)Same four-state local space as the repulsive Hubbard; the doubly-occupied state is now energetically favored.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range: on-site U < 0 + NN hoppingLocal — area-law-compatible.
B5 entanglement scaling1D: area + log near criticality (gapless pairing/charge mode) · 2D: area law1D Luther–Emery liquid (gapped spin, gapless charge) off half-filling.
B6 spectral gapspin gap (pairs are spin singlets) for any U < 0; charge sector gapless off half-filling (superconductor), gapped at half-filling (pair CDW)The pairing gap is the order; the spin gap is a hallmark of local-pair formation in the BEC regime.
B7 ground-state orders-wave superconductor (off half-filling); at half-filling on a bipartite lattice the SC and charge-density-wave orders are degenerate (pseudospin SU(2))Off half-filling the pseudospin field tilts toward SC; at half-filling SC and CDW are exactly degenerate.
B8 frustrationnone on bipartite lattices; fermionic statistics present but does not produce a DQMC sign here (see C12)The attraction pairs up/down spins symmetrically, removing the usual fermionic sign.
C9 global symmetryU(1)_charge × SU(2)_spin; PLUS an exact pseudospin (η-pairing) SU(2) at half-filling on bipartite latticesThe pseudospin SU(2) rotates between pairing and charge density — its three components are the SC order parameter (two) and the density (one); it forces the SC–CDW degeneracy.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k), point group (D_4 square), inversionBipartite sublattice structure underlies the sign-free property.
C11 integrability1D: Bethe-ansatz integrable (Lieb–Wu with U < 0) · 2D / 3D: non-integrable1D has the exact spectrum / thermodynamics; higher D is fully numerical.
C12 sign problemSIGN-FREE in DQMC at ANY filling (the attraction gives identical up- and down-spin determinants, \det M_↑ \det M_↓ = (\det M)^2 ≥ 0)This is the headline computational feature — contrast the doped repulsive Hubbard, which has a severe sign problem.
D13 regimeground state (T = 0) and finite temperature (the T_c of the SC transition is the central target)Finite-T DQMC for T_c; ground-state DMRG/ED for pairing correlations.
D14 filling / dopingfilling tunes the order: off half-filling → s-wave SC; half-filling → the SC/CDW-degenerate (pseudospin-symmetric) pointFilling is the key control axis between the SC and SC+CDW regimes (and along the T_c dome).
D15 disorderclean by default; disorder studied for the SC–insulator (localization) transition of pairs
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • s-wave superconductor (off half-filling, any U < 0) : pairing order parameter Δ = ⟨c_{i↑} c_{i↓}⟩; pair-field (s-wave) correlation function and superfluid density; spin gap. Diagnose by the q = 0 pair structure factor and superfluid stiffness.
  • Half-filling (bipartite) : SC and charge-density-wave are degenerate (pseudospin SU(2)); the combined order is a "supersolid"-like degenerate manifold. Diagnose by the equal SC and CDW structure factors.
  • BCS–BEC crossover : a smooth crossover (not a transition) from overlapping Cooper pairs (|U| \ll t) to tightly-bound on-site bosonic pairs (|U| \gg t), tracked by the pair size, double occupancy, and the two temperature scales T_p (pairing) and T_c (condensation).

Canonical observables

  • Pair-field correlation function P_s(r) = ⟨Δ_i^\dagger Δ_j⟩ and s-wave pair structure factor; superfluid density ρ_s.
  • Superconducting T_c vs filling ⟨n⟩ and |U|/t (the T_c dome).
  • Double occupancy ⟨n_↑ n_↓⟩ (grows toward 1 in the BEC limit); momentum distribution n(k); quasiparticle weight.
  • Spin gap; pairing temperature T_p; at half-filling the CDW structure factor S(π,π) (degenerate with SC).

Recommended methods

  • Primary (any filling, large N, finite-T and ground state): sign-free DQMC — the attractive interaction makes the determinant a perfect square, so DQMC is numerically exact at scale at all fillings (per method-property-map.md §QMC / C12) — the decisive advantage over the doped repulsive model.
  • Cross-check: DMRG/MPS in 1D / on cylinders (pairing correlations, spin gap); ED small-cluster oracle; the 1D Lieb–Wu Bethe-ansatz solution as an analytic benchmark.

Benchmarks

  • Sign-free DQMC at all fillings: the up/down determinants are identical (\det M_↑ \det M_↓ = (\det M)^2 ≥ 0), so the average sign is exactly 1 for any ⟨n⟩ (convention H = -tΣc†c − |U|Σn↑n↓) — the contrast with the sign-ful doped repulsive Hubbard.
  • 2D square T_c dome (DQMC): a broad maximum T_c ≈ 0.16\,t near |U|/t ≈ 5 ± 1 and band filling ⟨n⟩ ≈ 0.79 ± 0.09 — Fontenele et al. fontenele_2022_attractive.
  • Half-filling SC–CDW degeneracy: on a bipartite lattice at ⟨n⟩ = 1 the s-wave-SC and CDW order parameters are exactly degenerate (pseudospin / η-pairing SU(2)).
  • BCS–BEC crossover: a smooth crossover from BCS (|U| \ll t, large overlapping pairs, T_c rising with |U|) to BEC (|U| \gg t, tightly-bound local pairs, T_c ∝ t^2/|U| falling) with the maximum in between — Fontenele et al. fontenele_2022_attractive.

Key reference: fontenele_2022_attractive — Fontenele, Costa, dos Santos & Paiva, "The 2D attractive Hubbard model and the BCS-BEC crossover" (Phys. Rev. B 105, 184502, 2022): a downloadable all-details study using sign-free DQMC to map the superconducting T_c across band filling and |U|/t, the BCS–BEC crossover (pairing T_p vs degeneracy T_d scales, double occupancy, n(k), quasiparticle weight), chosen as the key reference because it directly delivers the headline benchmarks. Broader context: Micnas, Ranninger & Robaszkiewicz, "Superconductivity in narrow-band systems with local nonretarded attractive interactions", Rev. Mod. Phys. 62, 113 (1990) (doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.62.113; no arXiv preprint).

multiorbital-hubbardHund coupling; orbital-selective MottmixedED
$$H = -t \sum_{\langle ij\rangle,m,\sigma} \left( c^\dagger_{im\sigma} c_{jm\sigma} + \text{h.c.} \right) + H_{\text{Kanamori}}$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometrysingle-site/impurity + bath · lattice (square/cubic) · Z→∞ (DMFT/CDMFT)Runtime scope is the impurity/DMFT-embedded problem; lattice multiorbital is DMFT territory.
A2 boundary conditionsimpurity: none (0D + bath) · lattice: PBC/cylinder/infinite (DMFT)Bath discretization, not boundaries, dominates the impurity problem.
A3 statistics & local dimfermion; local dim 4^M per site (64 for M=3)The 4^M local wall is the master cost axis — cost it out before any method.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range: on-site Kanamori (U, U', J_H) + NN hoppingLocal interactions; area-law compatible.
B5 entanglement scalingimpurity: area-law bath chain · lattice: area law (2D) / DMFT localImpurity-as-chain is MPS-friendly; 4^M inflates per-site MPS cost.
B6 spectral gapmetal (Hund's metal, gapless) · Mott insulator (U > U_c(J_H)) · orbital-selective Mott (some bands gapped, others metallic)J_H suppresses the Fermi-liquid coherence scale → bad metal above it.
B7 ground-state orderHund's metal (incoherent correlated metal) · Mott / orbital-selective Mott insulator · magnetic order at low T"Spin-freezing" non-Fermi-liquid regime is the hallmark of Hund's-metal physics.
B8 frustrationfermionic sign always; orbital + spin degeneracy enlarges the low-energy manifoldMultiorbital low-energy degeneracy is the source of Hund's-metal correlations.
C9 global symmetryU(1)_charge × SU(2)_spin × orbital symmetry; J_H breaks full orbital rotation (keeps SO(3) only with full rotationally-invariant Kanamori)J_H is what lowers orbital symmetry; density-density-only further breaks it.
C10 spatial symmetryimpurity: orbital point group (t_{2g}/e_g crystal field) · lattice: translation + point groupCrystal-field splitting labels the orbital sectors.
C11 integrabilitynon-integrable (multiorbital interactions)No exact solution; numerical throughout.
C12 sign problemgenerically severe in multiorbital DQMC; CT-HYB (hybridization-expansion CTQMC) sign-free for density-density, sign-ful with spin-flip/pair-hopping & off-diagonal hybridizationThe severe multiorbital sign problem is why CTQMC/ED-bath dominate over lattice DQMC.
D13 regimeground state + finite-T (CTQMC/DMFT); dynamics out of card scopeHund's-metal coherence scale is a finite-T phenomenon.
D14 filling / dopingshell filling N (per-orbital occupancy) is the control parameter; strongest correlations away from N=M or N=1 ("Janus" fillings N=2,4 for M=3)Average shell occupancy, not just U, sets the correlation strength.
D15 disorderclean by default
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Hund's metal : incoherent correlated metal — small quasiparticle weight Z, large effective mass m*/m, reduced coherence temperature T_coh; non-Fermi-liquid self-energy in the spin-freezing regime (Im Σ(iω_n) ∝ ω_n^α, α ≈ 0.5 at the boundary).
  • Mott insulator : opens for U > U_c(J_H); charge gap Δ_c ~ U_{eff} = U+(M-1)J_H at N=M.
  • Orbital-selective Mott : some orbitals localized (gapped) while others remain itinerant — diagnose per-orbital Z_m and spectral weight.
  • Magnetic / orbital order at low T : staggered local moment, orbital occupancy imbalance.

Canonical observables

  • Per-orbital occupancies ⟨n_m⟩, double occupancy ⟨n_{m↑} n_{m↓}⟩.
  • Local moment ⟨S^2⟩, instantaneous ⟨S_z^2⟩; total spin (high-spin Hund's-rule multiplet at large J_H).
  • Quasiparticle weight Z_m = (1 - ∂Σ/∂ω)^{-1}, effective mass m*/m; coherence scale T_coh.
  • Spectral function A(ω), self-energy Σ(iω_n) (spin-freezing diagnostic).

Recommended methods

  • Primary (single-site / impurity, small M, finite bath): ED — exact within the discretized bath, U(1)×SU(2)×orbital sectors cut the 4^M·d_bath space (per method-property-map.md §ED).
  • Primary (impurity solver in DMFT, finite-T): CTQMC (CT-HYB) — handles a continuous bath; sign-free for density-density Kanamori (§QMC/C12).
  • Cross-check: DMRG/MPS impurity solver for a longer bath chain (§MPS); DMFT/CDMFT for the lattice self-energy and Mott/orbital-selective transition. Lattice DQMC is sign-blocked (C12).

Benchmarks

  • Half-filled M-orbital shell (N=M): the atomic/Mott gap is enhanced by Hund's coupling to U_{eff} = U + (M-1)J_H (Georges-de'Medici-Mravlje, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 4, 137 (2012), Eq. 11; Kanamori convention U' = U - 2J_H). For the half-filled 3-orbital Hubbard-Kanamori model, DMFT finds U_c strongly *reduced* by J_H (their Fig. 2), whereas at N=1 U_c *increases* quasi-linearly with J_H.
  • 3-orbital Hubbard-Kanamori model, "spin-freezing" regime: the imaginary-frequency self-energy behaves as Im Σ(iω_n) ∝ ω_n^α with α ≈ 1/2 at the frozen-moment phase boundary (Werner-Gull-Troyer-Millis, PRL 101, 166405 (2008); reviewed in georges_2012_strong).

Key reference: georges_2012_strong — the authoritative review of Hund's-coupling physics (Hund's metals, spin-freezing, orbital-selective Mott, the U_c(J_H) and U_{eff}=U+(M-1)J_H relations) for multiorbital correlated metals, with DMFT benchmarks across 3d/4d TMOs and iron pnictides.

t-jdoped Mott insulator; no double occupancymixedDMRGMPSED
$$H = -t \sum_{\langle ij\rangle,\sigma} P \left( c^\dagger_{i\sigma} c_{j\sigma} + \text{h.c.} \right) P + J \sum_{\langle ij\rangle} \left( \mathbf{S}_i \cdot \mathbf{S}_j - \tfrac{1}{4} n_i n_j \right)$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain / quasi-1D ladder / 2D square (Z=4); triangular when frustrated2D square doped is the cuprate-physics target.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (DMRG) · PBC (ED) · cylinder (2D DMRG)Cylinder width caps the 2D-DMRG budget; stripes need long cylinders.
A3 statistics & local dimfermion; d = 3 per site (∅, ↑, ↓) — no double occupancyThe no-double-occupancy constraint is a Hilbert-space restriction, not a symmetry; d=3 (not 4) is the projected local space.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range: NN hopping + NN exchange J (extended t-J adds t', J')Local — area-law compatible.
B5 entanglement scaling1D: area+log (gapless Luttinger liquid; c=1 charge + c=1 spin) · 2D: area lawDoped 1D t-J is a Luttinger liquid with spin-charge separation.
B6 spectral gapdoped: gapless · zero doping: reduces to Heisenberg (gapless 1D / 2D AFM)At half-filling (n=1) kinetic term is fully projected → pure Heisenberg.
B7 ground-state order2D large-J/t: d_{x²-y²} superconductivity / stripes / phase separation · doped: Luttinger liquid (1D) · half-filled: AFMPhase separation at large J/t; stripe vs uniform d-SC near degenerate in the cuprate window.
B8 frustrationnone on bipartite lattices · geometric on triangular · fermionic sign on dopingFermionic antisymmetry under doping is the intrinsic frustration.
C9 global symmetryU(1)_charge × SU(2)_spin (N↑, N↓ conserved; S^z)At the supersymmetric point J=2t, an enlarged su(2|1) superalgebra appears (1D).
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k), point group (D_4 square), inversionBlock-diagonalizes ED sectors.
C11 integrability1D supersymmetric integrable point at J = 2t (Bethe ansatz, Sutherland/Schlottmann); otherwise non-integrableJ=2t gives an exact spectrum/thermodynamics benchmark; generic J/t is fully numerical.
C12 sign problemhalf-filling (n=1, → Heisenberg, bipartite): sign-free · doped: severe sign problemDoping turns on the fermion sign — QMC is blocked away from the Heisenberg limit.
D13 regimeground state (T=0) default; finite-T / dynamics out of card scopeE/N + spin/charge correlations are the canonical targets.
D14 filling / dopingdoping δ = 1-n is the central axis; n=1 (half-filling) → HeisenbergDoping breaks particle-hole symmetry and drives SC/stripe competition.
D15 disorderclean by default
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Half-filling (n=1) : antiferromagnet (the kinetic term is projected away → Heisenberg) — staggered magnetization, S(π,π) (2D) or power-law spin correlations (1D).
  • Doped 1D : Luttinger liquid — power-law K_ρ-controlled correlations, spin-charge separation; check exponents.
  • Doped 2D, large J/t : d_{x²-y²} pairing (pair-field correlations), stripe order (charge/spin density modulation), and phase separation at large J/t (J/t ≳ 3 per Emery–Kivelson–Lin) — diagnose via density profile and pair/charge structure factors.

Canonical observables

  • Ground-state energy per site E/N; hole density δ.
  • Spin correlations ⟨S_i·S_j⟩, spin structure factor S(q); charge/density correlations N(q).
  • d-wave pair-field correlations (2D doped); single-hole dispersion / quasiparticle weight.
  • Luttinger exponent K_ρ, central charge c (1D entanglement scaling).

Recommended methods

  • Primary (1D / ladder / cylinder): DMRG/MPS — near-exact in 1D, the d=3 projected local space + U(1)×SU(2) conservation keep cost low (per method-property-map.md §MPS).
  • Primary (small clusters): projected ED — exact oracle on the no-double-occupancy basis (§ED).
  • Doped 2D (sign-blocked): DMRG cylinders + VMC/NQS cross-checked (§B8/C12) for stripes vs pairing; QMC blocked by the doping sign problem.

Benchmarks

  • 1D supersymmetric point J = 2t at half-filling: exactly solvable (Bethe ansatz) with ground-state energy per site E/N = -2t·ln 2 + ... reducing to the Heisenberg value at n=1 — the canonical integrable benchmark (Sutherland, Phys. Rev. B 12, 3795 (1975); Schlottmann, Phys. Rev. B 36, 5177 (1987)).
  • 2D t-J, phase separation: the doped system phase-separates into hole-rich and AFM regions for J/t ≳ 3 (and at all J/t near half-filling), established by ED/numerics (Emery, Kivelson & Lin, PRL 64, 475 (1990)); the small-J/t cuprate window (J/t ≈ 0.3-0.4) hosts the contested stripe-vs-uniform-d-SC competition reviewed in dagotto_1993_correlated.

Key reference: dagotto_1993_correlated — the authoritative review of computational studies of the t-J and Hubbard models for the cuprates (d-wave SC, phase separation, spin correlations vs doping, photoemission), the standard reference for what numerics established about correlated electrons in high-T_c materials.

t-vextended Hubbard; charge-order competitionmixedDMRGMPSQMC
$$H = -t \sum_{\langle ij\rangle} \left( c^\dagger_i c_j + \text{h.c.} \right) + V \sum_{\langle ij\rangle} n_i n_j$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain / quasi-1D ladder / 2D square (Z=4) / triangular (frustrated)1D chain is the exactly-tractable reference (→ XXZ).
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (DMRG) · PBC (ED/QMC) · cylinder (2D)OBC gives Friedel oscillations; PBC needed for clean momentum sectors.
A3 statistics & local dimspinless fermion; d = 2 per site (empty / occupied)The smallest fermionic local space — cheap per-site cost.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range: NN hopping + NN repulsion V (extended adds V')Local — area-law compatible.
B5 entanglement scaling1D: area+log (Luttinger liquid, c=1) for V < V_c; area law (gapped CDW) for V > V_c · 2D: area lawAt half-filling the 1D transition (V_c = 2t, i.e. XXZ Δ=1) is BKT-type.
B6 spectral gap1D half-filling: gapless metal (|V| < 2t) / gapped CDW (V > 2t) · away from half-filling: gapless Luttinger liquidMaps to the XXZ gap: gapless XY phase |Δ|<1, gapped Ising-AFM Δ>1.
B7 ground-state orderLuttinger liquid (metal) · charge-density wave at half-filling for V > V_c=2t · phase separation for V < -V_c (attractive)CDW = staggered density ⟨n_i⟩ = n̄ ± δ(-1)^i; the XXZ Ising-AFM Néel state.
B8 frustrationnone on bipartite (chain, square) · geometric on triangular · fermionic sign on doping/2DBipartite half-filling is unfrustrated and sign-free.
C9 global symmetryU(1)_charge (N_f conserved); particle-hole at half-filling on bipartite latticesNo spin SU(2) (spinless); JW image has only U(1) S^z (XXZ has no SU(2) except Δ=1).
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k), inversion/parity, sublattice exchange (bipartite)CDW spontaneously breaks the Z_2 sublattice (translation by one site).
C11 integrability1D: Bethe-ansatz integrable (exact map to XXZ via Jordan–Wigner) · 2D/3D: non-integrable1D gives exact ground-state energy, gap, and V_c=2t from the XXZ solution.
C12 sign problem1D and 2D bipartite at half-filling: sign-free (particle-hole / bipartite) · doped / frustrated / non-bipartite: sign problem can appearSign-free half-filled bipartite case is QMC-exact at scale.
D13 regimeground state (T=0) default; finite-T / dynamics out of card scopeE/N + charge structure factor N(q) are canonical targets.
D14 filling / dopinghalf-filling (CDW reference) is the symmetric point; doping → incommensurate Luttinger liquidCommensurate half-filling is where the CDW can lock in.
D15 disorderclean by default
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Luttinger liquid (metal) : |V| < V_c = 2t at half-filling (and generically off half-filling) — power-law density correlations, no gap; characterized by K_ρ.
  • Charge-density wave (insulator) : V > V_c = 2t at half-filling — staggered density order parameter m_{CDW} = (1/N)Σ_i (-1)^i ⟨n_i⟩, peak in N(q=π), finite charge gap. Maps to the XXZ Néel state for Δ > 1.
  • Phase separation : strong attraction V < -2t.

Canonical observables

  • Ground-state energy per site E/N; density profile ⟨n_i⟩.
  • Charge structure factor N(q) = (1/N)Σ_{ij} e^{iq(i-j)}⟨n_i n_j⟩_c; CDW order parameter m_{CDW}.
  • Charge gap Δ_c = E(N_f+1)+E(N_f-1)-2E(N_f); Luttinger parameter K_ρ, central charge c (1D).

Recommended methods

  • Primary (1D / ladder): DMRG/MPS — near-exact in 1D, U(1) N_f conservation, small d=2 (per method-property-map.md §MPS).
  • Primary (2D bipartite half-filling, large N): sign-free QMC — bipartite particle-hole symmetry → numerically exact at scale (§QMC, C12).
  • Cross-check: ED small-cluster oracle (§ED); for 1D, validate against the exact XXZ Bethe-ansatz energy/gap (C11).

Benchmarks

  • 1D half-filling, CDW transition: exact via the XXZ map (Jordan–Wigner, Δ = V/2t). The metal→CDW (BKT) transition sits at Δ = 1, i.e. V_c = 2t; for V > 2t the CDW gap opens exponentially (XXZ Ising-AFM gap), the Yang–Yang exact result (C. N. Yang & C. P. Yang, Phys. Rev. 150, 321 (1966)). Convention H = -t Σ(c†c+h.c.) + V Σ n_i n_j.
  • 1D, V = 0 (free fermions): exact tight-binding band, E/N = -2t/π·sin(πn) → -2t/π ≈ -0.6366 t at half-filling (n=1/2), the free-fermion limit benchmark (Voit review voit_1995_one, Luttinger-liquid V→0 endpoint).

Key reference: voit_1995_one — the authoritative review of 1D Fermi (Luttinger) liquids, covering the Luttinger-liquid universality class, the exact Bethe-ansatz solution, spin-charge separation, and the CDW/Mott alternatives — the all-details source for the gapless and CDW physics of 1D spinless-fermion (t-V) and related models.

falicov-kimballlocalized f-electrons; exact in d=∞sign-freeDMFT
$$H = -t \sum_{\langle ij\rangle} \left( c^\dagger_i c_j + \text{h.c.} \right) + U \sum_i n^c_i\, n^f_i$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain / 2D square (Z=4) / 3D / Z→∞ (DMFT — exact)The infinite-dimensional limit is exactly solvable (DMFT); finite-D studied by Monte Carlo over f-configs.
A2 boundary conditionsPBC / OBC (finite clusters) · infinite (DMFT, Bethe / hypercubic DOS)DMFT works directly in the thermodynamic limit.
A3 statistics & local dimitinerant c (spinless d_c = 2; d_c = 4 with spin) plus a classical static f-occupation {0,1} per siteThe f-electrons are not a quantum degree of freedom in the dynamics — a classical Ising-like variable.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range: on-site cf repulsion U + NN c-hoppingLocal.
B5 entanglement scalingthe c-subsystem (for a fixed f-config) is a free-fermion area-law state; the full model = classical average over f-configurationsNo genuine cf entanglement growth — the f-config is a conserved classical field.
B6 spectral gapmetal at small U · c-spectral (Mott-like) gap opens at large U (band splits into lower/upper Hubbard-like sub-bands)The metal–insulator feature is driven by U; at half-filling the CDW also gaps the spectrum at low T.
B7 ground-state orderhalf-filling, bipartite, low T: checkerboard charge-density wave (staggered f-occupation) · large U: Mott-like insulatorThe simplest correlated model with both a CDW transition and a metal–insulator transition.
B8 frustrationnone on bipartite lattices (checkerboard CDW); geometric frustration of the f-arrangement on non-bipartite latticesThe f-config ordering can be frustrated by lattice geometry.
C9 global symmetryc-charge U(1) plus each n^f_i separately conserved → extensively many conserved quantities (f-electrons are static)The macroscopic set of conserved n^f_i is the model's defining structural feature ([H, n^f_i] = 0 for all i).
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k), point group (D_4 square), inversion; sublattice (bipartite) for the checkerboard CDWThe CDW spontaneously breaks the sublattice (translation) symmetry.
C11 integrabilityexactly solvable in infinite dimensions (DMFT) — Brandt–Mielsch / Freericks–ZlatićThe Z→∞ self-energy is local and the impurity problem closes exactly; finite-D is not integrable but is sign-free.
C12 sign problemsign-free: the static f-configuration reduces the quantum problem to a classical Monte Carlo over f-configs (each config = a free-fermion c-determinant, manifestly positive)No fermion sign — the f-config sum is a classical statistical-mechanics problem.
D13 regimeground state and finite-T (the CDW ordering temperature T_c is a central target); real-time / spectral via DMFTFinite-T phase diagram (CDW T_c(U)) and the T=0 MIT are the canonical targets.
D14 filling / dopinghalf-filling (ρ_c = ρ_f = ½) → checkerboard CDW, symmetric reference; doping the c or f density changes the ordered pattern / melts the CDWBoth c-filling and f-filling are control axes.
D15 disorderclean by default; an annealed/quenched random f-config maps the model onto a binary-alloy / Anderson-disorder problemThe c-electrons effectively see the f-config as a (self-consistent) disorder potential.
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Checkerboard charge-density wave (half-filling, bipartite, T < T_c) : staggered f-occupation (f-electrons localize on one sublattice) — order parameter is the staggered f-density / CDW structure-factor peak S_f(π,…); also gaps the c-spectrum.
  • Homogeneous metal (small U, T > T_c) : disordered f-config, metallic c-band.
  • Mott-like insulator (large U) : the c-density of states splits into lower/upper sub-bands separated by a U-driven gap — metal–insulator transition with U.

Canonical observables

  • c-electron spectral function A(ω) / density of states (DMFT) — band splitting / MIT.
  • CDW order parameter (staggered f-density) and structure factor S_f(q); ordering temperature T_c(U).
  • Ground-state energy; f-occupation pattern; c-charge gap.
  • Static / dynamic charge susceptibility (CDW instability).

Recommended methods

  • Primary (high-D / local self-energy): DMFT — exact in Z→∞; gives the c-spectral function, the metal–insulator transition, and the CDW transition analytically/numerically (per method-property-map.md A1 Z→∞ row).
  • Primary (finite D, exact): classical Monte Carlo over f-configurations — for each f-config diagonalize the free-fermion c-Hamiltonian (a positive weight); sign-free, numerically exact at scale (§C12).
  • Cross-check: ED on small clusters (enumerate f-configs exactly); free-fermion c-diagonalization for any fixed f-config.

Benchmarks

  • Half-filling, bipartite, T=0: ground state is the checkerboard CDW (f-electrons occupy one sublattice) for any U>0 — exact for the infinite-D / bipartite case (Brandt–Mielsch; reviewed in freericks_2003_exact).
  • Finite-T: a CDW ordering temperature T_c(U) separates the ordered checkerboard phase from the disordered phase; T_c is non-monotonic in U (rises then falls, peaking at intermediate U) — DMFT result freericks_2003_exact.
  • Large U: the c-density of states splits into lower and upper sub-bands separated by a gap ≈ U (metal–insulator transition) — exact DMFT spectral function freericks_2003_exact (convention H = −tΣc†c + U Σ n^c n^f).

Key reference: freericks_2003_exact — Freericks & Zlatić, "Exact dynamical mean-field theory of the Falicov–Kimball model" (the RMP review): the all-details source for the DMFT solution, the formalism, the CDW transition, and the metal–insulator physics. (arXiv preprint cond-mat/0301188; published RMP 75, 1333 (2003).)

kondo-latticescreened local moments; heavy fermionsmixedDMRGMPSDMFT
$$H = -t \sum_{\langle ij\rangle,\sigma} \left( c^\dagger_{i\sigma} c_{j\sigma} + \text{h.c.} \right) + J_K \sum_i \mathbf{S}_i \cdot \mathbf{s}_i$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain / quasi-1D ladder / 2D square (Z=4) / 3D / Z→∞ (DMFT/DMFT-DCA)1D KLM is the cleanest DMRG target; higher D is the heavy-fermion / quantum-criticality arena.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (DMRG) · PBC (ED) · cylinder (2D DMRG) · infinite (DMFT)Cylinder width caps the 2D-DMRG bond-dim budget.
A3 statistics & local dimfermion conduction band (d_c = 4: ∅, ↑, ↓, ↑↓) plus a localized spin-½ at each site → effective d = 8 per siteThe extra two-dimensional local spin space doubles the per-site cost over plain Hubbard.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range: on-site Kondo exchange J_K + NN hoppingLocal — area-law-compatible.
B5 entanglement scaling1D: area law (gapped Kondo insulator at half-filling) · area+log near gapless metallic / critical regimes · 2D: area lawHeavy-Fermi-liquid metal is gapless (Fermi-surface log corrections).
B6 spectral gaphalf-filling: spin gap and charge gap for all J_K>0 (Kondo insulator, 1D) · doped / metallic: gapless (heavy Fermi liquid)1D half-filled KLM is gapped for any J_K>0 (Tsunetsugu–Sigrist–Ueda).
B7 ground-state orderheavy Fermi liquid (paramagnetic, large Fermi surface) · RKKY antiferromagnet (small J_K) · ferromagnet (low conduction filling) · Kondo insulator (half-filling)Doniach picture: AF order at small J_K, screened paramagnet (heavy FL) at large J_K.
B8 frustrationnone on bipartite lattices · interaction-driven competition (Kondo vs RKKY) · fermionic sign always presentThe Kondo–RKKY competition is the model's defining tension, not geometric frustration.
C9 global symmetryU(1)_charge (conduction N) × SU(2)_spin (total spin of conduction + local moments); S^z conservedParticle-hole symmetry at half-filling on bipartite lattices (sign-free DQMC).
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k), point group (D_4 square), inversionBlock-diagonalizes ED sectors.
C11 integrabilitynon-integrable (the lattice model)Contrast the single Kondo impurity, which IS Bethe-ansatz solvable; the lattice destroys integrability → full numerics required.
C12 sign problemhalf-filled particle-hole-symmetric KLM: sign-free in DQMC · doped: severe sign problem in generalHalf-filling on a bipartite lattice is the sign-free reference point.
D13 regimeground state (T=0) default; finite-T (DQMC/DMFT) for the Kondo crossover T_K and T_cohE/N, spin/charge gaps, and the Doniach phase boundary are the targets.
D14 filling / dopinghalf-filling → Kondo insulator (symmetric reference); doping turns on the sign problem and the heavy-FL / magnetic competitionConduction filling is the key control axis (along with J_K/t).
D15 disorderclean by default; disorder → Kondo-disorder / non-Fermi-liquid physics (out of scope)
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Heavy Fermi liquid (paramagnetic) : Kondo screening wins (J_K ≳ J_K*); large Fermi surface enclosing conduction + local-moment count, strongly enhanced effective mass m*. Diagnostics: m* / coherence temperature T_coh, large-Fermi-surface volume.
  • RKKY antiferromagnet : at small J_K, indirect RKKY exchange (∝ J_K²) orders the local moments — staggered magnetization m_s, spin structure-factor peak S(π,…).
  • Ferromagnet : at low conduction-electron filling, double-exchange-like ferromagnetism of the local moments.
  • Kondo insulator (half-filling) : both spin and charge gap open for any J_K>0 — measure Δ_spin, Δ_charge.

Canonical observables

  • Ground-state energy per site E/N; spin gap Δ_spin and charge gap Δ_charge (half-filling).
  • Staggered magnetization m_s, spin structure factor S(q) (RKKY phase).
  • Effective mass m* / quasiparticle weight Z; coherence / Kondo temperature T_K ∝ exp(−1/J_K ρ).
  • Doniach crossover scale J_K* where T_K ~ T_RKKY (RKKY-AF ↔ heavy-FL boundary).

Recommended methods

  • Primary (1D / ladder / cylinder): DMRG/MPS — near-exact in 1D, U(1)×SU(2) quantum-number conservation cuts cost (per method-property-map.md §MPS); the standard tool for the 1D-KLM phase diagram.
  • Primary (high-D / local self-energy): DMFT / DMFT-DCA — captures Kondo screening, heavy-FL coherence, and the Kondo insulator in the large-Z limit (§A1 Z→∞).
  • Cross-check: sign-free DQMC at half-filling (particle-hole symmetry, §C12); ED small-cluster oracle; VMC/NQS for doped / sign-blocked regimes.

Benchmarks

  • 1D half-filled KLM is a Kondo insulator with both a spin gap and a charge gap for all J_K > 0 (no magnetic order, no Doniach transition at half-filling) — Tsunetsugu, Sigrist & Ueda, Rev. Mod. Phys. 69, 809 (1997) (convention H = −tΣc†c + J_K Σ S·s, J_K>0).
  • Doniach competition (away from half-filling): RKKY scale T_RKKY ∝ J_K² vs Kondo scale T_K ∝ exp(−1/J_K ρ) cross at a coupling J_K*; for J_K < J_K* the ground state is an RKKY antiferromagnet, for J_K > J_K* a paramagnetic heavy Fermi liquid (Doniach 1977; reviewed in coleman_2006_heavy).

Key reference: coleman_2006_heavy — Coleman's "Heavy Fermions: electrons at the edge of magnetism" review: the all-details pedagogical source covering the Kondo lattice, the Doniach phase diagram, Kondo screening vs RKKY, heavy Fermi liquids and Kondo insulators. Chosen over Tsunetsugu–Sigrist–Ueda RMP 69, 809 (1997) because it is freely downloadable (arXiv) and broader in scope, while still covering the 1D-KLM benchmarks cited below.

anderson-impuritysingle magnetic impurity; Kondo singletsign-freeNRG
$$H = \varepsilon_d \sum_\sigma n_{d\sigma} + U\, n_{d\uparrow} n_{d\downarrow} + \sum_{k\sigma} \varepsilon_k c^\dagger_{k\sigma} c_{k\sigma} + \sum_{k\sigma} \left( V_k\, d^\dagger_\sigma c_{k\sigma} + \text{h.c.} \right)$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry0D impurity + bath (not a lattice) — bath represented as a star (from Γ(ω)) or a 1D Wilson/Lanczos chainThe bath geometry (star vs chain) is a representation choice, not a lattice.
A2 boundary conditionsnone in the lattice sense; finite-bath ED truncates the bath, NRG uses a semi-infinite chainBath discretization quality is the dominant concern.
A3 statistics & local dimfermion; impurity local dim d = 4 (∅, ↑, ↓, ↑↓) + bath sites (d=4 each)Cost is impurity 4 × bath 4^{L_bath}.
A4 interaction rangeinteraction is purely local (on the impurity); hybridization is local impurity↔bathOnly the impurity is interacting — this is what makes NRG/CTQMC tractable.
B5 entanglement scalingarea-law along the Wilson/Lanczos bath chain (single cut) → MPS/NRG friendlyLogarithmic discretization gives energy-scale separation NRG exploits.
B6 spectral gapgapless (metallic bath); below T_K a Kondo resonance pins at the Fermi levelThe Kondo screening scale T_K, not a gap, is the relevant low-energy scale.
B7 ground-state orderunique non-degenerate Kondo singlet (local moment screened by the bath)Local-moment regime above T_K, screened singlet below — a crossover, not SSB.
B8 frustrationnone (single impurity); fermionic, but sign-controlled by NRG/EDNo geometric frustration; multichannel variants can give non-Fermi-liquid fixed points.
C9 global symmetrytotal N and total S^z conserved (impurity + bath); symmetric point ε_d=-U/2 adds particle-hole symmetry; SU(2) spin with no fieldPH symmetry at the symmetric point fixes ⟨n_d⟩=1 and protects the NRG iteration.
C10 spatial symmetryn/a (0D); channel/orbital symmetry in multichannel/multiorbital variantsSingle-channel symmetric SIAM is the canonical case.
C11 integrabilityBethe-ansatz solvable (Wiegmann; Tsvelick–Wiegmann) — exact thermodynamicsProvides exact T_K, susceptibility, and Wilson-ratio benchmarks.
C12 sign problemNRG/ED: none · CT-HYB CTQMC: sign-free for the single-orbital SIAMSingle-orbital is benign; multiorbital with spin-flip/pair-hopping is sign-ful (→ multiorbital-hubbard).
D13 regimeground state + finite-T (NRG gives full T-dependence) and dynamics (spectral functions)NRG natively produces thermodynamics and A(ω) down to T→0.
D14 filling / dopingimpurity occupancy ⟨n_d⟩ set by ε_d/U; ⟨n_d⟩=1 at the symmetric point (Kondo regime); mixed-valence near ε_d≈0 or ε_d≈-UTuning ε_d moves between Kondo, empty/full, and mixed-valence regimes.
D15 disorderclean single impurity by default (disorder enters only via lattice/DMFT embedding)
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Local-moment regime (T ≫ T_K) : unscreened impurity spin — Curie-like susceptibility χ_imp ~ 1/T, impurity entropy S_imp → ln 2.
  • Kondo-screened singlet (T ≪ T_K) : moment quenched — Pauli-like (χ_imp finite), S_imp → 0, Kondo resonance in A(ω) at the Fermi level. Crossover, not a phase transition; characterized by the Kondo scale T_K.
  • Mixed valence / empty-orbital : away from the symmetric point, charge fluctuations dominate (⟨n_d⟩ ≠ 1).

Canonical observables

  • Impurity occupancy ⟨n_d⟩, double occupancy ⟨n_{d↑} n_{d↓}⟩; local moment ⟨S_z^2⟩.
  • Kondo temperature T_K; impurity contributions to entropy S_imp(T), specific heat, magnetic susceptibility χ_imp(T).
  • Wilson ratio R_W = 4π²χ_imp/(3γ_imp); impurity spectral function A(ω) (Kondo resonance, Hubbard satellites).

Recommended methods

  • Primary: NRG (numerical renormalization group) — logarithmic bath discretization + iterative diagonalization resolves the exponentially small T_K and the full crossover; the method of record for quantum-impurity problems (per method-property-map.md §ED/RG reasoning).
  • Cross-check: ED with a finite discretized bath (L_bath ≲ 8) as an exact oracle (§ED); CT-HYB CTQMC for a continuous bath at finite-T (§QMC, sign-free single-orbital); DMRG/MPS impurity solver for a long bath chain (§MPS).

Benchmarks

  • Symmetric single-channel Anderson/Kondo model, strong-coupling fixed point: high-T impurity entropy S_imp(T→∞) = ln 2 and Wilson ratio R_W = 2 are reproduced by NRG with high precision (Wilson, Rev. Mod. Phys. 47, 773 (1975); Bulla–Costi–Pruschke review bulla_2007_numerical, Fig. 5). NRG with discretization Λ ≈ 2 already gives static properties to within a few percent.
  • Symmetric Anderson Kondo scale: T_K ∝ √{UΓ}·exp(-πU/8Γ + πΓ/2U) (Haldane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 416 (1978)); the leading exponential T_K ~ exp(-πU/8Γ) sets the exponentially small low-energy scale that NRG is built to resolve. The Bethe-ansatz solution (Tsvelick–Wiegmann, Adv. Phys. 32, 453 (1983)) gives the exact universal thermodynamics against which NRG χ_imp(T) is checked.

Key reference: bulla_2007_numerical — the authoritative review of the numerical renormalization group for quantum-impurity systems (logarithmic discretization, iterative diagonalization, fixed points, thermodynamics, spectral functions, Wilson ratio), the all-details methods source for the Anderson/Kondo impurity.

topo Topological band models 4

quadratic hopping with topology — edge zero modes and Chern numbers

sshdimerized chain; topological edge zero modesn/afree-fermion
$$H = \sum_{n} \left[ t_1\, c^\dagger_{A,n} c_{B,n} + t_2\, c^\dagger_{B,n} c_{A,n+1} + \text{h.c.} \right]$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain, two-site (A/B sublattice) unit cellThe dimerization is the entire story.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (edge states, bulk–boundary correspondence) · PBC (Bloch bands, winding number)OBC is essential to expose the zero-energy edge modes; PBC for the bulk invariant.
A3 statistics & local dimspinless fermion; d = 2 per site (single orbital)Single-particle problem per k; the many-body state is a Slater determinant.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range: nearest-neighbor hopping only (alternating t_1, t_2)Local; no interactions.
B5 entanglement scalingarea law (constant, gapped) — entanglement spectrum carries the topological signature (degeneracy in the topological phase)Free-fermion ground state; entanglement-spectrum degeneracy ↔ edge modes.
B6 spectral gapgapped (bulk gap = 2|t_1 − t_2|) everywhere except the critical point t_1 = t_2 (Dirac point, gapless)Gap closing at t_1=t_2 is the topological phase transition.
B7 ground-state order1D symmetry-protected topological (SPT) phase (t_2>t_1) vs trivial (t_1>t_2) — class BDI / AIII (chiral/sublattice symmetry)Topological phase: winding number ν=1, Zak phase π, protected zero-energy edge states. Trivial: ν=0, Zak phase 0.
B8 frustrationnone (free fermions, bipartite)
C9 global symmetrychiral / sublattice (A/B) symmetry Γ = σ_z (the protecting symmetry; quantizes the winding/Zak phase) + U(1) charge (particle number); time-reversal + particle-hole → class BDIChiral symmetry is what protects the SPT; breaking it (e.g. an on-site staggered potential) trivializes the topology.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation by one unit cell (k); inversionInversion also quantizes the Zak phase (inversion-symmetric SPT).
C11 integrabilityfree-fermion / quadratic → exactly solvable in O(N³) despite the latticeDiagonalize the 2N×2N (or 2×2 Bloch) single-particle Hamiltonian; no many-body numerics needed.
C12 sign problemN/A — free fermions, no Monte Carlo required
D13 regimeground state (T=0) default; quench / dynamics also exactly tractable (quadratic)Half-filled (one fermion per cell) lower band is the canonical ground state.
D14 filling / dopinghalf-filling (lower band filled) is the insulating, topologically nontrivial reference; the gap sits at zero energy
D15 disorderclean by default; bond disorder preserving chiral symmetry keeps the topology (studied as a perturbation)
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed by defaultNon-Hermitian SSH is a heavily studied extension (asymmetric hopping → non-Hermitian skin effect, breakdown of conventional bulk–boundary correspondence).

Phases & order parameters

  • Topological phase (t_2 > t_1) : winding number ν = 1, Zak phase π; under OBC, two exponentially-localized zero-energy edge modes (one per end) — diagnose by the bulk winding number, the Zak/Berry phase, or the OBC edge-state count.
  • Trivial phase (t_1 > t_2) : winding number ν = 0, Zak phase 0; no edge states.
  • Critical point (t_1 = t_2) : bulk gap closes (Dirac point), topological transition.

Canonical observables

  • Bulk band structure / bulk gap = 2|t_1 − t_2|.
  • Winding number ν (chiral invariant) / Zak (Berry) phase (0 or π).
  • OBC edge-state spectrum (zero-energy modes) and edge-mode localization length.
  • Entanglement spectrum (degeneracy = topological marker); single-particle correlation matrix.

Recommended methods

  • Primary: exact free-fermion diagonalization — quadratic Hamiltonian, solved in O(N³) (Bloch bands for the invariant under PBC; real-space 2N×2N matrix for the OBC edge modes), per method-property-map.md C11 free-fermion row.
  • Cross-check: ED small-N as a sanity check; DMRG/MPS to confirm entanglement-spectrum degeneracy and to extend to the interacting / extended-SSH case (where the free-fermion solution no longer applies).

Benchmarks

  • Bulk gap Δ = 2|t_1 − t_2| (PBC, convention H = Σ t_1 c†_A c_B + t_2 c†_B c_{A,n+1} + h.c.); gap closes at t_1 = t_2.
  • Winding number / Zak phase: ν = 1, Zak = π for t_2 > t_1 (topological); ν = 0, Zak = 0 for t_1 > t_2 (trivial) — Asbóth et al. asboth_2015_short.
  • OBC, topological phase (t_2 > t_1): exactly two zero-energy edge modes (one localized at each end), exponentially decaying with length ∝ 1/ln(t_2/t_1); none in the trivial phase.

Key reference: asboth_2015_short — Asbóth, Oroszlány & Pályi, "A Short Course on Topological Insulators": the canonical pedagogical all-details source; its opening SSH chapter develops the dimerized chain, chiral symmetry, the winding number, the Zak phase, bulk–boundary correspondence, and the edge states in full.

haldane-chernChern insulator; anomalous Halln/afree-fermion
$$H = t_1 \sum_{\langle ij\rangle} c^\dagger_i c_j \;+\; t_2 \sum_{\langle\langle ij\rangle\rangle} e^{i\phi_{ij}}\, c^\dagger_i c_j \;+\; M \sum_i \xi_i\, n_i$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry2D honeycomb lattice, two-site (A/B) unit cell, coordination Z = 3Two Dirac points (K, K') in the Brillouin zone are the seat of the topology.
A2 boundary conditionsPBC / torus (Bloch bands, Chern number) · ribbon / cylinder (chiral edge modes, bulk–boundary correspondence)The ribbon geometry exposes the chiral edge states; the torus defines C.
A3 statistics & local dimspinless fermion; d = 2 per site; quadratic (single-particle)d = 2 (single orbital per site); the many-body state is a Slater determinant filling the lower band.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range: real NN hopping + complex NNN hopping + on-site massLocal; no interactions in the canonical model.
B5 entanglement scaling2D area law (gapped); the half-filled lower-band ground state is short-range entangled but carries a nonzero Chern numberFree-fermion ground state; the Chern number is the bulk topological signature (no local order parameter).
B6 spectral gapgapped (band gap at K, K') except on the phase boundary M = ±3\sqrt{3}\, t_2 \sin\phi where one Dirac point closesGap closing at a single Dirac cone = topological transition (C jumps by ±1).
B7 ground-state orderChern insulator / quantum anomalous Hall (topological band, class A, C = ±1) for |M| < |3\sqrt{3}\, t_2 \sin\phi|; trivial band insulator otherwiseTopological phase: one chiral edge mode per edge, quantized σ_xy = ±e²/h. No symmetry breaking — the order is purely band-topological.
B8 frustrationnone (free fermions)
C9 global symmetrycharge U(1) (particle number); time-reversal is broken by the complex t_2 (this is what allows C ≠ 0)Broken time-reversal → class A; the staggered flux carries no net flux but breaks T. The mass term M instead breaks inversion.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k); C_3 rotation; inversion broken by M, T broken by φAt M = 0, \sin\phi \ne 0 inversion is preserved but T is broken (topological); at \phi = 0, M \ne 0 T is preserved but inversion broken (trivial).
C11 integrabilityfree-fermion / quadratic → exactly solvable (diagonalize the 2×2 Bloch Hamiltonian per k, O(N³) real-space)Berry curvature integrated over the BZ gives the integer Chern number.
C12 sign problemN/A — free fermions, no Monte Carlo required (interacting/Haldane–Hubbard extensions are sign-ful)
D13 regimeground state (T = 0) default; quench / Hall-response dynamics also exactly tractable (quadratic)The Chern number and edge spectrum are the targets.
D14 filling / dopinghalf-filling (lower band filled, gap at zero energy) is the topological insulating referenceAt half-filling the Fermi level sits in the gap; the quantized Hall response requires the gap to be at the chemical potential.
D15 disorderclean by default; weak disorder preserves the quantized σ_xy (topological protection) until it closes the mobility gapTopological robustness against disorder is a defining feature of the QAH plateau.
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Chern-insulator (QAH) phase (|M| < |3\sqrt{3}\, t_2 \sin\phi|) : Chern number C = ±1 (sign set by \mathrm{sgn}(\phi)); one chiral edge mode per edge; quantized Hall conductance σ_xy = C e²/h. Diagnose by the BZ-integrated Berry curvature (Chern number), the ribbon edge spectrum, or the Hall conductance.
  • Trivial band insulator (|M| > |3\sqrt{3}\, t_2 \sin\phi|) : C = 0; no chiral edge modes; σ_xy = 0.
  • Transition (M = ±3\sqrt{3}\, t_2 \sin\phi) : one Dirac point closes, C jumps by ±1.

Canonical observables

  • Bulk Bloch band structure / band gap at K, K'.
  • Chern number C (BZ-integrated Berry curvature of the filled band).
  • Hall conductance σ_xy = C e²/h (TKNN / Kubo).
  • Ribbon edge-state spectrum (chiral, gap-traversing) and edge-mode chirality.

Recommended methods

  • Primary: exact free-fermion diagonalization — diagonalize the 2×2 Bloch Hamiltonian on a k-grid for the Chern number / bands, and the real-space ribbon for edge modes, O(N³), per method-property-map.md C11 free-fermion row.
  • Cross-check: ED small torus (Chern number from the many-body twisted-boundary response) as a sanity check; DMRG/MPS on cylinders or VMC/iPEPS for the interacting Haldane–Hubbard extension (where the free-fermion solution breaks and a sign problem appears).

Benchmarks

  • Topological criterion: C = ±1 (QAH) for |M| < |3\sqrt{3}\, t_2 \sin\phi|, C = 0 (trivial) otherwise (convention H = t_1 Σ_⟨ij⟩ c†c + t_2 Σ_⟨⟨ij⟩⟩ e^{iφ} c†c + M Σ ξ_i n_i) — Haldane 1988; reviewed in Hasan & Kane hasan_2010_topological.
  • Quantized Hall conductance: σ_xy = C e²/h = ±e²/h in the topological phase, 0 in the trivial phase (TKNN integer).
  • Bulk–boundary correspondence: a ribbon hosts exactly |C| = 1 chiral edge mode per edge in the topological phase (none in the trivial phase) — the central self-consistency check.

Key reference: hasan_2010_topological — Hasan & Kane, "Colloquium: Topological insulators" (RMP 82, 3045, 2010): the authoritative all-details downloadable review. Section II.B.2 ("Graphene, Dirac electrons, Haldane model") develops the honeycomb Dirac structure, the complex-NNN staggered-flux term, the time-reversal-breaking gap, the Chern number, the chiral edge states, and the quantized Hall response in full — chosen over the (no-arXiv) original because it is downloadable and covers the model end-to-end. The defining paper is Haldane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2015 (1988) (doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.61.2015; predates arXiv).

hofstadterflux per plaquette; butterfly spectrumn/afree-fermion
$$H = -t \sum_{\langle ij\rangle} e^{i\theta_{ij}}\, c^\dagger_i c_j + \text{h.c.}, \qquad \sum_{\square} \theta_{ij} = 2\pi\alpha,\quad \alpha = \frac{p}{q}$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry2D square lattice; magnetic unit cell of q sites at flux p/q (Z = 4)The enlarged magnetic cell (→ q subbands) is the defining structure; reduces to the 1D Harper equation in Landau gauge.
A2 boundary conditionstorus / PBC (magnetic Brillouin zone, Chern/TKNN labels) · cylinder / strip (chiral edge modes in the gaps)The magnetic BZ requires magnetic translation operators; a strip exposes the IQHE edge modes.
A3 statistics & local dimspinless fermion; d = 2 per site; quadratic (single-particle)Single orbital per site; the spectrum is a single-particle band problem (Slater-determinant many-body state).
A4 interaction rangeshort-range: nearest-neighbor hopping with Peierls phasesLocal; no interactions (Hofstadter–Hubbard is the interacting extension).
B5 entanglement scaling2D area law (gapped, when the Fermi level sits in a gap); filled-subband ground states carry nonzero Chern numbersFree-fermion ground state; topology lives in the gap labels, not a local order parameter.
B6 spectral gapself-similar fractal of gaps and q subbands (the butterfly); gapped whenever E_F sits in a butterfly gap, gap closings on subband touchingsThe fractal gap structure as a function of α is the signature; each gap is robust where it is open.
B7 ground-state ordertopological bands labeled by Chern numbers (integer quantum Hall on a lattice, class A)Each filled set of subbands has a total Chern number C; the Hall conductance is σ_xy = C e²/h. No symmetry breaking — purely band-topological.
B8 frustrationnone (free fermions)
C9 global symmetrycharge U(1); magnetic translation symmetry (a projective / ray representation — the two magnetic translations commute only up to a phase)Ordinary translation is broken by the gauge field; the magnetic translation group is the residual symmetry and forces the q-site magnetic cell. Time-reversal is broken by the field.
C10 spatial symmetrymagnetic translations (Z_q-enlarged unit cell → magnetic BZ); point-group symmetry reduced by the fieldMagnetic translations replace ordinary translations; the magnetic BZ is 1/q of the original.
C11 integrabilityfree-fermion / quadratic → exactly solvable via the Harper equation (a q×q Bloch matrix per magnetic crystal momentum), O(N³)Diagonalizing the q×q Harper matrix over the magnetic BZ gives the full butterfly and the Chern labels.
C12 sign problemN/A — free fermions, no Monte Carlo required (Hofstadter–Hubbard / interacting extensions become sign-ful, magnetic-flux sign problem)The magnetic field is itself a generic source of the QMC sign problem in interacting variants.
D13 regimeground state (T = 0) default; spectrum/transport are the targets; dynamics exactly tractable (quadratic)The butterfly and the gap Chern labels are computed once and for all.
D14 filling / dopinggaps open at fillings set by the Diophantine equation r = q\, s + p\, C (TKNN; C = gap Chern number, s integer); the Hall plateau sits at each such commensurate fillingFilling selects which butterfly gap (and hence which Chern number C) determines σ_xy.
D15 disorderclean by default; disorder broadens subbands into Landau-like bands with localized states between the (topologically protected) extended levels — the mechanism of IQHE plateausDisorder is what makes the experimental quantum Hall plateaus flat; the Chern number is robust.
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Integer quantum Hall states (one per butterfly gap) : labeled by the total Chern number C of the filled subbands; quantized Hall conductance σ_xy = C e²/h; chiral edge modes in a strip geometry. Diagnose by the TKNN integers from the Diophantine equation and the strip edge spectrum.
  • The Hofstadter butterfly itself : the spectrum vs α ∈ [0,1], a self-similar fractal; at α = p/q the band splits into exactly q subbands.

Canonical observables

  • Single-particle spectrum vs flux α — the Hofstadter butterfly.
  • Number of subbands (= q at α = p/q) and the butterfly gap structure.
  • Chern number C of each gap (TKNN / Diophantine equation); Hall conductance σ_xy = C e²/h.
  • Strip edge-state spectrum (chiral, gap-traversing).

Recommended methods

  • Primary: exact single-particle diagonalization of the Harper equation — the q×q magnetic-Bloch matrix over the magnetic BZ gives the spectrum, subbands, and Chern labels in O(q³) per k; a strip diagonalization gives the edge modes. Free-fermion / quadratic, per method-property-map.md C11 row.
  • Cross-check: ED on a small torus with magnetic flux quanta for the many-body Chern number; the TKNN / Diophantine equation gives the gap Chern numbers analytically as an independent check.

Benchmarks

  • Subband count: at flux α = p/q (coprime) the spectrum splits into exactly q subbands separated by q − 1 gaps (Hofstadter 1976) hofstadter_1976_energy.
  • Self-similar butterfly: the spectrum as a function of α ∈ [0,1] is a fractal with the same structure recurring at all scales (Hofstadter 1976).
  • Gap Chern numbers: each gap carries an integer C solving the Diophantine equation r = q\, s + C\, p with |C| ≤ q/2 (TKNN 1982); the Hall conductance at that filling is σ_xy = C e²/h.

Key reference: hofstadter_1976_energy — Hofstadter, "Energy levels and wave functions of Bloch electrons in rational and irrational magnetic fields", Phys. Rev. B 14, 2239 (1976): the defining paper that derives the Harper equation, the q-subband structure at rational flux, and the self-similar butterfly spectrum. The TKNN topological labeling (Thouless, Kohmoto, Nightingale, den Nijs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 405 (1982)) supplies the Chern-number / Hall-conductance interpretation. _bib stub — original PRB predates arXiv, no PDF reachable._

kitaev-chainp-wave wire; Majorana end modesn/afree-fermion
$$H = \sum_i \left[ -t\left(c^\dagger_i c_{i+1} + \text{h.c.}\right) - \mu\left(n_i - \tfrac12\right) + \Delta\left(c_i c_{i+1} + \text{h.c.}\right) \right]$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chainThe defining model of a 1D topological superconductor.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (Majorana end modes, ground-state parity degeneracy) · PBC (BdG Bloch bands, Z2 invariant)OBC is essential to expose the Majorana zero modes; PBC for the bulk invariant.
A3 statistics & local dimspinless fermion; d = 2 per site; BdG-quadraticSolved by Bogoliubov–de Gennes diagonalization (pairing → particle-hole-doubled single-particle problem).
A4 interaction rangeshort-range: NN hopping + NN p-wave pairingLocal; no interactions.
B5 entanglement scalingarea law (constant, gapped); ground-state fermion-parity (Majorana) degeneracy under OBCFree-fermion ground state; the topological degeneracy is the entanglement/edge signature.
B6 spectral gapgapped (bulk BdG gap) except at the transition μ = ±2t where the gap closesGap closing at |μ| = 2t is the topological phase transition.
B7 ground-state order1D topological superconductor (class D, Z2 invariant) for |μ| < 2t vs trivial for |μ| > 2tTopological phase: Majorana zero modes localized at the two ends; near-degenerate even/odd-parity ground states.
B8 frustrationnone (free fermions)
C9 global symmetryfermion parity Z2 (P = ∏(1−2n_i)) — pairing breaks charge U(1); particle-hole (BdG) symmetry; time-reversal → class DNo charge conservation: superconducting pairing breaks U(1) down to Z2 parity. The two Majorana-degenerate ground states differ by total fermion parity.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k, PBC); inversionBulk Z2 invariant defined from the BdG Bloch Hamiltonian.
C11 integrabilityfree-fermion / quadratic → exactly solvable (BdG / Bogoliubov diagonalization, O(N³))Quadratic in the fermions; exact spectrum, edge modes, and phase diagram.
C12 sign problemN/A — free fermions, no Monte Carlo required
D13 regimeground state (T=0) default; quench / braiding dynamics also exactly tractable (quadratic)Parity-resolved ground states and the Majorana spectrum are the targets.
D14 filling / dopingcontrolled by μ (no fixed filling — pairing does not conserve particle number); μ = 0 is the particle-hole-symmetric sweet spotμ is the tuning parameter across the topological transition, not a filling constraint.
D15 disorderclean by default; on-site disorder (preserving class D) shifts but does not immediately destroy the topological phase
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Topological superconductor (|μ| < 2t, Δ ≠ 0) : Z2 invariant nontrivial; under OBC, two Majorana zero modes (one at each end) combine into a single delocalized fermion → near-degenerate even/odd fermion-parity ground states. Diagnose by the bulk Z2 invariant, the OBC zero-mode spectrum, and the ground-state parity (near-)degeneracy.
  • Trivial phase (|μ| > 2t) : trivial Z2 invariant; no Majorana end modes, unique ground state.
  • Transition (μ = ±2t) : bulk gap closes.

Canonical observables

  • Bulk BdG band structure / gap; Z2 topological invariant.
  • OBC end-mode spectrum (zero-energy Majoranas) and Majorana localization length.
  • Ground-state fermion-parity (near-)degeneracy energy splitting (exponentially small in N).
  • Majorana wavefunction profiles (perfectly localized at the sweet spot μ=0, t=Δ).

Recommended methods

  • Primary: exact BdG / free-fermion diagonalization — quadratic Hamiltonian solved in O(N³) (Bogoliubov transformation; Bloch BdG bands for the invariant, real-space Nambu matrix for the Majorana end modes), per method-property-map.md C11 free-fermion row.
  • Cross-check: ED small-N (resolve the parity sectors and degeneracy); DMRG/MPS for the interacting Kitaev chain (NN repulsion breaks the free-fermion solution) and to confirm the topological degeneracy via entanglement. The Jordan–Wigner map to the transverse-field Ising chain (transverse-field-ising) gives an independent analytic benchmark.

Benchmarks

  • Topological phase: |μ| < 2t (with Δ ≠ 0); trivial for |μ| > 2t; bulk gap closes at μ = ±2t (convention H = Σ −t(c†c+h.c.) − μ(n−½) + Δ(cc+h.c.)) — Kitaev kitaev_2000_unpaired.
  • OBC topological phase: a Majorana zero mode at each end; the two fermion-parity ground states are degenerate up to a splitting ∝ e^{−N/ξ} (exponentially small in chain length).
  • Sweet spot μ = 0, t = Δ: the end Majoranas are perfectly localized on the two terminal sites (zero localization length), exact zero-energy modes for any N.
  • Jordan–Wigner: the chain maps onto the 1D transverse-field Ising model — the topological (|μ|<2t) phase corresponds to the Ising ordered (ferromagnetic) phase, the transition at |μ|=2t to the Ising critical point.

Key reference: kitaev_2000_unpaired — Kitaev, "Unpaired Majorana fermions in quantum wires": the defining paper introducing the model, the topological vs trivial phases, the Majorana end modes, the bulk Z2 invariant, and the Jordan–Wigner connection to the Ising chain.

disorder Disorder, MBL & open systems 4

random potentials, many-body localization, SYK, and driven-dissipative steady states

anderson-localizationdisordered potential; localized statesn/afree-fermion
$$H = -t \sum_{\langle ij\rangle}\bigl(c^\dagger_i c_j + \text{h.c.}\bigr) \;+\; \sum_i \varepsilon_i\, n_i, \qquad \varepsilon_i \in [-W/2,\,+W/2]\ \text{i.i.d. uniform}$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometrydimension is THE master axis: 1D / 2D / 3D (hyper)cubic, Z=2d1D & 2D (orthogonal): all states localized for any W>0 (lower critical dimension d_c=2); 3D: extended states + mobility edge → metal–insulator transition. Nothing about this model matters more than d.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC · PBC · quasi-1D bars / cylinders (transfer-matrix MacKinnon–Kramer)Transfer-matrix finite-size scaling on long quasi-1D bars of cross-section M^{d-1} is the workhorse for the 3D transition.
A3 statistics & local dima single non-interacting fermion (d=2 per site formally, but no many-body space)The "Hilbert space" is just the L^d lattice sites; cost is polynomial (O(L^{3d}) dense, far less with sparse/transfer methods), not exponential.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (nearest-neighbor hopping) · long-range hopping 1/r^a is a studied variant (power-law random banded matrices)NN hopping with on-site disorder is the standard Anderson model; long-range hopping can change the critical dimension.
B5 entanglement scalingn/a in the many-body sense (single particle). Eigenfunctions: exponentially localized (localized phase) with localization length ξ; extended/critical at the mobility edgeThe relevant "size" is the localization length ξ and the multifractal wavefunction structure at criticality, not entanglement entropy.
B6 spectral gapgapless single-particle band; the key feature is the mobility edge E_c separating localized (band tails) from extended (band center) states (3D)E_c moves with W; when E_c sweeps through the Fermi energy the system undergoes the Anderson metal–insulator transition.
B7 ground-state orderno symmetry-breaking order — the transition is between an Anderson insulator (localized, exponentially small DC conductivity) and a diffusive metal (extended)Order parameter ≈ the typical (geometric-mean) local density of states / inverse participation ratio, not a Landau order parameter.
B8 frustrationnone (single particle, bipartite hypercubic lattice)Disorder, not frustration, is the only complication.
C9 global symmetryU(1) (single-particle number) — but the decisive structure is the symmetry class: orthogonal (time-reversal, no SOC), unitary (broken T, e.g. magnetic field), symplectic (T + spin–orbit)The Wigner-Dyson class controls the critical behavior and whether 2D can delocalize (unitary/symplectic classes can; orthogonal cannot).
C10 spatial symmetrynone per realization (disorder breaks translation); statistical translation/isotropy after disorder averagingEach sample is inhomogeneous; observables are averaged or, better, characterized by their full distribution (broad at criticality).
C11 integrabilitynon-interacting → directly diagonalizable (O(L^{3d}) dense; sparse/transfer-matrix/kernel-polynomial much cheaper)There is no many-body correlation to capture — the entire physics is the localization of single-particle eigenfunctions, accessible from the one-body matrix.
C12 sign problemn/a (single particle, no Monte Carlo over a many-body amplitude)Studied by exact one-body diagonalization, transfer matrices, kernel-polynomial DOS, and the self-consistent / supersymmetric field theories.
D13 regimeeigenstates and single-particle spectrum (T=0 localization properties); conductance/transport via Landauer / KuboOne asks where states localize and how the conductance scales with system size, not a finite-T many-body quantity.
D14 filling / dopingthe Fermi energy / mobility edge position sets metal vs insulator (3D); tuning E_F across E_c is the transitionFilling matters only through which single-particle states are occupied relative to E_c.
D15 disorderquenched on-site disorder is the defining axis — the localization–delocalization transition is tuned by W (and d, and symmetry class)Requires averaging over realizations; distributions are broad and non-self-averaging at criticality (typical ≠ mean) — use geometric means / finite-size scaling.
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closedNon-Hermitian Anderson models (e.g. Hatano–Nelson, imaginary gauge field) are a distinct, actively-studied variant with a different (skin-effect) localization transition.

Phases & order parameters

  • Extended / metallic phase (3D, weak disorder, near band center) : Bloch-like wavefunctions spread over the whole sample; finite DC conductivity; level statistics Wigner-Dyson (GOE for orthogonal class).
  • Localized / Anderson-insulator phase (1D & 2D any W; 3D strong W or band tails) : eigenfunctions decay as e^{-r/ξ}; vanishing DC conductivity; Poisson level statistics.
  • Mobility edge E_c (3D) : separates the two within a single spectrum; at the critical point wavefunctions are multifractal (a continuous set of exponents τ_q/f(α)), level statistics are scale-invariant ("critical statistics").
  • Diagnostics: inverse participation ratio / participation entropy, localization length ξ from transfer matrices, typical DOS (geometric mean), Thouless/dimensionless conductance g, and the multifractal spectrum at the transition.

Canonical observables

  • Localization length ξ(W, E) from transfer-matrix Lyapunov exponents on quasi-1D bars; finite-size scaling of Λ = ξ_M/M (the MacKinnon–Kramer ratio whose M-flow direction distinguishes metal from insulator).
  • Inverse participation ratio P_2 = Σ_i |ψ_i|^4 and its disorder average / multifractal exponents τ_q at the mobility edge.
  • Dimensionless (Thouless) conductance g and its scaling β-function (the basis of the scaling theory of localization).
  • Typical (geometric-mean) local density of states — the natural order parameter that vanishes at localization.

Recommended methods

  • Primary (3D transition): transfer-matrix finite-size scaling on long quasi-1D bars (cross-section M^{d-1}), extracting Λ=ξ_M/M and fitting the crossing / scaling to get W_c and ν. The classic high-precision route (not a many-body harness solver; a one-body linear-algebra calculation).
  • Primary (eigenstates/DOS): exact one-body diagonalization (dense O(L^{3d}) for IPR/multifractality on modest L; sparse / kernel-polynomial / shift-invert for the DOS and interior states on large L). This is "ED" applied to the L^d one-body matrix — polynomial, not d^N.
  • Cross-check: Kubo / Landauer conductance (recursive Green's function) for transport; level-spacing statistics (Wigner-Dyson vs Poisson) as an independent localization diagnostic; self-consistent theory of localization / supersymmetric σ-model for analytic guidance.

Benchmarks

  • 3D Anderson model, box disorder, band center (E=0), orthogonal class: critical disorder W_c ≈ 16.5 t — the standard transfer-matrix value (Slevin–Ohtsuki, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 382 (1999); MacKinnon–Kramer) evers_2007_anderson.
  • 3D orthogonal-class localization-length (correlation-length) exponent ν ≈ 1.57 ± 0.02 — the high-precision transfer-matrix finite-size-scaling result quoted in the review evers_2007_anderson (contrast the ε-expansion ν≈1, noted there as asymptotically inaccurate).
  • 2D orthogonal class: all states localized for any W>0 (no transition), from the one-parameter scaling theory (Abrahams, Anderson, Licciardello & Ramakrishnan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 673 (1979); d_c=2); the unitary and symplectic classes *can* support a 2D transition evers_2007_anderson.

Key reference: evers_2007_anderson — Evers & Mirlin, "Anderson transitions" (Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1355, 2008): the authoritative downloadable all-details review — the scaling theory of localization, the full symmetry-class classification (Wigner-Dyson, chiral, Bogoliubov–de Gennes), critical exponents, multifractality of wavefunctions at the mobility edge, and the σ-model field theory.

mbl-disordered-heisenbergmany-body localization; ETH violationn/aEDDMRGMPS
$$H = J \sum_i \mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_{i+1} \;+\; \sum_i h_i\, S^z_i, \qquad h_i \in [-W,\,+W]\ \text{i.i.d. uniform}$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain (Z=2)1D is where MBL is best established; higher-d MBL stability is debated (avalanche instability).
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (DMRG-X / shift-invert ED) · PBC (clean ED level statistics)PBC restores translation for level-statistics ensembles; OBC is convenient for entanglement cuts and DMRG-X.
A3 statistics & local dimspin-½; d = 2 per site (Jordan-Wigner → interacting spinless fermions)Same 2^N Hilbert space as the clean chain; disorder lifts the need for momentum sectors.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (nearest-neighbor exchange + on-site random field)Locality is essential: it is what allows quasi-local integrals of motion (l-bits) to form in the MBL phase.
B5 entanglement scalingexcited eigenstates: volume-law (thermal, small W) → area-law (MBL, large W)The eigenstate-entanglement transition is the defining MBL diagnostic; area-law excited states are why MPS/DMRG-X can target them.
B6 spectral gapno protecting gap — physics is at finite energy density (mid-spectrum), many-body level spacing ∼ 2^{-N}The relevant scale is the level statistics of bulk eigenstates, not a ground-state gap.
B7 ground-state orderthermal phase: no order (ergodic) · MBL phase: emergent integrability; possible eigenstate (localization-protected) order / spin-glass order in eigenstatesMBL can stabilize order and "forbidden" eigenstate order at high energy density that equilibrium would wash out.
B8 frustrationnone (unfrustrated NN chain); the complication is quenched randomness, not geometric frustrationDisorder, not frustration, drives the physics.
C9 global symmetryU(1) (S^z_tot conserved; random field breaks SU(2)→U(1) and breaks translation)S^z-resolution is the cheap ED/DMRG-X reduction; the random field removes momentum as a good quantum number.
C10 spatial symmetrynone (disorder breaks translation and point group); restored only after disorder averagingEach realization is inhomogeneous; observables are averaged (median/typical) over realizations.
C11 integrabilityclean chain: Bethe-ansatz integrable · thermal phase (W small): non-integrable, chaotic (ETH) · MBL phase: emergent integrability — extensive set of quasi-local integrals of motion (l-bits)The l-bit picture is the central theoretical structure: H = Σ h̃_i τ^z_i + Σ J̃_{ij} τ^z_i τ^z_j + … in dressed pseudospins τ^z (exponentially localized), contrasting the clean chain's Bethe-ansatz integrability.
C12 sign problemn/a — real fields, but studied by ED / shift-invert / Krylov / DMRG-X, not QMC (mid-spectrum excited states + real-time at finite energy density are off-limits to QMC)The target (highly-excited eigenstates, long-time dynamics) is exactly the regime where Monte Carlo has no foothold.
D13 regimeexcited eigenstates / quench dynamics at finite energy density (mid-spectrum, infinite-T ensemble) — the headline regimeNot a ground-state problem: one targets the middle of the many-body spectrum and post-quench dynamics, not E_0.
D14 filling / dopingfixed S^z sector (≈ half-filling in fermion language); usually the S^z_tot=0 / largest sectorFilling fixes the sector size for shift-invert ED.
D15 disorderdisordered (quenched random field) — the defining axis; ergodic ↔ MBL transition tuned by WRequires averaging over many realizations (sample multiplier); the ergodic→MBL crossover is the whole point of the model.
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed (unitary dynamics)Coupling to a bath / dissipation destabilizes MBL — a separate open-system question.

Phases & order parameters

  • Thermal / ergodic phase (small W) : obeys ETH; excited eigenstates have volume-law entanglement; GOE/Wigner-Dyson level statistics (level-spacing ratio ⟨r⟩ ≈ 0.53); DC transport and thermalization after a quench.
  • MBL phase (large W) : ETH-violating; excited eigenstates have area-law entanglement; emergent l-bits (quasi-local integrals of motion); Poisson level statistics (⟨r⟩ ≈ 0.386); no DC transport; only logarithmic-in-time entanglement growth S(t) ∝ ln t after a quench; memory of initial-state imbalance.
  • Diagnostics: level-spacing ratio ⟨r⟩, mid-spectrum entanglement entropy and its variance, post-quench imbalance/return probability, the logarithmic entanglement-growth slope, l-bit localization length.

Canonical observables

  • Adjacent-gap (level-spacing) ratio ⟨r_n⟩ = ⟨min(δ_n,δ_{n+1})/max(δ_n,δ_{n+1})⟩ for mid-spectrum eigenvalues (GOE ≈ 0.5307, Poisson ≈ 0.3863).
  • Bipartite entanglement entropy of mid-spectrum eigenstates (volume vs area law) and its sample-to-sample variance (peaks at the transition).
  • Post-quench imbalance I(t) / staggered-magnetization memory, and entanglement entropy S(t) (linear in thermal phase, ∝ ln t in MBL).
  • All quantities are disorder-averaged (often the median / typical value) over many field realizations.

Recommended methods

  • Primary (eigenstates): shift-invert / Krylov ED for mid-spectrum eigenstates (L ≲ 22–24 after S^z resolution) — gives ⟨r⟩, eigenstate entanglement, and level statistics; the standard MBL workhorse (per method-property-map.md §ED, B5 volume↔area, D15).
  • Primary (deep-MBL eigenstates, larger L): DMRG-X / MPS — exploits the area-law of MBL excited eigenstates to target individual highly-excited states variationally (§MPS, D15 "excited-state area law").
  • Primary (dynamics): TEBD / TDVP for post-quench evolution at moderate times; entanglement grows only logarithmically in the MBL phase, so MPS reaches long times there (§MPS, D13).
  • Cross-check: full ED on small L (exact spectrum / oracle); always average over realizations and report the distribution, not a single sample.

Benchmarks

  • Ergodic→MBL crossover (1D random-field Heisenberg, mid-spectrum, infinite-T ensemble): W_c ≈ 3.5 J (box disorder h_i∈[-W,W]) — the much-cited Pal–Huse / Luitz–Laflorencie–Alet value, with a strong caveat that finite-size drifts and avalanche arguments cast doubt on whether a sharp transition survives L→∞ abanin_2018_colloquium (Luitz, Laflorencie & Alet, Phys. Rev. B 91, 081103 (2015)).
  • Level-spacing ratio: ⟨r⟩ ≈ 0.5307 (GOE, thermal) → ⟨r⟩ ≈ 0.3863 (Poisson, MBL) — the standard ergodicity diagnostic (Oganesyan–Huse, Phys. Rev. B 75, 155111 (2007); Atas et al. 2013) abanin_2018_colloquium.
  • Post-quench entanglement growth: S(t) ∝ ln t in the MBL phase (vs linear in the thermal phase) — the slow-dynamics signature explained by the l-bit dephasing (Žnidarič et al. 2008; Bardarson–Pollmann–Moore 2012) abanin_2018_colloquium.

Key reference: abanin_2018_colloquium — Abanin, Altman, Bloch & Serbyn, "Colloquium: Many-body localization, thermalization, and entanglement" (Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 021001, 2019): the authoritative downloadable all-details review — ETH and its MBL breakdown, the random-field XXZ/Heisenberg chain, the l-bit (quasi-local integrals of motion) picture, area-law excited-state entanglement, logarithmic entanglement growth, level statistics, eigenstate order, and the experimental platforms.

sachdev-ye-kitaevmaximally chaotic; strange metaln/aSchwinger–Dyson
$$H = \sum_{i<j<k<l} J_{ijkl}\, \chi_i \chi_j \chi_k \chi_l, \qquad \overline{J_{ijkl}} = 0,\quad \overline{J_{ijkl}^2} = \frac{3!\,J^2}{N^3}$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry0+1-dimensional (quantum mechanics); no lattice, no geometry — all-to-all coupling among N MajoranasThere is no notion of position, distance, or dimension; "geometry" is the complete graph on N sites.
A2 boundary conditionsN/A — no lattice, hence no boundary conditionsA single quantum-mechanical degree-of-freedom cluster of N Majoranas.
A3 statistics & local dimMajorana fermions (χ_i); N Majoranas → Hilbert dimension 2^{N/2} (complex-fermion variant: Dirac fermions, d = 2 per mode)Pairs of Majoranas form a qubit, so N Majoranas span 2^{N/2} states — the ED wall.
A4 interaction rangeall-to-all (infinite-range), 4-body random — the opposite extreme of short-rangeEvery quartet (i,j,k,l) interacts; this infinite-range randomness is what enables the melonic large-N solution.
B5 entanglement scalingvolume-law (eigenstates are highly entangled; the thermofield-double / ground state has near-maximal entanglement)No spatial area law (no geometry); tensor-network methods do not apply.
B6 spectral gapgapless / no quasiparticles; conformal (scale-invariant) IR with a continuum of excitationsThe IR is governed by a conformal Green's function, not by particle-like poles — a non-Fermi liquid.
B7 ground-state ordernon-Fermi liquid / strange metal: conformal IR, no quasiparticles, extensive T→0 entropy; holographically dual to AdS₂ / near-extremal black holesNo symmetry-breaking order parameter; characterized by the conformal exponents, the chaos rate, and the residual entropy.
B8 frustrationdisorder-induced (the random all-to-all couplings produce a frustrated, glass-free but highly entangled landscape)The randomness, not geometry, drives the complexity; the model is a non-glassy quantum liquid.
C9 global symmetryMajorana version: fermion parity Z_2 only (no charge) · complex-fermion version: U(1) chargeDisorder average restores statistical homogeneity; individual realizations have only parity (or U(1)).
C10 spatial symmetryN/A — no lattice; large-N replica / O(N) structure after disorder averagingNo translation or point group; the relevant structure is the replica-diagonal GΣ bilocal field.
C11 integrabilitysolvable in the large-N limit (melonic dominance → Schwinger–Dyson equations, conformal IR); finite-N is non-integrable / chaotic → EDLarge N: closed GΣ equations. Finite N: fully chaotic (random-matrix level statistics), requires exact diagonalization.
C12 sign problemN/A in the large-N (analytic) solution; finite-N studied by ED (no Monte Carlo). Real-time / many-replica numerics can be sign-fulThe standard route is analytic large-N + finite-N ED, not QMC.
D13 regimefinite temperature (conformal IR, free energy, entropy) and real-time chaos / dynamics (OTOC, spectral form factor) are the focus; ground state for the residual entropyThe chaos, scrambling, and thermodynamics — not a ground-state energy — are the headline targets.
D14 filling / dopingMajorana version: half-filling fixed by particle–hole structure · complex-fermion version: charge Q is a tuning parameter (compressibility)Filling matters only in the complex-fermion (charged) variant.
D15 disorderquenched disorder is intrinsic — the random couplings J_{ijkl}; physical quantities are disorder-averaged (self-averaging at large N)The disorder average is part of the model definition, not an optional complication; it is what produces the O(N)/replica structure.
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closedNon-Hermitian and Lindbladian SYK are studied extensions.

Phases & order parameters

  • Non-Fermi-liquid / conformal "strange metal" phase : no order parameter. Diagnostics are the conformal fermion dimension Δ = 1/q (= 1/4 for q = 4), the maximal Lyapunov exponent, and the extensive residual entropy.
  • (Coupled-SYK / complex-SYK extensions) : a low-temperature crossover to a Fermi-liquid or a wormhole/gapped phase, diagnosed by the same conformal-vs-gapped Green's function.

Canonical observables

  • Disorder-averaged two-point function G(τ) = \overline{⟨T\chi_i(τ)\chi_i(0)⟩} and its conformal IR form (fermion dimension Δ = 1/q).
  • Free energy, entropy, and the extensive zero-temperature entropy S_0 = N s_0.
  • Out-of-time-order correlator (OTOC) → Lyapunov exponent λ_L (chaos / scrambling).
  • Spectral form factor and level statistics (random-matrix / ramp-plateau structure) at finite N.

Recommended methods

  • Primary: large-N Schwinger–Dyson (melonic) equations — the disorder-averaged GΣ self-consistent equations solved numerically (iteration on the imaginary-time grid) give the Green's function, free energy, entropy, and conformal exponents. Analytic / numerical-saddle, not a harness lattice solver.
  • Cross-check: ED at finite N (build the 2^{N/2} Majorana Hamiltonian for one or many disorder realizations, diagonalize, average) — gives the spectral form factor, level statistics, OTOC, and entropy, and tests the approach to the large-N predictions, per method-property-map.md ED row (volume-law, small N).

Benchmarks

  • Maximal chaos: the Lyapunov exponent saturates the chaos bound, λ_L = 2πk_BT/ℏ (Eq. 12.52 of the review; the bound λ_L ≤ 2πk_BT/ℏ is conjectured for all strongly-interacting systems) — chowdhury_2021_sachdev.
  • Conformal fermion dimension: Δ = 1/q = 1/4 for the q = 4 model (the IR Green's function G(τ) ∝ \mathrm{sgn}(τ)/|τ|^{2Δ}) — chowdhury_2021_sachdev.
  • Extensive zero-temperature entropy: S_0/N = s_0 ≈ 0.2324\,k_B per fermion for the q = 4 Majorana model (Kitaev; Maldacena–Stanford) — a non-Fermi-liquid hallmark, reviewed in chowdhury_2021_sachdev.

Key reference: chowdhury_2021_sachdev — Chowdhury, Georges, Parcollet & Sachdev, "Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev models and beyond: Window into non-Fermi liquids" (RMP 94, 035004, 2022): the authoritative downloadable all-details review covering the model definition, the large-N melonic / Schwinger–Dyson solution, the conformal IR, maximal chaos, the residual entropy, finite-N numerics, the holographic dual, and the connections to strange metals.

dissipative-spin-lindbladdriven-dissipative; Lindblad steady staten/aEDTEBDTDVP
$$\frac{d\rho}{dt} = -i[H,\rho] + \sum_k\Bigl(L_k\,\rho\,L_k^\dagger - \tfrac12\{L_k^\dagger L_k,\,\rho\}\Bigr) \equiv \mathcal{L}\rho$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain (boundary-driven transport) · 2D lattice (driven-dissipative arrays)Boundary-driven XXZ chain is the canonical transport setup; 2D driven-dissipative lattices (cavity/Rydberg arrays) host steady-state phase transitions.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (boundary driving — jumps act only at the ends) · PBC (bulk dissipation) · semi-infinite leadsBoundary driving requires OBC by definition; bulk dissipation can use PBC.
A3 statistics & local dimspin-½; the density matrix doubles the space: d²=4 per site, total 4ᴺ (vectorized)The blow-up (vs d for a closed system) is what makes vectorized-Liouvillian ED hit a wall around N≈8–10 spins.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range coherent coupling (NN) + local (single-site) jump operatorsLocality of both H and L_k is what makes MPDO / dissipative-TEBD viable.
B5 entanglement scalingsteady state generally has operator-space entanglement (mixed-state correlations); area-law-like for gapped dissipative steady states, can grow near criticalityTensor-network cost is set by the operator-space (MPDO) bond dimension, the open-system analog of χ.
B6 spectral gapLiouvillian gap Δ_𝓛 = -max Re λ_{≠0} (the smallest nonzero |Re λ|) sets the asymptotic relaxation rate; closes at a dissipative phase transitionThe relevant gap is of the non-Hermitian 𝓛, not of H; a closing Liouvillian gap (in the thermodynamic limit) signals a dissipative phase transition or slow/algebraic relaxation.
B7 ground-state ordersteady-state order ρ_ss instead of a ground state: dissipative phases (e.g. ordered vs disordered NESS) separated by dissipative phase transitions; bistability/limit cycles possibleNo variational ground state — the analog of "the phase" is the structure of the nonequilibrium steady state and any transition between such states.
B8 frustrationnone required; competition is between coherent drive and incoherent dissipation, not geometric frustrationThe driving-vs-dissipation balance plays the role frustration plays in closed models.
C9 global symmetryweak vs strong symmetries of the Liouvillian — a *strong* symmetry (U commutes with H and every L_k) gives conserved quantities and multiple steady states; a *weak* symmetry (only the full 𝓛 is invariant) just block-diagonalizes 𝓛This weak/strong distinction is special to open systems and governs steady-state degeneracy / decoherence-free subspaces.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (bulk dissipation) · only end-to-end / inversion for boundary-driven chainsTranslation block-diagonalizes 𝓛 for bulk-dissipative lattices; boundary driving breaks it.
C11 integrabilitygeneric driven-dissipative 𝓛: non-integrable · special cases (boundary-driven XXZ) admit exact matrix-product steady statesProsen's matrix-product-operator ansatz gives exact NESS and current scaling for certain boundary-driven integrable chains — rare analytic benchmarks.
C12 sign problemn/a in the standard routes (vectorized-𝓛 ED, MPDO/dissipative-TEBD, quantum trajectories); real-time/open Monte Carlo can have sign issuesThe workhorses are ED of 𝓛, tensor networks for ρ, and trajectory averaging — not equilibrium QMC.
D13 regimenonequilibrium dynamics / steady state (NESS) — relaxation under 𝓛 and the t→∞ ρ_ss; the defining regimeNot equilibrium and not a ground state: the targets are the steady state, the relaxation (Liouvillian gap), and transport.
D14 filling / dopingS^z (magnetization) is generally not conserved once decay/injection jumps act; a boundary chemical-potential bias drives a spin currentDrive/dissipation pump magnetization; the analog of "doping" is the imposed boundary bias Γ_L≠Γ_R.
D15 disorderclean by default; disordered jump rates / fields are a studied extension (dissipation-assisted or -hindered localization)Disorder + dissipation is its own research direction (stability of MBL to a bath).
D16 hermiticitynon-Hermitian / open (Lindblad) — the defining axis: complex Liouvillian spectrum, biorthogonal eigenmodes, ρ_ss = zero-mode right eigenvector, no standard variational principleThis is the whole point of the card: closed-system ground-state machinery does not apply; one works with the density matrix / superoperator or unravels into quantum trajectories.

Phases & order parameters

  • Nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) ρ_ss : the unique (generically) zero-eigenvalue right eigenvector of 𝓛; its observables (steady-state magnetization, correlations, current) characterize the "phase".
  • Dissipative phase transition : a nonanalyticity of ρ_ss (and a closing Liouvillian gap in the thermodynamic limit) as drive/dissipation are tuned — e.g. ordered ↔ disordered steady-state magnetization, bistability, or a limit cycle.
  • Transport (boundary-driven chain) : steady-state spin current j and its system-size scaling j ∼ N^{-α}ballistic (α=0), diffusive (α=1), or anomalous/superdiffusive depending on the XXZ anisotropy Δ (KPZ superdiffusion at the isotropic point).
  • Diagnostics: Liouvillian gap Δ_𝓛 (relaxation rate), steady-state order parameters, two-point steady-state correlators, the full spectrum of 𝓛 in the complex plane.

Canonical observables

  • Steady-state expectation values ⟨O⟩_ss = Tr(O ρ_ss) — magnetization, density, correlations.
  • Liouvillian spectrum {λ} (complex) and the Liouvillian gap Δ_𝓛 → asymptotic relaxation time τ ∼ 1/Δ_𝓛.
  • Steady-state spin/particle current j and its scaling with N (transport class).
  • Purity Tr(ρ²), operator-space (mixed-state) entanglement, and full counting statistics of the current.

Recommended methods

  • Primary (small N): vectorized-Liouvillian ED — build 𝓛 as a 4ᴺ×4ᴺ matrix, get ρ_ss as its zero (right) eigenvector and Δ_𝓛 from the next eigenvalue; exact but capped near N≈8–10 by the d²ᴺ wall (per method-property-map.md §ED with the open-system doubling, D16).
  • Primary (1D / larger N): matrix-product density operators (MPDO) + dissipative TEBD/TDVP — evolve ρ (or its purification) as a tensor network in operator space to reach the steady state; the open-system analog of DMRG/TEBD (§MPS, A1 1D, A4 local jumps).
  • Primary (sampling / larger systems): quantum trajectories (Monte Carlo wavefunction / stochastic unravelling) — average many stochastic pure-state trajectories (deterministic non-Hermitian evolution + random quantum jumps) to reconstruct ρ; trades the density-matrix cost for d-dimensional states × samples, and integrates naturally with t-DMRG.
  • Cross-check: corner-space renormalization (2D lattices); exact matrix-product steady states (boundary-driven integrable XXZ) as an analytic benchmark; mean-field for a phase-diagram sketch.

Benchmarks

  • Liouvillian gap → relaxation: the asymptotic decay rate toward ρ_ss is set by Δ_𝓛 = -max_{λ≠0} Re λ, with relaxation time τ ∼ 1/Δ_𝓛; a closing gap (in N→∞) marks a dissipative phase transition (Kessler et al., Phys. Rev. A 86, 012116 (2012)).
  • Boundary-driven XXZ spin transport: NESS current scaling j∼N^{-α} is ballistic (Δ<1), diffusive (Δ>1), and superdiffusive / KPZ (α=2/3) at the isotropic point Δ=1 — exact matrix-product NESS and large-scale simulation (Prosen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 217206 (2011); Žnidarič 2011; reviewed in the open-many-body literature, cf. daley_2014_quantum).
  • Steady-state magnetization across a driven-dissipative phase transition (e.g. dissipative TFIM/XYZ) jumps/kinks at the critical drive-to-dissipation ratio — the dissipative-phase-transition order-parameter signature.

Key reference: daley_2014_quantum — Daley, "Quantum trajectories and open many-body quantum systems" (Adv. Phys. 63, 77, 2014): the best downloadable lattice/methods-focused all-details source — the Lindblad master equation, the quantum-trajectories (Monte Carlo wavefunction) method and its physical (continuous-measurement) interpretation, and crucially its integration with time-dependent DMRG for open many-body lattices, with worked AMO examples. Chosen over Sieberer–Buchhold–Diehl (Keldysh field theory, arXiv:1512.00637) because this card's operational focus is the lattice numerical toolkit (trajectories + tensor networks), not the field-theoretic formulation.

bosons Bosons & Rydberg arrays 2

lattice bosons and Rydberg blockade — superfluid–Mott transition and quantum scars

bose-hubbardsuperfluid–Mott transition; lattice bosonssign-freeQMCDMRGMPS
$$H = -t \sum_{\langle ij\rangle} \left( b^\dagger_i b_j + \text{h.c.} \right) + \frac{U}{2} \sum_i n_i (n_i - 1) - \mu \sum_i n_i$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain · 2D square (Z=4) · 3D cubic (Z=6); any optical-lattice geometryEach dimension has a well-characterized SF–Mott transition.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (DMRG) · PBC (ED/QMC) · cylinder (2D DMRG); trap potential in experimentsA harmonic trap produces the "wedding-cake" shells of alternating SF/Mott regions.
A3 statistics & local dimsoft-core boson, local dim d = n_max + 1 (truncated)Hard-core limit d = 2 maps to XY/XXZ; soft-core needs n_max convergence (cost ∝ d·χ³ in MPS).
A4 interaction rangeshort-range: NN hopping + on-site U (extended Bose-Hubbard adds NN V, giving supersolid/density-wave)Local — area-law compatible.
B5 entanglement scalingMott (gapped): area law · superfluid (gapless): area-law-ish in 2D/3D, area+log in 1D (c=1 Luttinger liquid)1D SF is a critical Luttinger liquid; gapped Mott is the cheap regime for tensor networks.
B6 spectral gapMott insulator: gapped (incompressible, charge gap ∝ U) · superfluid: gapless (sound mode, compressible)The Mott gap and compressibility κ = ∂n/∂μ are the order diagnostics.
B7 ground-state ordersuperfluid (off-diagonal long-range order, ⟨b^\dagger_i b_j⟩ → const, condensate) ↔ Mott insulator (no ODLRO, integer filling, gapped)The SF–Mott quantum phase transition; SF spontaneously breaks the U(1) phase.
B8 frustrationnone on bipartite lattices; geometric frustration possible (triangular → frustrated/supersolid)Bipartite Bose-Hubbard is unfrustrated and sign-free.
C9 global symmetryU(1) particle number (N = Σ n_i conserved); the SF phase spontaneously breaks U(1) phase rotationThe conserved N blocks the Hamiltonian and is exploited by ED/DMRG/QMC.
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k), point group, inversion/parityBlock-diagonalizes ED; Mott lobes respect translation, SF is uniform.
C11 integrability1D non-integrable (generic) — except the hard-core limit, which is free-fermion (Jordan-Wigner)The hard-core point gives exact 1D benchmarks; the soft-core model needs full numerics.
C12 sign problemsign-free (bosonic, positive worldline weights) on any lattice/fillingThe defining advantage: worm-algorithm / SSE QMC is numerically exact at scale — the workhorse method.
D13 regimeground state (T=0, SF–Mott phase diagram) default; finite-T (thermal SF, BKT in 2D) and real-time quench dynamics all standardCold-atom quench experiments probe SF→Mott dynamics directly.
D14 filling / dopingcommensurate (integer) filling → Mott insulator at small t/U; incommensurate filling → superfluidMott lobes occur only at integer n; off-integer the system is always (compressible) SF.
D15 disorderclean by default; on-site disorder + interactions → Bose glass (compressible, gapless, insulating)The disordered Bose-Hubbard model is the canonical Bose-glass platform.
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed

Phases & order parameters

  • Superfluid : off-diagonal long-range order ⟨b^\dagger_i b_j⟩ (condensate fraction / superfluid stiffness ρ_s), gapless, compressible (κ > 0); spontaneously breaks U(1). Occurs at large t/U and at any incommensurate filling.
  • Mott insulator : integer filling n ∈ ℤ, gapped (charge gap Δ ∝ U), incompressible (κ = 0), no ODLRO. Occurs in lobes at small t/U and commensurate filling.
  • SF–Mott transition : two universality classes — the Mott-lobe tip (fixed integer density) is in the (d+1)D XY universality class with dynamical exponent z=1; the generic lobe boundary (density-changing) is mean-field-like with z=2.

Canonical observables

  • Energy per site E/N; density n and compressibility κ = ∂n/∂μ (zero in Mott, finite in SF).
  • Single-particle correlator ⟨b^\dagger_i b_j⟩ / condensate fraction; superfluid stiffness ρ_s (winding number in QMC); momentum distribution n(k) (the experimentally imaged quantity).
  • Mott gap Δ = E(N+1) + E(N-1) - 2E(N); phase-boundary (t/U)_c of each lobe.

Recommended methods

  • Primary (any dimension, sign-free): QMC — worm-algorithm / SSE; numerically exact at large N and finite T, the standard benchmark for the SF–Mott phase diagram (per method-property-map.md §QMC, C12 sign-free).
  • Primary (1D / ladders): DMRG/MPS — near-exact in 1D, U(1) N conservation; converge n_max and χ (§MPS).
  • Cross-check: ED small-cluster oracle (fixed-N sector); mean-field / Gutzwiller for a quick phase-boundary sketch (becomes exact as Z → ∞).

Benchmarks

  • 1D, n = 1 SF–Mott (Mott-lobe tip): (t/U)_c ≈ 0.2974(3) — DMRG (Kühner-White-Monien, PRB 61, 12474 (2000); consistent with Läuchli-Kollath). Convention H = -t Σ(b†b+h.c.) + (U/2)Σ n(n-1).
  • 2D square, n = 1: (t/U)_c = (J/U)_c = 0.05974(3) — worm-algorithm QMC (Capogrosso-Sansone et al., PRA 77, 015602 (2008)).
  • 3D cubic, mean-field (Mott-tip estimate): U_c/(z t) ≈ 5.83 at the n=1 tip (z = 6), the Gutzwiller/strong-coupling result — exact-in-Z→∞ baseline, corrected downward by fluctuations bloch_2007_many.

Key reference: bloch_2007_many — Reviews of Modern Physics "Many-Body Physics with Ultracold Gases"; the all-details downloadable source for the Bose-Hubbard model in optical lattices — derives H from the continuum, lays out the SF–Mott transition and phase diagram, the Mott-lobe structure, mean-field/Gutzwiller treatment, and the experimental signatures (momentum distribution, the Greiner SF→Mott observation). (The defining theory paper is Fisher-Weichman-Grinstein-Fisher, PRB 40, 546 (1989); no arXiv preprint exists, so it would be a stub — this RMP review is preferred as the full-text source covering the same physics.)

rydberg-pxpRydberg blockade; quantum scarsn/aEDTDVPMPS
$$H = \Omega \sum_i P_{i-1}\, \sigma^x_i\, P_{i+1} \;-\; \Delta \sum_i n_i$$
AxisValueNote
A1 dimension & geometry1D chain (Z=2); also 2D arrays (square / other tweezer geometries)The 1D chain is the canonical scar platform; 2D PXP also shows scarring.
A2 boundary conditionsOBC (tweezer chain / DMRG) · PBC (ED, clean momentum sectors)Revival fidelity and the scar tower are cleanest with translation symmetry (PBC).
A3 statistics & local dimspin-1/2 / two-level atom; d = 2 per site, but a constrained Hilbert space (no two adjacent excitations)Constraint → Fibonacci-dimensional space, dim ∼ φ^N, φ = (1+√5)/2 (golden ratio), not 2^N.
A4 interaction rangeshort-range (NN blockade + on-site drive in the PXP limit)Physical van-der-Waals tail is 1/r^6; the PXP limit keeps only the NN hard constraint.
B5 entanglement scalingvolume law for generic eigenstates (ETH bulk) · sub-thermal / anomalously low entanglement for the scar-tower statesThe scar subspace is the exception that makes MPS capture the revival dynamics to long times.
B6 spectral gapno protecting gap (non-integrable chaotic spectrum); the scar tower sits at ≈ equal energy spacing inside the bulkScars are special excited states embedded in a thermal continuum, not a low-energy gap structure.
B7 ground-state orderdisordered (paramagnetic) at small/negative Δ · Z₂ (period-2) ordered "antiferromagnetic" phase at suitable Δ > 0The detuned ground state breaks translation by one site (⟨Z₂⟩ order); the scar physics is a dynamical, not ground-state, phenomenon.
B8 frustrationnone (constraint, not competing couplings)The blockade is a kinematic constraint rather than frustrated exchange.
C9 global symmetryZ_2 (spatial inversion / reflection); particle-hole-like spectral reflection of the PXP spectrumNo U(1): the drive does not conserve excitation number (Δ=0 PXP).
C10 spatial symmetrytranslation (k), inversion/parityScar states carry definite momentum (k=0 and k=π); used to resolve the tower in ED.
C11 integrabilitynon-integrable (level repulsion, ETH for the bulk) — but hosts quantum many-body scars (weak ergodicity breaking, ETH violated only in the scar subspace)The scarred subspace is approximately decoupled from the thermal bulk (an approximate su(2) "spectrum-generating" algebra).
C12 sign problemn/a — this is a real-time-dynamics / ED-MPS target, not a QMC targetQuench dynamics from |Z₂⟩ is the workhorse calculation; no Monte Carlo sampling.
D13 regimereal-time quench dynamics (revivals from |Z₂⟩) is the defining regime; also full-spectrum (ED) and ground state (detuned phase)|Z₂⟩ is an infinite-temperature state for the constrained ensemble, yet shows periodic revivals.
D14 filling / dopingn/a (spin/qubit model; detuning Δ plays the role of a chemical potential for excitations)Tuning Δ drives the disordered ↔ Z₂-ordered transition.
D15 disorderclean (translation-invariant) by defaultSite/detuning disorder can be added (tweezer arrays), tuning toward localization.
D16 hermiticityHermitian / closed (unitary quench)Dissipation (atom loss, spontaneous emission) is a separate open-system extension.

Phases & order parameters

  • Disordered / paramagnetic (small or negative Δ) : no broken symmetry; short-range correlations.
  • Z₂ (period-2 "antiferromagnetic") ordered phase (suitable Δ > 0) : staggered Rydberg density ⟨n_i⟩ = n̄ ± δ(-1)^i, order parameter ⟨Z₂⟩ (structure-factor peak at q=π); the ground state is close to the |•◦•◦…⟩ pattern. The disordered→Z₂ transition is in the (1+1)D Ising universality class.
  • Quantum many-body scars (dynamical, all Δ≈0) : a tower of ≈ equally-spaced special eigenstates with anomalously large overlap on |Z₂⟩; diagnosed by long-lived revivals of the |Z₂⟩ autocorrelation/fidelity and by the sub-thermal entanglement of the tower states.

Canonical observables

  • Quench from |Z₂⟩: return probability / fidelity |⟨Z₂|ψ(t)⟩|², domain-wall or staggered-magnetization dynamics, entanglement-entropy growth.
  • Eigenstate diagnostics: overlap |⟨Z₂|E_n⟩|² vs energy (the scar tower), entanglement entropy vs energy (scars are outliers), level-spacing statistics (Wigner-Dyson for the bulk → non-integrable).
  • Ground-state (detuned) phase: staggered density / ⟨Z₂⟩ order parameter; Hilbert-space dimension growth ∼ φ^N.

Recommended methods

  • Primary: ED — small constrained chains (N ≲ 32, Fibonacci-reduced dimension after symmetry) give the full spectrum, the scar tower, level statistics, and exact quench dynamics; the universal oracle here (per method-property-map.md §ED, A3/C10).
  • Primary (longer times / larger N): MPS / TDVP — the scar subspace's sub-thermal entanglement keeps the bond dimension manageable out to many revival periods (§MPS, D13); standard TEBD/TDVP for the constrained chain.
  • Cross-check: QCS (circuit / state-vector simulation) for the same quench; reproduce against Rydberg-array experimental revivals.

Benchmarks

  • Constrained Hilbert-space dimension grows as the Fibonacci sequence, dim ∼ φ^N with φ = (1+√5)/2 ≈ 1.618 (PBC: dim = L_N Lucas number; OBC: Fibonacci) — the kinematic signature of the infinite blockade serbyn_2020_quantum.
  • |Z₂⟩ quench shows periodic revivals of the return probability with period T_rev ≈ 2π/(1.3–1.5 Ω) (i.e. an effective frequency slightly above the bare Ω) — the original observation in Rydberg arrays serbyn_2020_quantum.
  • Scar-tower eigenstates are approximately equally spaced in energy (spacing ≈ ΔE_scar, the inverse revival period), with anomalously large |⟨Z₂|E_n⟩|² standing out against the thermal continuum serbyn_2020_quantum.

Key reference: serbyn_2020_quantum — pedagogical Nature Physics review of quantum many-body scars and weak ergodicity breaking; works the PXP model explicitly (Eq. 1, the projector-dressed drive), the |Z₂⟩-quench revivals, the scar tower of special eigenstates with enhanced |Z₂⟩ overlap, the approximate spectrum-generating algebra, and the MPS/TDVP analysis — the best single downloadable all-details source. (The defining theory paper is Turner-Michailidis-Abanin-Serbyn-Papić, arXiv:1711.03528; this review subsumes and contextualizes it.)