Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

A stabilizer code model with non-invertible symmetries: Strange fractons, confinement, and non-commutative and non-Abelian fusion rules

Published 18 Sep 2023 in hep-th, cond-mat.str-el, and quant-ph | (2309.10037v4)

Abstract: We introduce a stabilizer code model with a qutrit at every edge on a square lattice and with non-invertible plaquette operators. The degeneracy of the ground state is topological as in the toric code, and it also has the usual deconfined excitations consisting of pairs of electric and magnetic charges. However, there are novel types of confined fractonic excitations composed of a cluster of adjacent faces with vanishing flux. They manifest confinement, and even larger configurations of these fractons are fully immobile although they acquire emergent internal degrees of freedom. Deconfined excitations change their nature in presence of these fractonic defects. As for instance, fractonic defects can absorb magnetic charges making magnetic monopoles exist while electric charges acquire restricted mobility. Furthermore, some generalized symmetries can annihilate any ground state and also the full sector of fully mobile excitations. All these properties can be captured via a novel type of \textit{non-commutative} and \textit{non-Abelian} fusion category in which the product is associative but does not commute, and can be expressed as a sum of (operator) equivalence classes. Generalized non-invertible symmetries give rise to the feature that the fusion products form a non-unital category without a proper identity. We show that a variant of this model features a deconfined fracton liquid phase and a phase where the dual (magnetic) strings have condensed.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (70)
  1. Davide Gaiotto, Anton Kapustin, Nathan Seiberg,  and Brian Willett, “Generalized Global Symmetries,” JHEP 02, 172 (2015), arXiv:1412.5148 [hep-th] .
  2. John McGreevy, “Generalized Symmetries in Condensed Matter,”   (2022), 10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-040721-021029, arXiv:2204.03045 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  3. Sakura Schafer-Nameki, “ICTP Lectures on (Non-)Invertible Generalized Symmetries,”  (2023), arXiv:2305.18296 [hep-th] .
  4. Shu-Heng Shao, “What’s Done Cannot Be Undone: TASI Lectures on Non-Invertible Symmetry,”   (2023), arXiv:2308.00747 [hep-th] .
  5. Yichul Choi, Ho Tat Lam,  and Shu-Heng Shao, “Noninvertible Global Symmetries in the Standard Model,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 161601 (2022), arXiv:2205.05086 [hep-th] .
  6. Pavel Putrov and Juven Wang, “Categorical Symmetry of the Standard Model from Gravitational Anomaly,”   (2023), arXiv:2302.14862 [hep-th] .
  7. Clay Cordova and Seth Koren, “Higher Flavor Symmetries in the Standard Model,” Annalen Phys. 535, 2300031 (2023), arXiv:2212.13193 [hep-ph] .
  8. Nathan Seiberg and Shu-Heng Shao, “Majorana chain and Ising model – (non-invertible) translations, anomalies, and emanant symmetries,”   (2023), arXiv:2307.02534 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  9. Rahul M. Nandkishore and Michael Hermele, “Fractons,” Ann. Rev. Condensed Matter Phys. 10, 295–313 (2019), arXiv:1803.11196 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  10. Michael Pretko, Xie Chen,  and Yizhi You, “Fracton Phases of Matter,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 35, 2030003 (2020), arXiv:2001.01722 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  11. Cenke Xu, “Novel algebraic boson liquid phase with soft graviton excitations,” arXiv preprint cond-mat/0602443  (2006).
  12. Cenke Xu and Petr Hořava, “Emergent gravity at a lifshitz point from a bose liquid on the lattice,” Phys. Rev. D 81, 104033 (2010).
  13. Michael Pretko, “Generalized electromagnetism of subdimensional particles: A spin liquid story,” Phys. Rev. B 96, 035119 (2017a).
  14. Michael Pretko, “Subdimensional particle structure of higher rank u⁢(1)𝑢1u(1)italic_u ( 1 ) spin liquids,” Phys. Rev. B 95, 115139 (2017b).
  15. Nathan Seiberg, “Field Theories With a Vector Global Symmetry,” SciPost Phys. 8, 050 (2020), arXiv:1909.10544 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  16. Daniel Bulmash and Maissam Barkeshli, “Generalized U⁢(1)𝑈1U(1)italic_U ( 1 ) Gauge Field Theories and Fractal Dynamics,”  (2018), arXiv:1806.01855 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  17. Han Ma, Michael Hermele,  and Xie Chen, “Fracton topological order from the higgs and partial-confinement mechanisms of rank-two gauge theory,” Phys. Rev. B 98, 035111 (2018).
  18. Andrey Gromov, ‘‘Towards classification of fracton phases: The multipole algebra,” Phys. Rev. X 9, 031035 (2019a).
  19. Nathan Seiberg and Shu-Heng Shao, “Exotic Symmetries, Duality, and Fractons in 2+1-Dimensional Quantum Field Theory,” SciPost Phys. 10, 027 (2021a), arXiv:2003.10466 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  20. Nathan Seiberg and Shu-Heng Shao, “Exotic ℤNsubscriptℤ𝑁\mathbb{Z}_{N}blackboard_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT symmetries, duality, and fractons in 3+1-dimensional quantum field theory,” SciPost Phys. 10, 003 (2021b), arXiv:2004.06115 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  21. Nathan Seiberg and Shu-Heng Shao, “Exotic U⁢(1)𝑈1U(1)italic_U ( 1 ) Symmetries, Duality, and Fractons in 3+1-Dimensional Quantum Field Theory,” SciPost Phys. 9, 046 (2020), arXiv:2004.00015 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  22. Michael Pretko and Leo Radzihovsky, “Fracton-elasticity duality,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 195301 (2018).
  23. Andrey Gromov, “Chiral topological elasticity and fracton order,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 076403 (2019b).
  24. Wilbur Shirley, Kevin Slagle, Zhenghan Wang,  and Xie Chen, “Fracton models on general three-dimensional manifolds,” Phys. Rev. X 8, 031051 (2018).
  25. Wilbur Shirley, Kevin Slagle,  and Xie Chen, “Foliated fracton order from gauging subsystem symmetries,” SciPost Phys. 6, 041 (2019a).
  26. Dominic J. Williamson, “Fractal symmetries: Ungauging the cubic code,” Phys. Rev. B 94, 155128 (2016).
  27. Yizhi You, Trithep Devakul, F. J. Burnell,  and S. L. Sondhi, “Subsystem symmetry protected topological order,” Phys. Rev. B 98, 035112 (2018).
  28. Dominic J. Williamson, Zhen Bi,  and Meng Cheng, “Fractonic Matter in Symmetry-Enriched U(1) Gauge Theory,” Phys. Rev. B 100, 125150 (2019), arXiv:1809.10275 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  29. A. Yu. Kitaev, “Fault tolerant quantum computation by anyons,” Annals Phys. 303, 2–30 (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/9707021 .
  30. Daniel Gottesman, “Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction,”   (1997), arXiv:quant-ph/9705052 .
  31. Jeongwan Haah, ‘‘Local stabilizer codes in three dimensions without string logical operators,” Phys. Rev. A 83, 042330 (2011).
  32. Sagar Vijay, Jeongwan Haah,  and Liang Fu, “Fracton topological order, generalized lattice gauge theory, and duality,” Phys. Rev. B 94, 235157 (2016).
  33. Eduardo Fradkin and Stephen H. Shenker, “Phase diagrams of lattice gauge theories with higgs fields,” Phys. Rev. D 19, 3682–3697 (1979).
  34. John C Baez and Urs Schreiber, “Higher gauge theory,” arXiv preprint math/0511710  (2005).
  35. Juan Pablo Ibieta-Jimenez, Marzia Petrucci, LN Xavier,  and Paulo Teotonio-Sobrinho, “Topological entanglement entropy in d-dimensions for abelian higher gauge theories,” Journal of High Energy Physics 2020, 1–44 (2020).
  36. R Costa de Almeida, JP Ibieta-Jimenez, J Lorca Espiro,  and P Teotonio-Sobrinho, “Topological order from a cohomological and higher gauge theory perspective,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.04186  (2017).
  37. Alex Bullivant, Marcos Calçada, Zoltán Kádár, Paul Martin,  and Joao Faria Martins, “Topological phases from higher gauge symmetry in 3+ 1 dimensions,” Physical Review B 95, 155118 (2017).
  38. Alex Bullivant, Marcos Calçada, Zoltán Kádár, Joao Faria Martins,  and Paul Martin, “Higher lattices, discrete two-dimensional holonomy and topological phases in (3+ 1) d with higher gauge symmetry,” Reviews in Mathematical Physics 32, 2050011 (2020).
  39. Maissam Barkeshli, Yu-An Chen, Po-Shen Hsin,  and Ryohei Kobayashi, “Higher-group symmetry in finite gauge theory and stabilizer codes,”   (2022), arXiv:2211.11764 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  40. Salvatore D. Pace and Xiao-Gang Wen, “Emergent higher-symmetry protected topological orders in the confined phase of U(1) gauge theory,” Phys. Rev. B 107, 075112 (2023), arXiv:2207.03544 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  41. Chetan Nayak, Steven H Simon, Ady Stern, Michael Freedman,  and Sankar Das Sarma, “Non-abelian anyons and topological quantum computation,” Reviews of Modern Physics 80, 1083 (2008a).
  42. Jurgen Fuchs, “Fusion rules in conformal field theory,” Fortsch. Phys. 42, 1–48 (1994), arXiv:hep-th/9306162 .
  43. Han Yan, “Hyperbolic fracton model, subsystem symmetry, and holography,” Phys. Rev. B 99, 155126 (2019), arXiv:1807.05942 [hep-th] .
  44. Claudio Chamon, ‘‘Quantum glassiness in strongly correlated clean systems: An example of topological overprotection,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 040402 (2005).
  45. Sergey Bravyi, Bernhard Leemhuis,  and Barbara M Terhal, “Topological order in an exactly solvable 3d spin model,” Annals of Physics 326, 839–866 (2011).
  46. Beni Yoshida, “Exotic topological order in fractal spin liquids,” Phys. Rev. B 88, 125122 (2013).
  47. Miguel Jorge Bernabé Ferreira, Pramod Padmanabhan,  and Paulo Teotonio-Sobrinho, “2d quantum double models from a 3d perspective,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 47, 375204 (2014).
  48. Shriya Pai and Michael Pretko, “Fractons from confinement in one dimension,” Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013094 (2020), arXiv:1909.12306 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  49. Miguel Jorge Bernabé Ferreira, Juan Pablo Ibieta Jimenez, Pramod Padmanabhan,  and Paulo Teôtonio Sobrinho, “A recipe for constructing frustration-free hamiltonians with gauge and matter fields in one and two dimensions,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 48, 485206 (2015).
  50. Shriya Pai and Michael Hermele, “Fracton fusion and statistics,” Phys. Rev. B 100, 195136 (2019), arXiv:1903.11625 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  51. Jeongwan Haah, “Commuting pauli hamiltonians as maps between free modules,” Communications in Mathematical Physics 324, 351–399 (2013).
  52. Jeongwan Haah, ‘‘Algebraic methods for quantum codes on lattices,” Revista colombiana de matematicas 50, 299–349 (2016).
  53. David Tong, “Lectures on the Quantum Hall Effect,”  (2016) arXiv:1606.06687 [hep-th] .
  54. Franz J. Wegner, “Duality in generalized ising models and phase transitions without local order parameters,” J. Math. Phys. 12 (1971), 10.1063/1.1665530.
  55. John B. Kogut, “An introduction to lattice gauge theory and spin systems,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 51, 659–713 (1979).
  56. N. Read and Subir Sachdev, “Large-n expansion for frustrated quantum antiferromagnets,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 1773–1776 (1991).
  57. X. G. Wen, “Mean-field theory of spin-liquid states with finite energy gap and topological orders,” Phys. Rev. B 44, 2664–2672 (1991).
  58. F. Alexander Bais, Peter van Driel,  and Mark de Wild Propitius, “Quantum symmetries in discrete gauge theories,” Phys. Lett. B 280, 63–70 (1992), arXiv:hep-th/9203046 .
  59. Juan Martin Maldacena, Gregory W. Moore,  and Nathan Seiberg, “D-brane charges in five-brane backgrounds,” JHEP 10, 005 (2001), arXiv:hep-th/0108152 .
  60. Pramod Padmanabhan and Indrajit Jana, “Groupoid Toric Codes,”   (2022), arXiv:2212.01021 [quant-ph] .
  61. Wilbur Shirley, Kevin Slagle,  and Xie Chen, “Fractional excitations in foliated fracton phases,” Annals Phys. 410, 167922 (2019b), arXiv:1806.08625 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  62. Chetan Nayak, Steven H. Simon, Ady Stern, Michael Freedman,  and Sankar Das Sarma, “Non-abelian anyons and topological quantum computation,” Reviews of Modern Physics 80, 1083–1159 (2008b).
  63. Matthew Buican and Andrey Gromov, “Anyonic Chains, Topological Defects, and Conformal Field Theory,” Commun. Math. Phys. 356, 1017–1056 (2017), arXiv:1701.02800 [hep-th] .
  64. Erik P. Verlinde, “Fusion Rules and Modular Transformations in 2D Conformal Field Theory,” Nucl. Phys. B 300, 360–376 (1988).
  65. Gregory W. Moore and Nathan Seiberg, “Polynomial Equations for Rational Conformal Field Theories,” Phys. Lett. B 212, 451–460 (1988).
  66. Song He, Tokiro Numasawa, Tadashi Takayanagi,  and Kento Watanabe, “Quantum dimension as entanglement entropy in two dimensional conformal field theories,” Phys. Rev. D 90, 041701 (2014), arXiv:1403.0702 [hep-th] .
  67. Bowen Shi, “Seeing topological entanglement through the information convex,” Phys. Rev. Research. 1, 033048 (2019), arXiv:1810.01986 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  68. Bowen Shi, Kohtaro Kato,  and Isaac H. Kim, “Fusion rules from entanglement,” Annals Phys. 418, 168164 (2020), arXiv:1906.09376 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  69. Bowen Shi, “Verlinde formula from entanglement,” Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023132 (2020), arXiv:1911.01470 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  70. Tanay Kibe, Prabha Mandayam,  and Ayan Mukhopadhyay, “Holographic spacetime, black holes and quantum error correcting codes: a review,” Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 463 (2022), arXiv:2110.14669 [hep-th] .
Citations (1)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Sign Up to Summarize

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Sign Up to Generate All Videos Subscribe on YouTube

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Sign Up to Generate

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Generate Now

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Generate Now

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Sign Up