CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 1

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Four-dimensional topological lattices through connectivity

Price, Hannah M.·2018·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1806.05263arXiv 1806.05263
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Thanks to recent advances, the 4D quantum Hall (QH) effect is becoming experimentally accessible in various engineered set-ups. In this paper, we propose a new type of 4D topological system that, unlike other 2D and 4D QH models, does not require complicated (artificial) gauge fields and/or time-reversal symmetry breaking. Instead, we show that there are 4D QH systems that can be engineered for spinless particles by designing the lattice connectivity with real-valued hopping amplitudes, and we explain how this physics can be intuitively understood in analogy with the 2D Haldane model. We illustrate our discussion with a specific 4D lattice proposal, inspired by the widely-studied 2D honeycomb and brickwall lattice geometries. This also provides a minimal model for a topological system in Class AI, which supports nontrivial topological band invariants only in four spatial dimensions or higher.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1806.05263

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • 4D topological lattice models have been proposed that exploit lattice connectivity for spinless particles.

    “or lattice connectivity for spinless particles (Price, 2018).”

    From Topological photonics (2019) · cites this paper as Price, 2018

  • Unlike in 2D, time-reversal symmetry breaking is not the only route to observing a quantum Hall effect.

    “However, unlike in 2D, time-reversal symmetry breaking is not the only route to observing a quantum Hall effect.”

    From Topological photonics (2019) · cites this paper as Price, 2018

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 60

  1. M. Z. Hasan and C. L. Kane, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 3045 (2010).
  2. X.-L. Qi and S.-C. Zhang, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 1057 (2011).
  3. B. A. Bernevig and T. L. Hughes, Topological insula- tors and topological superconductors (Princeton Univer- sity Press, 2013).
  4. A. Kitaev, V. Lebedev, and M. Feigelman, AIP Confer- ence Proceedings, 1134, 22 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  5. S. Ryu, A. P. Schnyder, A. Furusaki, and A. W. Ludwig, New J. Phys. 12, 065010 (2010). · DOI
  6. C.-K. Chiu, J. C. Y. Teo, A. P. Schnyder, and S. Ryu, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 035005 (2016).
  7. J. Kruthoff, J. de Boer, J. van Wezel, C. L. Kane, and R.-J. Slager, Phys. Rev. X 7, 041069 (2017). · DOI
  8. K. v. Klitzing, G. Dorda, and M. Pepper, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 494 (1980).
  9. D. J. Thouless, M. Kohmoto, M. P. Nightingale, and M. den Nijs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 405 (1982).
  10. N. Goldman, J. Budich, and P. Zoller, Nat. Phys. 12, 639 (2016).
  11. N. Cooper, J. Dalibard, and I. Spielman, Reviews of Modern Physics 91, 015005 (2019).
  12. L. Lu, J. D. Joannopoulos, and M. Soljačić, Nat. Phys. 12, 626 (2016).
  13. A. B. Khanikaev and G. Shvets, Nat. Photon. 11, 763 (2017).
  14. T. Ozawa, H. M. Price, A. Amo, N. Goldman, M. Hafezi, L. Lu, M. C. Rechtsman, D. Schuster, J. Simon, O. Zil- berberg, et al., Reviews of Modern Physics 91, 015006 (2019).
  15. J. E. Avron, L. Sadun, J. Segert, and B. Simon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 1329 (1988).
  16. J. Fröhlich and B. Perdini, "New applications of the chi- ral anomaly," in Mathematical Physics 2000 (Imperial College Press, London, United Kingdom) pp. 9-47.
  17. S.-C. Zhang and J. Hu, Science 294, 823 (2001).
  18. X.-L. Qi, T. L. Hughes, and S.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. B 78, 195424 (2008).
  19. J. Edge, J. Tworzydlo, and C. Beenakker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 135701 (2012).
  20. S. Sugawa, F. Salces-Carcoba, A. R. Perry, Y. Yue, and I. Spielman, Science 360, 1429 (2018).
  21. M. Lohse, C. Schweizer, H. M. Price, O. Zilberberg, and I. Bloch, Nature 553, 55 (2018).
  22. O. Zilberberg, S. Huang, J. Guglielmon, M. Wang, K. P. Chen, Y. E. Kraus, and M. C. Rechtsman, Nature 553, 59 (2018).
  23. D. J. Thouless, Phys. Rev. B 27, 6083 (1983).
  24. H. Kunz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 1095 (1986).
  25. Y. E. Kraus, Y. Lahini, Z. Ringel, M. Verbin, and O. Zil- berberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 106402 (2012).
  26. Y. E. Kraus and O. Zilberberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 116404 (2012).
  27. Y. E. Kraus, Z. Ringel, and O. Zilberberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 226401 (2013).
  28. M. Verbin, O. Zilberberg, Y. Lahini, Y. E. Kraus, and Y. Silberberg, Phys. Rev. B 91, 64201 (2015).
  29. M. Lohse, C. Schweizer, O. Zilberberg, M. Aidelsburger, and I. Bloch, Nat. Phys. 12, 350 (2016).
  30. S. Nakajima, T. Tomita, S. Taie, T. Ichinose, H. Ozawa, L. Wang, M. Troyer, and Y. Takahashi, Nat. Phys. 12, 296 (2016).
  31. X. Zhang, Y. Chen, Y. Wang, Y. Liu, J. Y. Lin, N. C. Hu, B. Guan, and C. H. Lee, Physical Review B 100, 041110 (2019).
  32. I. Petrides, H. M. Price, and O. Zilberberg, Phys. Rev. B 98, 125431 (2018). · DOI
  33. C. H. Lee, Y. Wang, Y. Chen, and X. Zhang, Physical Review B 98, 094434 (2018).
  34. H. M. Price, O. Zilberberg, T. Ozawa, I. Carusotto, and N. Goldman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 195303 (2015).
  35. T. Ozawa, H. M. Price, N. Goldman, O. Zilberberg, and I. Carusotto, Phys. Rev. A 93, 1 (2016).
  36. H. M. Price, O. Zilberberg, T. Ozawa, I. Carusotto, and N. Goldman, Physical Review B 93, 1 (2016).
  37. O. Boada, A. Celi, J. I. Latorre, and M. Lewenstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 133001 (2012).
  38. A. Celi, P. Massignan, J. Ruseckas, N. Goldman, I. B. Spielman, G. Juzeliūnas, and M. Lewenstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 043001 (2014).
  39. O. Boada, A. Celi, J. Rodríguez-Laguna, J. I. Latorre, and M. Lewenstein, New J. Phys. 17, 045007 (2015).
  40. M. Mancini, G. Pagano, G. Cappellini, L. Livi, M. Rider, J. Catani, C. Sias, P. Zoller, M. Inguscio, M. Dalmonte, and L. Fallani, Science 349, 1510 (2015).
  41. B. K. Stuhl, H.-I. Lu, L. M. Aycock, D. Genkina, and I. B. Spielman, Science 349, 1514 (2015).
  42. X.-W. Luo, X. Zhou, C.-F. Li, J.-S. Xu, G.-C. Guo, and Z.-W. Zhou, Nature Comm. 6, 7704 (2015).
  43. L. F. Livi, G. Cappellini, M. Diem, L. Franchi, C. Clivati, M. Frittelli, F. Levi, D. Calonico, J. Catani, M. Inguscio, and L. Fallani, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 220401 (2016).
  44. L. Yuan, Y. Shi, and S. Fan, Optics letters 41, 741 (2016).
  45. T. Ozawa and I. Carusotto, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 013601 (2017).
  46. H. M. Price, T. Ozawa, and N. Goldman, Phys. Rev. A 95, 023607 (2017).
  47. Y. Li, K. Intriligator, Y. Yu, and C. Wu, Phys. Rev. B 85, 085132 (2012). · DOI
  48. Y. Li and C. Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 216802 (2013). · DOI
  49. Y. Li, S.-C. Zhang, and C. Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 186803 (2013).
  50. D. Jukić and H. Buljan, Phys. Rev. A 87, 013814 (2013).
  51. F. D. M. Haldane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2015 (1988). · DOI · Paper page
  52. M. Goerbig and G. Montambaux, in Dirac Matter (Springer, 2017) pp. 25-53.
  53. G. Jotzu, M. Messer, R. Desbuquois, M. Lebrat, T. Uehlinger, D. Greif, and T. Esslinger, Nature 515, 237 (2014).
  54. N. Fläschner, D. Vogel, M. Tarnowski, B. Rem, D.-S. Lühmann, M. Heyl, J. Budich, L. Mathey, K. Sengstock, and C. Weitenberg, Nat. Phys. 14, 265 (2018).
  55. M. Mochol-Grzelak, A. Dauphin, A. Celi, and M. Lewen- stein, Quantum Science and Technology 4, 014009 (2018).
  56. L. Shao and Y. Zhao, arXiv:1805.07323. · arXiv
  57. Y. Wang, H. M. Price, B. Zhang, and Y. Chong, Nature communications 11, 1 (2020).
  58. R. Yu, Y. X. Zhao, and A. P. Schnyder, National Science Review (2020), 10.1093/nsr/nwaa065. · DOI · Paper page
  59. M. Ezawa, Phys. Rev. B 100, 075423 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  60. L. Li, C. H. Lee, and J. Gong, Communications Physics 2, 1 (2019).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Price, H. M.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2018
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1806.05263
arXiv
1806.05263
References
0
Type
Preprint
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review