SciPost Submission Page
Non-invertible and higher-form symmetries in 2+1d lattice gauge theories
by Yichul Choi, Yaman Sanghavi, Shu-Heng Shao, Yunqin Zheng
This is not the latest submitted version.
This Submission thread is now published as
Submission summary
Authors (as registered SciPost users): | Yunqin Zheng |
Submission information | |
---|---|
Preprint Link: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.13105v1 (pdf) |
Date submitted: | June 12, 2024, 2:39 p.m. |
Submitted by: | Zheng, Yunqin |
Submitted to: | SciPost Physics |
Ontological classification | |
---|---|
Academic field: | Physics |
Specialties: |
|
Approach: | Theoretical |
Abstract
We explore exact generalized symmetries in the standard 2+1d lattice $\mathbb{Z}_2$ gauge theory coupled to the Ising model, and compare them with their continuum field theory counterparts. One model has a (non-anomalous) non-invertible symmetry, and we identify two distinct non-invertible symmetry protected topological phases. The non-invertible algebra involves a lattice condensation operator, which creates a toric code ground state from a product state. Another model has a mixed anomaly between a 1-form symmetry and an ordinary symmetry. This anomaly enforces a nontrivial transition in the phase diagram, consistent with the "Higgs=SPT" proposal. Finally, we discuss how the symmetries and anomalies in these two models are related by gauging, which is a 2+1d version of the Kennedy-Tasaki transformation.
Author indications on fulfilling journal expectations
- Provide a novel and synergetic link between different research areas.
- Open a new pathway in an existing or a new research direction, with clear potential for multi-pronged follow-up work
- Detail a groundbreaking theoretical/experimental/computational discovery
- Present a breakthrough on a previously-identified and long-standing research stumbling block
Current status:
Reports on this Submission
Report #2 by Anonymous (Referee 2) on 2024-8-13 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:2405.13105v1, delivered 2024-08-13, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.9588
Report
This paper studies several instances of generalized symmetries with and without anomalies and in particular including non-invertible symmetries in models built from qubits. While most if not all of the phenomena discussed in this paper are known from a continuum field theory perspective it is still a very worthwhile exercise to illustrate it in the lattice setting.
In Sec. 2, the authors study a generalization of the well-known KW duality of the Ising model to 2+1d where they couple models with Z2 0 form symmetry and Z2 1 form symmetry. In general these models map into each other under gauging of Z2 0 form symmetry or conversely Z2 1 form symmetry. Hence there is a parameter subspace which is self dual under such gauging. This model hosts a non-invertible 2+1d KW self-duality symmetry which they study in detail.
In Sec 3, the paper demonstrates that the non-invertible symmetry thus obtained in Sec. 2 is related to a D8 invertible symmetry via gauging of the non-normal Z2 subgroup of D8. Specifically they discuss a 2+1d version of the Ashkin Teller model (in a restricted locus in parameter space) that realizes this symmetry and show that its gauging produces a model with a symmetry that corresponds to 2-representations of a 2-group.
In Sec. 4 the paper discusses yet another restricted region of their parent model that realizes a mixed anomaly between two Z2 0-form symmetries and a Z2 1-form symmetry and explore the consequences of this anomaly on the phase diagram .
In Sec. 5, the papers studies the 2+1d cluster SPT which is an SPT conventionally protected by Z2 0-form x Z2 1-form symmetry. The authors show that this splits into atleast two distinct SPTs protected by the non-invertible symmetry. This is a direct generalization of a recent work by a subset of the authors in one dimension lower.
I am happy to recommend this nice work for publication in Scipost however I have a couple of small questions/comments for the authors:
Requested changes
-
It is claimed in the paper that 1.2 can be obtained by gauging the Z2 0-form symmetry in the Ising model. Isn’t this strictly speaking incorrect? Specifically when we gauge the Z2 0-form we do not land on a model that admits a tensor product Hilbert space. The dual Z2 1-form symmetry is topological in the sense used in the paper. A quick way to see that is that the product of ZZ around a plaquette is the identity before gauging but maps to a product of \sigma_z’s around a plaquette which must be enforced to be the identity as well.
-
In this work, is it correct that both the SPTs realized reduce to the same SPT as a Z2 0-form x Z2 1-form SPT. Perhaps a more non-trivial example would be an SPT which trivializes on any invertible subgroup. Does this model realize such a phase?
-
Can the mixed anomaly be viewed as a standard LSM anomaly involving a Z2 0-form symmetry and a Z2 1-form symmetry as the local representative of one of the Z2 symmetries contains a charged line of the 1-form symmetry?
Recommendation
Publish (easily meets expectations and criteria for this Journal; among top 50%)
Report #1 by Anonymous (Referee 1) on 2024-7-25 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:2405.13105v1, delivered 2024-07-25, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.9471
Strengths
- Thorough investigation of generalized symmetries, including non-invertible ones, of lattice $\mathbb{Z}_2$ gauge theories in 2+1 dimensions.
- Concrete lattice models of two SPT phases with non-invertible fusion 2-category symmetry $2\text{Rep}((\mathbb{Z}_2^{(1)} \times \mathbb{Z}_2^{(1)}) \rtimes \mathbb{Z}_2^{(0)})$.
- Precise formulation of a generalized Kennedy-Tasaki transformation (i.e., a twisted gauging) in the context of 2+1d lattice $\mathbb{Z}_2$ gauge theories.
- Detailed derivations of the results are provided in appendices.
- The manuscript is clearly written.
Report
The analyses in this paper are very explicit and provide us with analytical tools to study non-invertible symmetries of 2+1d lattice models on firm ground. The results of the paper would have various potential applications, one of which is to study an interface between 2+1d SPT phases with non-invertible symmetries. There are also various interesting future directions as mentioned in the last section of the manuscript. Given the significance of the results and a clear potential for further developments, I would recommend this paper for publication.
Requested changes
I have a few minor questions and suggestions listed below.
-
p.30, footnote 31, it would be helpful to comment on why "the generalized KT transformation is only unambiguous in the constrained Hilbert space $\widetilde{\mathcal{H}}$" because the operator $\mathsf{KT} = V\mathsf{D}V$ is well-defined also on the original tensor product Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$.
-
p.56, why does eq.(F.4) imply that "acting on an arbitrary state $|\psi\rangle$ with the entangler $V$ amounts to stacking a cluster state"? Do you use the fact that the diagonal entangler $V \otimes V$ acting on the doubled Hilbert space $\mathcal{H} \otimes \mathcal{H}$ is equivalent to the identity operator in an appropriate sense?
Please also find the following small typos.
-
p.21, eq.(3.8), the dot between the first and second lines would not be necessary.
-
p.40, the first paragraph of Section B.3, "can be view as" $\rightarrow$ "can be viewed as"
-
p.42, eq.(C.7), "$\prod_{l \ni v} \sigma^x_v$" $\rightarrow$ "$\prod_{l \ni v} \sigma^x_l$"
-
p.47, below eq.(D.9), "It exchanges the first and ..." would be a typo of "The first and ..."
-
p.56, below eq.(F.4), "stacking $H$ with an $\mathbb{Z}_2^{(0)} \times \mathbb{Z}_2^{(1)}$ SPT" $\rightarrow$ "stacking $H$ with a $\mathbb{Z}_2^{(0)} \times \mathbb{Z}_2^{(1)}$ SPT"
-
p.56, the first paragraph of Section F.2, "which exchanges exchange" $\rightarrow$ "which exchanges"
Recommendation
Publish (surpasses expectations and criteria for this Journal; among top 10%)