Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 65 references

Electric Circuit Realizations of Fracton Physics

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A circuit of capacitors and ideal transformers conserves dipole moment, so charge relaxes to a linear ramp instead of spreading evenly.

desk verdict A genuinely new circuit proposal for fracton-like dipole conservation, but the derivation of I1=-I2 and Eq. (4) is underjustified; fixable, and worth refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.08536 v1 pith:LURYXH4I submitted 2019-08-22 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mes-hall

Michael Pretko This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.mes-hall
keywords fractonselectriccircuitsdipolemomentconservationtransformershigher-momentfractolectricDCfiltersubdimensionalparticles
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that ordinary electric circuits, specifically capacitors joined by ideal transformers, can reproduce the defining property of fractons: conservation of dipole moment. In such a network, a current in one wire induces an equal and opposite current in a partner wire, and as a result the total dipole moment of the charge distribution can never relax. The predicted equilibrium is not the usual uniform charge spread but a linear ramp in position, a signature that the paper verifies with circuit simulation software. If real transformers approach ideal behavior, these circuits offer a table-top setting for fracton physics and also act as DC filters.

What carries the argument

The key circuit element is a transformer wound with equal and opposite turns, giving voltage ratio $-1$ and forcing the two coil currents to remain equal and opposite, $I_1(t) = -I_2(t)$. When these transformers connect neighboring capacitors in a lattice, they enforce the generalized continuity equation $\partial_t Q + \partial_x^2 I = 0$, which converts conservation of dipole moment from a dynamical accident into a kinematic constraint. The equilibrium argument uses an energy functional with Lagrange multipliers $\mu$ and $\lambda$ enforcing fixed total charge and dipole moment, yielding the linear charge profile that serves as the measurable fingerprint of the fractonic behavior.

What would settle it

Build the one-dimensional circuit, initialize charge on a single end capacitor, and let it relax while measuring the long-time voltage profile: if the steady state is uniform rather than linear, or if the dipole moment decays measurably on laboratory timescales, the fractonic constraint is violated. A second check is to apply an alternating voltage and look for any transmitted AC component, which must be absent for an ideal fractolectric circuit.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a chain of identical capacitors coupled by transformers wound for voltage ratio $-1$ obeys a generalized continuity equation $\partial_t Q + \partial_x^2 I = 0$, making the dipole moment $\sum_n x_n Q_n$ a boundary term that vanishes for the chosen open boundaries. Hence the system remembers its initial dipole moment forever, for ideal transformers, and its minimum-energy state at fixed total charge and dipole moment is $Q_n = \frac{2}{C}(\mu + \lambda x_n)$, a linear function of position. This linear equilibrium profile, verified in simulation, is the proposed diagnostic for dipole conservation, and any relaxation of the dipole requires transformer flux leakage. The same inductor-based mechanism extends to quadrupole-conserving layered circuits, to two-dimensional current-ice with pinch-point singularities, and to superconducting quantum circuits that would realize quantized fractons.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction rests on the assumption that each transformer is ideal: no flux leakage, equal self and mutual inductances, and currents that start out equal and opposite, so that $I_1(t) = -I_2(t)$ holds forever.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A one-dimensional chain of capacitors and ideal transformers will relax to a linear charge profile, $Q_n \propto \mu + \lambda x_n$, rather than a uniform one, giving a direct experimental signature of dipole conservation.
  • The same circuit acts as a perfect DC filter: a direct current passes through, while any alternating component is blocked because net charge transfer would change the dipole moment.
  • Adding hierarchical layers of transformers produces circuits that conserve both dipole and quadrupole moments, extending the construction to arbitrarily high multipole conservation.
  • In two-dimensional lattices with negligible capacitance, the current correlations should show pinch-point singularities, realizing a fracton 'current-ice' analogous to spin ice.
  • Replacing classical elements with superconducting wires and quantum dots would make the dipole conservation exact even in the DC limit, yielding quantized fractonic charges.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same transformer-drag mechanism could be transplanted to other metamaterial platforms, such as mechanical or acoustic lattices, to create classical dipole-conserving systems outside electronics.
  • The DC-filter property suggests a practical application as a frequency-selective element that passes DC while rejecting low-frequency noise; the linear steady-state charge profile could double as a built-in probe of transformer quality.
  • Because dipole conservation is robust to equal resistances but not to flux leakage, measuring the long-time decay of the dipole moment gives a direct, quantitative measure of transformer imperfection and sets an upper bound on how faithfully the circuit emulates fractons.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a class of classical electric circuits, called 'fractolectric circuits,' intended to realize fracton-type restricted mobility for electric charge. The core mechanism is a set of ideal transformers with voltage ratio -1 that are claimed to enforce equal-and-opposite currents in adjacent links, so that the charge distribution evolves under a generalized continuity equation dt Q + d_x^2 I = 0 (Eq. 4). From this the paper derives conservation of the dipole moment and predicts that, under internal resistance, the steady state is the minimum-energy charge configuration subject to fixed total charge and fixed dipole moment, namely a linear function of position (Eq. 6). The paper reports a CircuitLab simulation supporting the linear steady state, argues that the circuit acts as a perfect DC filter, and outlines extensions to quadrupole conservation, two-dimensional 'current-ice' behavior, and superconducting quantum circuits.

Significance. If the mechanism works as claimed, the paper is a valuable conceptual contribution: it connects the higher-moment conservation structure of fracton models to a concrete table-top observable, the linear steady-state charge profile, and it suggests a class of DC filters. The central prediction is falsifiable, the energy-minimization argument is clean once the constraint is accepted, and the proposed extensions give a plausible route to higher-rank and higher-dimensional analogues. However, the load-bearing derivation in the current manuscript is incomplete and partly ambiguous, with an invalid-looking variational formula and an unquantified simulation check. The core idea is promising but the paper is not yet publishable in its present form.

major comments (4)
  1. [Circuit Design, Eqs. (1)-(3)] The derivation of the current constraint is not valid as written. In the coupled-inductor model with identical coils and perfect coupling for opposite windings, M = -L, and the two equations in Eq. (1) become degenerate: V1 = -V2 holds identically for any pair of currents, so the step from V1 = -V2 to Eq. (2) does not follow. In the ideal-transformer limit L, M tend to infinity the current relation must come from the ampere-turn balance and the chosen reference directions of the ports, not from Eq. (1). The separate power-balance argument I1 V1 = I2 V2 is also convention-dependent: with the standard two-port convention V1 I1 + V2 I2 = 0 and V1 = -V2 one obtains I1 = I2, not I1 = -I2. The paper must specify current arrows on the circuit diagram and derive the physical I1 = -I2 relation, for example from a finite-leakage model or from the ideal transformer constitutive equations, before Eq. (4) can be trusted.
  2. [Circuit Design, Eq. (4)] Equation (4) is asserted rather than derived. The text does not write the Kirchhoff current and voltage equations for the network of Fig. 2, does not define the sign of the current I(x_n) in each transformer, and does not state the boundary conditions at the ends of the chain. Since Eq. (4) is the entire basis for the dipole-conservation claim, this omission is load-bearing. Please provide the explicit node equations and show by substitution that the only currents consistent with the transformer constraints satisfy dt Q + d_x^2 I = 0 in the bulk, with the boundary terms that make the dipole change vanish.
  3. [Diagnostics, Eqs. (5)-(6)] The variational result in Eq. (6) does not follow from the stated functional. For E = (1/(2C)) sum Q_n^2 - mu sum Q_n - lambda sum x_n Q_n, the stationarity condition gives Q_n = C(mu + lambda x_n), not (2/C)(mu + lambda x_n). The printed expression is dimensionally inconsistent as well: with mu and lambda carrying energy per charge and energy per charge per length, the right-hand side does not have units of charge. The linear-in-position prediction is qualitatively unaffected, but the formula should be corrected and, if quantitative comparison with the simulation is intended, the simulation should be checked against the corrected coefficient.
  4. [Diagnostics, Fig. 3 and CircuitLab simulation] The reported CircuitLab verification is not quantitative. The caption lists component values, but the full schematic, the precise initial conditions, the raw node voltages, and the fitted slope and intercept are not provided. There is no comparison of the late-time voltage profile with Eq. (6) and no error estimate. Since Eq. (4) is not derived independently, the simulation is currently the only quantitative evidence for the central claim; it should be reported in a reproducible way, for example with a netlist or shared circuit file and a table of final voltages.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Circuit Design, paragraph after Eq. (3)] The phrase 'up to a constant DC offset' is confusing: if I1 and I2 are equal and opposite at t = 0, then no DC offset is present; if a DC offset is allowed, the initial-condition statement must be modified accordingly.
  2. [Circuit Design, Fig. 1 and Fig. 2] The text says there is 'no ambiguity' in the abstract box notation for a ratio of -1, but without a dot or winding convention the sign of the current relation is exactly the ambiguity that matters. Please mark the schematic with explicit current arrows.
  3. [Diagnostics, DC filter discussion] The claim that the circuit is an infinite impedance for purely alternating applied voltage should be stated more carefully: internal AC currents and capacitor voltages will still vary, while the total transported charge from one end to the other is zero. The precise definition of 'net flow of charge' should be given.
  4. [Extensions, Fig. 4 and Eq. (7)] The extensions to quadrupole conservation and to two-dimensional current-ice are qualitative. If these are intended as results, the current pattern for Fig. 4a and the energy functional for the current-ice system should be written out explicitly rather than left as figures and expectations.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the dipole constraint is engineered into the circuit, but the linear steady-state prediction and the simulation check are independent of the input assumptions.

full rationale

The claimed derivation is not circular. The paper's central mechanism is the ideal-transformer relation in Eqs. (1)-(3), which yields I1(t) = -I2(t) from Faraday's-law voltage relations and an initial condition. This is a component-level input, not a parameter fitted to the target behavior. The generalized continuity equation, ∂t Q + ∂x^2 I = 0 (Eq. (4)), is a direct lattice bookkeeping consequence of this equal-and-opposite current pattern, and the statement that the dipole moment is a boundary term is an identity following from Eq. (4), not an assumption of the conclusion. The diagnostic prediction, Eq. (6), is derived by minimizing the capacitor energy functional Eq. (5) subject to fixed total charge and dipole moment; the linear profile is a nontrivial consequence of the constraint rather than a restatement of the transformer equations. The CircuitLab simulation is an external check, not a fit: no parameters are adjusted to produce the linear profile except the stated component values. The self-citations (e.g., Refs. [23], [61]) supply background definitions of fracton phenomenology and pinch-point correlations but are not used as a uniqueness theorem or as a substitute for the circuit derivation. The phrase 'by design' describes the engineering intent of the circuit geometry, not a circular derivation. A possible sign-convention or degeneracy issue in the step from Eq. (1) to Eq. (3) would be a correctness concern, not a circularity, and it does not by itself make the linear steady-state prediction equal to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted; component values are chosen for the simulator but do not affect the ideal-circuit claim. The key assumptions are ideal transformer behavior, zero initial DC offset, and the lattice continuity equation. No new physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Ideal transformer with perfect coupling (M=L) and V1 = -V2, with no flux leakage.
    Used to derive Eq. (3) that I1(t) = -I2(t); real transformers leak flux, which the paper acknowledges relaxes the dipole at longest times (Section 'Circuit Design').
  • domain assumption Initial currents in each transformer are equal and opposite (or the constant DC offset is zero).
    Needed to remove the integration constant in Eq. (3); true for a circuit at rest, as in the simulation.
  • domain assumption The bulk circuit obeys the lattice continuity equation ∂tQ + ∂x^2 I = 0 (Eq. 4).
    This equation is the basis for the dipole-conservation claim; it is stated as 'straightforward to verify' without a full derivation, so it functions as an assumption in the proof.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Electric Circuit Realizations of Fracton Physics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LURYXH4I

@misc{pith2026190808536,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Electric Circuit Realizations of Fracton Physics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LURYXH4I}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.08536}
}
read the original abstract

We design a set of classical macroscopic electric circuits in which charge exhibits the mobility restrictions of fracton quasiparticles. The crucial ingredient in these circuits is a transformer, which induces currents between pairs of adjacent wires. For an appropriately designed geometry, this induction serves to enforce conservation of dipole moment. We show that a network of capacitors connected via ideal transformers will forever remember the dipole moment of its initial charge configuration. Relaxation of the dipole moment in realistic systems can only occur via flux leakage in the transformers, which will lead to violations of fracton physics at the longest times. We propose a concrete diagnostic for these "fractolectric" circuits in the form of their characteristic equilibrium charge configurations, which we verify using simple circuit simulation software. These circuits not only provide an experimental testing ground for fracton physics, but also serve as DC filters. We outline extensions of these ideas to circuits featuring other types of higher moment conservation laws, as well as to higher-dimensional circuits which act as fracton "current-ice." While our focus is on classical circuits, we discuss how these ideas can be straightforwardly extended to realize quantized fractons in superconducting circuits.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.08536 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. A transformer functions via a central magnetic core [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Voltage across each capacitor (from -0.4 to 1.2 V) as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. a) Multiple layers of transformers can be used to con [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C. L. Kane and T. C. Lubensky, Topological boundary modes in isostatic lattices . Nature Physics 10, 39 (2014), arXiv:1308.0554v2

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

  2. [2]

    B. G.-g. Chen, N. Upadhyaya, and V. Vitelli, Nonlin- ear conduction via solitons in a topological mechanical insulator. PNAS, vol. 111 no. 36 13004-13009 (2014), arXiv:1404.2263v2

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

  3. [3]

    L. M. Nash, D. Kleckner, A. Read, V. Vitelli, A. M. Turner, and W. T. M. Irvine, Topological mechanics of gyroscopic metamaterials . Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112 (2015), 14495-14500, arXiv:1504.03362v2

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  4. [4]

    A. S. Meeussen, J. Paulose, and V. Vitelli, Geared topo- logical metamaterials with tunable mechanical stability . Phys. Rev. X 6, 041029 (2016), arXiv:1602.08769v2

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  5. [5]

    Lera and J

    N. Lera and J. V. Alvarez, Mechanical topological insula- tor in zero dimensions . Phys. Rev. B 97, 134118 (2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    N. Jia, C. Owens, A. Sommer, D. Schuster, and J. Simon, Time reversal invariant topologically insulating circuits . Phys. Rev. X 5, 021031 (2015), arXiv:1309.0878v2

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  7. [7]

    V. V. Albert, L. I. Glazman, and L. Jiang, Topological properties of linear circuit lattices . Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 173902 (2015), arXiv:1410.1243v3

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  8. [8]

    C. H. Lee et al., Topolectrical circuits. Communications Physics, Vol 1, 39 (2018), arXiv:1705.01077v3

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

Show all 65 references
  1. [9]

    Zhao, Topological circuits of inductors and ca- pacitors

    E. Zhao, Topological circuits of inductors and ca- pacitors. Annals of Physics 399, 289-313 (2018), arXiv:1810.10318v2

    2018 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Hofmann, T

    T. Hofmann, T. Helbig, C. H. Lee, M. Greiter, and R. Thomale, Chiral voltage propagation and calibration in a topolectrical Chern circuit. Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 247702 (2019), arXiv:1809.08687v2

    2019 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Ezawa, Electric circuits for non-Hermitian Chern in- sulators

    M. Ezawa, Electric circuits for non-Hermitian Chern in- sulators. arXiv:1904.03823v2 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Helbig, T

    T. Helbig, T. Hofmann, C. H. Lee, R. Thomale, S. Imhof, L. W. Molenkamp, and T. Kiessling, Band structure en- gineering and reconstruction in electric circuit networks . Phys. Rev. B 99, 161114(R) (2019), arXiv:1807.09555

    2019 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Kotwal, H

    T. Kotwal, H. Ronellenfitsch, F. Moseley, and J. Dunkel, Active topolectrical circuits. arXiv:1903.10130v2 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Imhof et al., Topolectrical circuit realization of topo- logical corner modes

    S. Imhof et al., Topolectrical circuit realization of topo- logical corner modes. Nature Physics 14, 925929 (2018), arXiv:1708.03647

    2018 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Ezawa, Higher-order topological electric circuits and topological corner resonance on the breathing Kagome and pyrochlore lattices

    M. Ezawa, Higher-order topological electric circuits and topological corner resonance on the breathing Kagome and pyrochlore lattices . Phys. Rev. B 98, 201402(R) (2018), arXiv:1809.08847

    2018 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Serra-Garcia, R

    M. Serra-Garcia, R. S¨ usstrunk, and S. D. Huber, Ob- servation of quadrupole transitions and edge mode topol- ogy in an LC network . Phys. Rev. B 99, 020304 (2019), arXiv:1806.07367

    2019 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Ezawa, Braiding of Majorana corner states in electric circuits and its non-Hermitian generalization

    M. Ezawa, Braiding of Majorana corner states in electric circuits and its non-Hermitian generalization. Phys. Rev. B 100, 045407 (2019), arXiv:1902.03716v2

    2019 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Ezawa, Non-Abelian braiding of Majorana-like edge states and scalable topological quantum computations in electric circuits

    M. Ezawa, Non-Abelian braiding of Majorana-like edge states and scalable topological quantum computations in electric circuits. arXiv:1907.06911 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Chamon, Quantum glassiness in strongly correlated clean systems: An example of topological overprotec- tion

    C. Chamon, Quantum glassiness in strongly correlated clean systems: An example of topological overprotec- tion. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 040402 (2005), arXiv:cond- mat/0404182v2

    2005

  12. [20]

    Haah, Local stabilizer codes in three dimensions with- out string logical operators

    J. Haah, Local stabilizer codes in three dimensions with- out string logical operators . Phys. Rev. A 83, 042330 (2011), arXiv:1101.1962v2

    2011 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Vijay, J

    S. Vijay, J. Haah, L. Fu, A new kind of topological quan- tum order: A dimensional hierarchy of quasiparticles built from stationary excitations . Phys. Rev. B 92, 235136 (2015), arXiv:1505.02576

    2015 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Vijay, J

    S. Vijay, J. Haah, L. Fu, Fracton topological order, gener- alized lattice gauge theory and duality . Phys. Rev. B 94, 235157 (2016), arXiv:1603.04442

    2016 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Pretko, Subdimensional particle structure of higher rank U(1) spin liquids

    M. Pretko, Subdimensional particle structure of higher rank U(1) spin liquids . Phys. Rev. B 95, 115139 (2017), arXiv:1604.05329v3

    2017 arXiv

  16. [24]

    R. M. Nandkishore and M. Hermele, Fractons. Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics, 10, 295-313 (2019), arXiv:1803.11196

    2019 arXiv

  17. [25]

    H. Ma, M. Hermele, and X. Chen, Fracton topological order from Higgs and partial confinement mechanisms of rank-two gauge theory . Phys. Rev. B 98, 035111 (2018), arXiv:1802.10108v2

    2018 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Bulmash and M

    D. Bulmash and M. Barkeshli, The Higgs mechanism in higher-rank symmetric U (1) gauge theories. Phys. Rev. B 97, 235112 (2018), arXiv:1802.10099v2

    2018 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Bravyi and J

    S. Bravyi and J. Haah, Quantum self-correction in the 3d cubic code model . Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 200501 (2013), arXiv:1112.3252

    2013 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Terhal, Quantum error correction for quantum memo- ries

    B. Terhal, Quantum error correction for quantum memo- ries. Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 307 (2015), arXiv:1302.3428v7 6

    2015 arXiv

  21. [29]

    B. J. Brown and D. J. Williamson, Parallelized quan- tum error correction with fracton topological codes . arXiv:1901.08061 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Slagle and Y.-B

    K. Slagle and Y.-B. Kim, Fracton topological order from nearest-neighbor two-spin interactions and dualities. Phys. Rev. B 96, 165106 (2017), arXiv:1704.03870v2

    2017 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Slagle and Y

    K. Slagle and Y. B. Kim, Quantum field theory of X-cube fracton topological order and robust degener- acy from geometry . Phys. Rev. B 96, 195139 (2017), arXiv:1708.04619v3

    2017 arXiv

  24. [32]

    H. Ma, E. Lake, X. Chen, and M. Hermele, Fracton topo- logical order via coupled layers . Phys. Rev. B 95, 245126 (2017), arXiv:1701.00747v2

    2017 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Vijay, Isotropic layer construction and phase diagram for fracton topological phases

    S. Vijay, Isotropic layer construction and phase diagram for fracton topological phases. arXiv:1701.00762 (2017)

    2017 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Shirley, K

    W. Shirley, K. Slagle, Z. Wang, and X. Chen, Frac- ton models on general three-dimensional manifolds . arXiv:1712.05892 (2017)

    2017 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Petrova and N

    O. Petrova and N. Regnault, A simple anisotropic three- dimensional quantum spin liquid with fracton topological order. Phys. Rev. B 96, 224429 (2017), arXiv:1709.10094

    2017 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Prem, S.-J

    A. Prem, S.-J. Huang, H. Song, and M. Hermele, Cage- net fracton models . Phys. Rev. X 9, 021010 (2019), arXiv:1806.04687v2

    2019 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Pai and M

    S. Pai and M. Hermele, Fracton fusion and statistics . arXiv:1903.11625 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  30. [38]

    H. Yan, O. Benton, L. D. C. Jaubert, and N. Shannon, Rank-2 U (1) spin-liquid on the breathing pyrochlore lat- tice. arXiv:1902.10934 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Williamson, Z

    D. Williamson, Z. Bi, and M. Cheng, Fractonic matter in symmetry-enrichedU (1) gauge theory. arXiv:1809.10275 (2018)

    2018 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Schmitz, Gauge structure: From stabilizer codes to continuum models

    A. Schmitz, Gauge structure: From stabilizer codes to continuum models. arXiv:1809.10151v3 (2018)

    2018 arXiv

  33. [41]

    H. Song, A. Prem, S.-J. Huang, and M. A. Martin- Delgado, Twisted fracton models in three dimensions . Phys. Rev. B 99, 155118 (2019), arXiv:1805.06899v2

    2019 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Y. You, T. Devakul, F. J. Burnell, and S. L. Sondhi, Symmetric fracton matter: Twisted and enriched. arXiv:1805.09800 (2018)

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Shirley, K

    W. Shirley, K. Slagle, and X. Chen, Twisted foliated frac- ton phases. arXiv:1907.09048 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Fuji, Anisotropic layer construction of anisotropic fracton models

    Y. Fuji, Anisotropic layer construction of anisotropic fracton models. arXiv:1908.02257v2 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Pretko and L

    M. Pretko and L. Radzihovsky, Fracton-elasticity duality. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 195301 (2018), arXiv:1711.11044

    2018 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Gromov, Fractional topological elasticity and fracton order

    A. Gromov, Fractional topological elasticity and fracton order. arXiv:1712.06600 (2017)

    2017 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Pai and M

    S. Pai and M. Pretko, Fractonic line excitations: An in- road from 3d elasticity theory . Phys. Rev. B 97, 235102 (2018), arXiv:1804.01536

    2018 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Kumar and A

    A. Kumar and A. C. Potter, Symmetry en- forced fractonicity and 2d quantum crystal melting . arXiv:1808.05621 (2018)

    2018 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Zhai and L

    Z. Zhai and L. Radzihovsky, Two-dimensional melting via sine-Gordon duality . arXiv:1905.00905 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Pretko, Z

    M. Pretko, Z. Zhai, and L. Radzihovsky, Crystal-to- fracton tensor gauge theory dualities . arXiv:1907.12577 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Radzihovsky and M

    L. Radzihovsky and M. Hermele, Fractons from vector gauge theory. arXiv:1905.06951 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  44. [52]

    A. Prem, J. Haah, and R. Nandkishore, Glassy quantum dynamics in translation invariant fracton models . Phys. Rev. B 95, 155133 (2017), arXiv:1702.02952

    2017 arXiv

  45. [53]

    S. Pai, M. Pretko, and R. Nandkishore, Localization in fractonic random circuits. Phys. Rev. X 9, 021003 (2019), arXiv:1807.09776v3

    2019 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Sous and M

    J. Sous and M. Pretko, Fractons from polarons and hole-doped antiferromagnets: Microscopic realizations . arXiv:1904.08424v2 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Pretko, Emergent gravity of fractons: Mach’s prin- ciple revisited

    M. Pretko, Emergent gravity of fractons: Mach’s prin- ciple revisited . Phys. Rev. D 96, 024051 (2017), arXiv:1702.07613v3

    2017 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Yan, Hyperbolic fracton model, subsystem symme- try, and holography

    H. Yan, Hyperbolic fracton model, subsystem symme- try, and holography . Phys. Rev. B 99, 155126 (2019), arXiv:1807.05942v4

    2019 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Yan, Hyperbolic fracton model, subsystem symme- try, and holography II: the dual eight-vertex model

    H. Yan, Hyperbolic fracton model, subsystem symme- try, and holography II: the dual eight-vertex model . arXiv:1906.02305 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  50. [58]

    You and F

    Y. You and F. von Oppen, Majorana quantum Lego, a route towards fracton matter. arXiv:1812.06091v2 (2018)

    2018 arXiv

  51. [59]

    T. Wang, W. Shirley, and X. Chen, Foliated fracton order in the Majorana checkerboard model . arXiv:1904.01111 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Ma and M

    H. Ma and M. Pretko, Higher rank deconfined quan- tum criticality at the Lifshitz transition and the exci- ton Bose condensate . Phys. Rev. B 98, 125105 (2018), arXiv:1803.04980v2

    2018 arXiv

  53. [61]

    A. Prem, S. Vijay, Y.-Z. Chou, M. Pretko, R. M. Nand- kishore, Pinch point singularities of tensor spin liquids . Phys. Rev. B 98, 165140 (2018), arXiv:1806.04148

    2018 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Duret and P

    D. Duret and P. Karp, Figure of merit and spatial res- olution of superconducting flux transformers . Journal of Applied Physics, 56(6):1762-1768 (1984)

    1984

  55. [63]

    Shimazu and T

    Y. Shimazu and T. Niizeki, Characteristics of switchable superconducting flux transformer with dc superconducting quantum interference device. Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 46, No. 4A, 1478-1481 (2007)

    2007

  56. [64]

    H. A. Dyvorne, J. Scola, C. Fermon, J. F. Jacquinot, and M. Pannetier-Lecoeur, Flux transformers made of com- mercial high critical temperature superconducting wires . Review of Scientific Instruments, 79:025107 (2008)

    2008

  57. [65]

    M. F. A. Fernandes, Squid based cryogenic current com- parator for measuring low-intensity antiproton beams . Ph.D. Thesis, University of Liverpool (2018)

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.