Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Entanglement-enhanced correlation propagation in the one-dimensional SU($N$) Fermi-Hubbard model

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In the 1D SU(N) Fermi-Hubbard model, flavor entanglement in the Mott-insulator initial state collectively enhances doublon hopping for N>2, raising the correlation-front velocity up to the single-component Bose-Hubbard limit as N grows.

desk verdict Genuinely new mechanism — initial-state flavor entanglement enhances doublon hopping in SU(N) fermions — with a clean product-state control, but the quantitative velocity formula is a heuristic extrapolation, not a derived result; worth refereeing after the abstract is toned down. read the letter →

arxiv 2510.25358 v2 pith:TWMXWY7P submitted 2025-10-29 cond-mat.quant-gas

Mathias Mikkelsen , Ippei Danshita This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gas
keywords SU(N)Fermi-Hubbardmodelquantumquenchcorrelationpropagationlight-conedynamicsdoublonholonMottinsulatorflavorentanglement
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

The paper aims to show that flavor entanglement in the initial state of a one-dimensional SU(N) Fermi-Hubbard gas speeds up the spread of correlations after a sudden quench, for N>2. The key object is the doublon, a doubly occupied site in the 1/N-filled Mott insulator; counting configurations shows that its effective hopping grows from J (SU(2)) toward the bosonic value 2J as N grows, because each doublon configuration in an entangled superposition can hop into several configurations on neighboring sites. Holons (empty sites) keep hopping J. The paper conjectures the large-lattice front velocity v_SU(N)=(4(1−1/N)+2)J, interpolating between 4J for SU(2) fermions and 6J for the single-component Bose-Hubbard model, and presents numerical quench fronts for N=2,3,4,6 that rise with N, while a flavor-product initial state shows no enhancement. A sympathetic reader would care because SU(N) quantum-gas simulators with single-site resolution can measure this velocity, making entanglement's dynamical effect observable and quantitative.

What carries the argument

The central object is the equal-superposition doublon collective state: for each site, the uniform superposition of all local configurations containing one double occupation. For N>2 each such configuration can connect to two adjacent doublon configurations with amplitude J, rather than one, which raises the effective hopping to up to 2J; a holon always connects to only one adjacent holon state, so its hopping stays J. In the special case N_P=N (one particle per flavor), these superposition states form a disconnected sector exactly equivalent to a single-component bosonic Hamiltonian; for N_P>N the sector is only approximate, and K is used as an indicator of the bandwidth and hence of the fr

What would settle it

Measure the density-density correlation front in an SU(3) or SU(4) Fermi-Hubbard quench on a large lattice (L≫24) at U_fin/J≈8 and extract the velocity: if it does not exceed 4J or does not increase with N toward (4(1−1/N)+2)J, the mechanism fails. In parallel, exact-diagonalize the one-doublon restricted Fock space for N_P≫N and check whether the actual bandwidth approaches 4K; a strong deviation would quantitatively invalidate the conjectured velocity even if the qualitative trend survives.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that flavor entanglement in the 1/N-filled Mott insulating initial state of the 1D SU(N) Fermi-Hubbard model collectively enhances the effective hopping of doublon excitations for N>2: the equal-superposition doublon collective state has matrix element K/J=(N−1−1/N_F)/(N/2−1/N_F), so K exceeds J for N>2, approaches 2(1−1/N)J for large systems, and tends to the single-component Bose-Hubbard value 2J as N→∞, while holon hopping remains J. From this the paper conjectures the correlation-front velocity v_SU(N)=(4(1−1/N)+2)J for large lattices, interpolating between the SU(2) bound 4J and the bosonic 6J. Numerical evaluation of the density-density correlation after th

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the correlation front in the full model is governed by the effective hopping K of the equal-superposition doublon state, and that the front velocity is the sum of the doublon and holon velocities — even though for N>2 with N_P>N that superposition does not form a closed sector, and the paper itself describes K as 'some indication of the propagation speed' rather than a proven bound.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the conjecture holds, an SU(N) simulator provides a front velocity tunable from 4J to 6J by changing N alone.
  • A flavor-product initial state shows no enhancement, implying a direct signature: the effect disappears when flavor entanglement is destroyed, e.g., by raising the initial temperature.
  • For N=2 the exact restricted-sector analysis gives no enhancement, so the SU(2) bound v≤4J is robust for all interactions.
  • For large N, correlation propagation in the Fermi-Hubbard model becomes indistinguishable from that of the single-component Bose-Hubbard model in the same geometry.
  • The predicted N-dependence is testable with existing quantum-gas-microscope setups using alkaline-earth atoms with N=3,4,6 flavors.

Reading between the lines

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

  • [Editorial inference] The counting mechanism behind K should transfer to other entangled initial states with flavor-symmetric superpositions, such as multicolor ladders or spin-orbital systems, giving analogous velocity boosts with different prefactors.
  • [Editorial inference] Because the closed-sector proof is exact only at N_P=N, the quantitative conjecture is most fragile in the dilute limit; a direct measurement of the doublon bandwidth for N_P≫N would either validate or break the (4(1−1/N)+2)J formula.
  • [Editorial inference] The front velocity could serve as a dynamical thermometer: measuring it as a function of initial temperature would map the crossover from entangled (enhanced) to classical (unenhanced) transport.
  • [Editorial inference] If the enhancement persists in higher-dimensional SU(N) Hubbard models, it could affect thermalization fronts and entanglement growth, not just density-density correlations.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies quench dynamics of the one-dimensional SU(N) Fermi-Hubbard model starting from a 1/N-filled Mott insulator at U→∞ and suddenly reducing U to a finite value. For N>2, the initial Mott state carries flavor entanglement (a (N−1)-component Luttinger liquid). The authors derive a combinatorial expression, Eq. (3), for the effective hopping K of an equal-superposition doublon state in a restricted one-doublon Fock space. This K exceeds J for N>2 and tends to 2(1−1/N)J for large systems, approaching the SCBHM doublon hopping 2J as N→∞; holon hopping remains J. They conjecture the correlation-front velocity v_SU(N) = (4(1−1/N)+2)J and support the qualitative N-dependence with MPS time evolution for N=2,3,4,6, together with a product-state control that shows no enhancement. The supplement contains ED spectra for restricted doublon/holon models and a proof that SU(N) fermions with N≥N_P reproduce bosonic matrix elements in the 1PF subsector.

Significance. The paper identifies a concrete and experimentally relevant mechanism: flavor entanglement in the initial Mott state enhances doublon mobility, leading to a N-dependent correlation-front velocity measurable with quantum-gas microscopes. Strengths include the parameter-free combinatorial derivation of K, the product-state control, the MPS numerics that reproduce the predicted qualitative ordering, and the supplement's general equivalence between SU(N) fermions and bosons in the N≥N_P sector. However, the quantitative velocity formula is only a conjecture: the exact sector calculation holds for N_P=N, while the quench simulations have N_F>1 where the equal-superposition sector is not closed. Table S1 shows the exact doublon bandwidth exceeds the naive K-based estimate by 11–15% in that regime, so the mapping from K to the front velocity is not quantitatively controlled. The abstract's 'we show' is stronger than the evidence and the paper's own conclusion.

major comments (3)
  1. [Analytical calculations, Eq. (3) and following paragraph; Suppl. S1.1.2] The closed-sector derivation is exact only for N_F=1 (N_P=N) or N=2. For the physical regime N_P>N, the paper concedes that the equal-superposition doublon states do not separate into their own sector, so Eq. (3) is only 'some indication' of the propagation speed. Since the MPS quenches use L=24 and N_F between 2 and 8, the analytical argument does not by itself establish the abstract's claim that v_SU(N) becomes equal to the SCBHM velocity in the large-N limit. The derivation-to-conjecture gap should be made explicit, and the abstract should be worded accordingly.
  2. [Numerical calculations, Fig. 2(g)-(h); Table S1] The data support the qualitative ordering (SU(2)<SU(3),SU(4),SU(6)<SCBHM, with the ABCD product state showing no enhancement), but they do not independently determine the functional form (1−1/N). The paper admits 'achievable L and N are so limited that it is hard to say anything quantitative.' Moreover, the additive rule v_doublon+v_holon is assumed without derivation, and Table S1 shows the exact doublon bandwidth exceeds the naive K-based estimate by 11–15% for N_P>N. The velocity formula should be presented as a heuristic extrapolation, not as a result established by the numerics.
  3. [Abstract and Summary/outlook] The abstract says 'we show that entanglement ... leads to collective enhancement ... becoming equal to the velocity of the Bose-Hubbard model in the large-N limit,' while the Summary calls the formula a conjecture. This mismatch in certainty is load-bearing for the paper's central claim. In addition, the Summary states that the velocity 'approaches J a/¯h, the same value as that of the SCBHM,' which is inconsistent with the conjectured formula v_SU(N)=(4(1−1/N)+2)J, whose large-N limit is 6J a/ar h. Please correct the typo and align the abstract with the conclusion.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] Typo: 'replusive' should be 'repulsive'.
  2. [Main text, near Fig. 2] Typo: 'dependendce' should be 'dependence'. Also, Fig. 2 caption: 'The table in Fig. 2(g)' should be 'the data in Fig. 2(g)' since (g) is a plot.
  3. [Supplemental Material, Table S1] In the SU(4), N_P=8 row, K/J is listed as 1.857, but Eq. (3) gives (N−1−1/N_F)/(N/2−1/N_F) = (4−1−1/2)/(2−1/2) = 5/3 ≈ 1.667 for N_F=2. The listed ΔE_K=6.337 is consistent with K=5/3, suggesting a typo in the K column.
  4. [Supplemental Material, Eq. (S2)] There is an unmatched parenthesis in the product term: 'L+1−3NF−jNF)' should presumably be 'L+1−3NF−jNF'.
  5. [Supplemental Material, S1.1.3 and S1.2] The term 'unconnected sectors' is used; for consistency with the main text, 'disconnected sectors' would be clearer.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the doublon hopping K is derived by parameter-free combinatorial counting and the velocity formula is explicitly presented as a conjecture, with its limitations admitted in the text.

full rationale

The central analytical quantity, K/J = (N-1-1/N_F)/(N/2-1/N_F) (Eq. 3), is obtained from combinatorial counting of doublon configurations (Q1 and Q2 in Eqs. S1-S2), not fitted to the numerical quench data. The velocity claim v_SU(N) = (4(1-1/N)+2)J is explicitly called a 'conjecture' in the Summary and is not presented as a derived theorem. The paper also plainly states its own limitations: for N>2 and N_P>N 'the equal doublon superposition states will not separate into their own sector' and K 'gives some indication of the propagation speed', and later admits 'achievable L and N are so limited that it is hard to say anything quantitative.' Thus the quantitative formula is an extrapolation from a heuristic model, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The numerical velocities are extracted by fits, but the conjectured formula is not obtained by fitting those velocities; it is a parameter-free combination of the asymptotic K and a holon contribution, and the paper does not claim to have derived this additivity. The holon model and the N=N_P closed-sector arguments are proved self-containedly in the supplement using Fourier transforms and explicit matrix-element calculations. Self-citations (Refs. 22, 24, 27, 46) are used for numerical methodology and context, not as the load-bearing justification of the central claim. No step reduces to its own inputs by construction, so no circularity is present. The weakness of the velocity conjecture is a concern about derivation completeness or correctness risk, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The true inputs are the doublon-holon dominance assumption, the equal-superposition-sector approximation for N_P>N (whose exact proof holds only at N_P=N), the un-derived velocity sum rule, and several protocol/numerical choices. The K formula itself is a parameter-free combinatorial derivation — the honest core of the paper.

free parameters (4)
  • Conjecture coefficients for v_SU(N) = v = (4(1-1/N)+2)J
    Functional form and coefficients are consistent with numerically fitted velocities; not derived from the model. Labeled a conjecture, but abstract states the effect as shown.
  • U_ini = 40J cutoff = 40J
    Finite stand-in for the U=infinity Mott insulator initial state; chosen by hand as 'large'.
  • U_fin = 8J primary final interaction = 8J
    Chosen protocol value; the paper notes enhancement only emerges for U_fin/J >= 4-6, so 8 is where the effect is visible but numerics still tractable.
  • MPS bond dimension / Trotter step = not stated
    Undisclosed numerical parameters that the central numerical claim depends on; no convergence checks reported.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Density correlations after the quench are carried dominantly by holon-doublon excitations.
    Adopted from Bose-Hubbard studies (Refs. 10, 17); stated as expectation: 'We expect this to also be the case for the SU(N) FHM so we focus on how a holon and a doublon propagate in the medium of the nbar=1 MI state.'
  • ad hoc to paper For N>2 and N_P>N, the equal-superposition collective doublon states dominate the correlation velocity.
    The paper states these states do not form a closed sector in this regime and that K is only 'some indication of the propagation speed'; this is the heuristic bridge to the physical regime.
  • domain assumption The DMRG ground state at U_ini=40J faithfully represents the U=infinity Mott insulator with a (N-1)-component Tomonaga-Luttinger flavor sector.
    Numerical approximation; the flavor entanglement (proportional to N-1 per Ref. 39) is the prerequisite for the claimed mechanism.
  • ad hoc to paper The front velocity equals v_doublon + v_holon.
    Conjectured sum rule, not derived; it is the basis of v=(4(1-1/N)+2)J.
  • standard math Ground-state sector of SU(N) fermions for N>=N_P (1PF sector) is equivalent to single-component bosons.
    Proved in Supplement S2 via k-RDM counting; invoked for the N_P=N analytical limit.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Entanglement-enhanced correlation propagation in the one-dimensional SU($N$) Fermi-Hubbard model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TWMXWY7P

@misc{pith2026251025358,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Entanglement-enhanced correlation propagation in the one-dimensional SU($N$) Fermi-Hubbard model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TWMXWY7P}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2510.25358}
}
abstract

We investigate the dynamics of correlation propagation in the one-dimensional Fermi-Hubbard model with SU($N$) symmetry when the repulsive-interaction strength is quenched from a large value, at which the ground state is a Mott-insulator with $1/N$ filling, to an intermediate value. From approximate analytical insights based on a simple model that captures the essential physics of the doublon excitations, we show that entanglement in the initial state leads to collective enhancement of the propagation velocity $v_{\text{SU}(N)}$ when $N>2$, becoming equal to the velocity of the Bose-Hubbard model in the large-$N$ limit. These results are supported by numerical calculations of the density-density correlation in the quench dynamics for $N=2,3,4,$ and $6$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.25358 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Illustration of a simple two-site model for SCBHM, SU(2) and SU(3) FHM (for simplicity we restrict SU(3) to the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a)-(f) shows [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. First and second quantized digital quantum simulations of bosonic systems

    quant-ph 2025-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    For fixed particle and mode numbers, first-quantized bosonic encodings beat second-quantized ones in gate count for k-RDM terms and standard Hamiltonians, with unary first-quantized cheapest in gates and binary first-...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Gross and I

    C. Gross and I. Bloch, Science357, 995 (2017)

    2017

  2. [2]

    Sch¨ afer, T

    F. Sch¨ afer, T. Fukuhara, S. Sugawa, Y. Takasu, and Y. Takahashi, Nat. Rev. Phys.2, 411 (2020)

    2020

  3. [3]

    Browaeys and T

    A. Browaeys and T. Lahaye, Nat. Phys.16, 132 (2020)

    2020

  4. [4]

    Morgado and S

    M. Morgado and S. Whitlock, A VS Quantum Sci.3, 023501 (2021)

    2021

  5. [5]

    Blatt and C

    R. Blatt and C. F. Roos, Nat. Phys.8, 277 (2012)

    2012

  6. [6]

    X. Wu, X. Liang, Y. Tian, F. Yang, C. Chen, Y.-C. Liu, M. K. Tey, and L. You, Chin. Phys. B30, 020305 (2021)

    2021

  7. [7]

    Monroe, W

    C. Monroe, W. C. Campbell, L.-M. Duan, Z.-X. Gong, A. V. Gorshkov, P. W. Hess, R. Islam, K. Kim, N. M. Linke, P. Richerme, C. Senko, and N. Y. Yao, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 025001 (2021)

    2021

  8. [8]

    Lamata, A

    L. Lamata, A. Parra-Rodriguez, M. Sanz, and E. Solano, Advances in Physics: X, 3:1, 1457981 (2018)

    2018

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    K. He, X. Geng, R. Huang, J. Liu, and W. Chen, Chin. Phys. B30, 080304 (2021)

    2021

  2. [10]

    Cheneau, P

    M. Cheneau, P. Barmettler, D. Poletti, M. Endres, P. Schauß, T. Fukuhara, C. Gross, I. Bloch, C. Kollath, and S. Kuhr, Nature481, 484 (2012)

    2012

  3. [11]

    Takasu, T

    Y. Takasu, T. Yagami, H. Asaka, Y. Fukushima, K. Na- gao, S. Goto, I. Danshita, and Y. Takahashi, Sci. Adv. 6, eaba9255 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    Richerme, Z.-X

    P. Richerme, Z.-X. Gong, A. Lee, C. Senko, J. Smith, M. Foss-Feig, S. Michalakis, A. V. Gorshkov, and C. Monroe, Nature511, 198 (2014)

    2014

  5. [13]

    Jurcevic, B

    P. Jurcevic, B. P. Lanyon, P. Hauke, C. Hempel, P. Zoller, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Nature511, 202 (2014)

    2014

  6. [14]

    C. Chen, G. Emperauger, G. Bornet, F. Caleca, B. G´ ely, M. Bintz, S. Chatterjee, V. Liu, D. Barredo, N. Y. Yao, T. Lahaye, F. Mezzacapo, T. Roscilde, and A. Browaeys, Science389, 483 (2025)

    2025

  7. [15]

    Gong and R

    Z. Gong and R. Hamasaki, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B36, 2230007 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    Cheneau,The Physics and Mathematics of Elliot Lieb: The 90th Anniversary Volume I, edited by R

    M. Cheneau,The Physics and Mathematics of Elliot Lieb: The 90th Anniversary Volume I, edited by R. K. Frank, A. Laptev, M. Lewin, and R. Seiringer, Chap. 10 (EMS Press, Berlin, 2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    Barmettler, D

    P. Barmettler, D. Poletti, M. Cheneau, and C. Kollath, Phys. Rev. A85, 053625 (2012)

    2012

  10. [18]

    Natu and E

    S. Natu and E. J. Mueller, Phys. Rev. A87, 063616 (2013)

    2013

  11. [19]

    Hauke and L

    P. Hauke and L. Tagliacozzo, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 207202 (2013)

    2013

  12. [20]

    M. R. C. Fitzpatrick and M. P. Kennett, Phys. Rev. A 98, 053618 (2018). 6

    2018

  13. [21]

    Cevolani, J

    L. Cevolani, J. Despres, G. Carleo, L. Tagliacozzo, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Phys. Rev. B98, 024302 (2018)

    2018

  14. [22]

    Nagao, M

    K. Nagao, M. Kunimi, Y. Takasu, Y. Takahashi, and I. Danshita, Phys. Rev. A99, 023622 (2019)

    2019

  15. [23]

    Despres, L

    J. Despres, L. Villa, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Sci. Rep. 9, 4135 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    Nagao, Y

    K. Nagao, Y. Takasu, Y. Takahashi, and I. Danshita, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 043091 (2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    Mokhtari-Jazi, M

    A. Mokhtari-Jazi, M. R. C. Fitzpatrick, and M. P. Ken- nett, Phys. Rev. A103, 023334 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    J. T. Schneider, J. Despres, S. J. Thomson, L. Tagli- acozzo, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Phys. Rev. Res.3, L012022 (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    Kaneko and I

    R. Kaneko and I. Danshita, Commun. Phys.5, 65 (2022)

    2022

  20. [28]

    Nagao and S

    K. Nagao and S. Yunoki, Phys. Rev. A111, 023315 (2025)

    2025

  21. [29]

    S. Taie, R. Yamazaki, S. Sugawa, and Y. Takahashi, Nat. Phys.8, 825 (2012)

    2012

  22. [30]

    Hofrichter, L

    C. Hofrichter, L. Riegger, F. Scazza, M. H¨ ofer, D. R. Fer- nandes, I. Bloch, and S. F¨ olling, Phys. Rev. X6, 021030 (2016)

    2016

  23. [31]

    Ozawa, S

    H. Ozawa, S. Taie, Y. Takasu, and Y. Takahashi, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 225303 (2018)

    2018

  24. [32]

    S. Taie, E. Ibarra-Garc ´ ıa-Padilla, N. Nishizawa, Y. Takasu, Y. Kuno, H.-T. Wei, R. T. Scalettar, K. R. A. Hazzard, and Y. Takahashi, Nat. Phys.18, 1356 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    D. Tusi, L. Franchi, L. F. Livi, K. Baumann, D. Bene- dicto Orenes, L. Del Re, R. E. Barfknecht, T.-W. Zhou, M. Inguscio, G. Cappellini, M. Capone, J. Catani, and L. Fallani, Nat. Phys. 18, 1201 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Pasqualetti, O

    G. Pasqualetti, O. Bettermann, N. D. Oppong, E. Ibarra- Garc ´ ıa-Padilla, S. Dasgupta, R. T. Scalettar, K. R. A. Hazzard, I. Bloch, and S. F¨ olling, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 083401 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Cazalilla and A

    M. Cazalilla and A. M. Rey, Rep. Prog. Phys.77, 124401 (2014)

    2014

  28. [36]

    C. He, E. Hajiyev, Z. Ren, B. Song, and G.-B. Jo, J. Phys.: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.52, 102001 (2019)

    2019

  29. [37]

    Ibarra-Garc ´ ıa-Padilla and S

    E. Ibarra-Garc ´ ıa-Padilla and S. Choudhury, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter37, 083003 (2025)

    2025

  30. [38]

    Bonnes, K

    L. Bonnes, K. R. A. Hazzard, S. R. Manmana, A. M. Rey, and S. Wessel, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 205305 (2012)

    2012

  31. [39]

    Capponi, P

    S. Capponi, P. Lecheminant, and K. Totsuka367, 50 (2016)

    2016

  32. [40]

    Yamamoto, J

    R. Yamamoto, J. Kobayashi, T. Kuno, K. Kato, and Y. Takahashi, New J. Phys.18, 023016 (2016)

    2016

  33. [41]

    Miranda, R

    M. Miranda, R. Inoue, N. Tambo, and M. Kozuma, Phys. Rev. A96, 043626 (2017)

    2017

  34. [42]

    S. Buob, J. H¨ oschele, V. Makhalov, A. Rubio-Abadal, and L. Tarruel, PRX Quantum 5, 020316 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    See Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]

  36. [44]

    Vidal, Phys

    G. Vidal, Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 040502 (2004)

    2004

  37. [45]

    Schollw¨ ock, Ann

    U. Schollw¨ ock, Ann. Phys.326, 96 (2011)

    2011

  38. [46]

    Mikkelsen and I

    M. Mikkelsen and I. Danshita, Phys. Rev. A107, 043313 (2023)

    2023

  39. [47]

    S. R. White, Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 2863 (1992)

    1992

  40. [48]

    Entanglement-enhanced correlation propagation in the one-dimensional SU(N) Fermi-Hubbard model

    M. Fishman, S. R. White, and E. M. Stoudenmire, Sci- Post Phys. Codebases 4 (2022). 7 Supplemental Material: “Entanglement-enhanced correlation propagation in the one-dimensional SU(N) Fermi-Hubbard model” S1. Restricted F ock-space representations for doublons and holons S.1....

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.