Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Polarization-dependent chiral transport and chiral solitons in spin Kitaev models

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proposes a Floquet-realizable spin Kitaev model in which x- and y-polarized spin excitations travel in opposite chiral directions, and whose large-spin limit hosts polarization-dependent chiral solitons.

desk verdict A clean Floquet construction and solid ED evidence for polarization-dependent chiral transport, with the chiral-soliton story resting on unverified semiclassical dynamics. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.17084 v1 pith:AHIBGJ7S submitted 2025-08-23 cond-mat.quant-gas cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.str-elnlin.PSquant-ph

Chenwei Lv , Thomas Bilitewski , Ana Maria Rey , Qi Zhou This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gascond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.str-elnlin.PSquant-ph
keywords spinKitaevmodelchiraltransportFloquetengineeringHatano-Nelsonnon-Hermitianskineffectsolitonsquantumsimulationpolarmolecules
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 proposes a one-dimensional spin model, the spin Kitaev model, whose interactions include the usual flip-flop exchange together with flip-flip and flop-flop terms that do not conserve total magnetization. It shows how a sequence of Floquet pulses can realize this model for arbitrary spin S with controllable phases, using current ultracold molecule, magnetic atom, or Rydberg platforms. In a fully polarized chain, a local x-polarized excitation amplifies and travels to the right while a y-polarized excitation travels to the left, a polarization-dependent chiral skin effect. In the large-S limit the model becomes a nonlinear Hatano-Nelson equation whose density-dependent mass supports chiral solitons, and a magnetic field binds these into chiral solitonic molecules whose travel direction is controlled by their internal orientation. The authors argue these effects are directly accessible in experiments and open routes to spintronics, information processing, and quantum sensing.

What carries the argument

The central object is the spin Kitaev Hamiltonian $\hat{H}_{sK}=\hat{H}_{ex}+\hat{H}_{ff}$, where $\hat{H}_{ex}$ contains exchange terms $J e^{-i\theta}\hat{S}^-_n\hat{S}^+_{n+1}$ and $\hat{H}_{ff}$ contains pair-flip terms $\Delta e^{-i\phi}\hat{S}^+_n\hat{S}^+_{n+1}$. The carrying identity is the quadrature decomposition: at $S\to\infty$, the $X$ and $P$ quadratures obey $\dot X_n=(\Delta+J)X_{n-1}+(\Delta-J)X_{n+1}$ and $\dot P_n=(J-\Delta)P_{n-1}-(\Delta+J)P_{n+1}$, two Hatano-Nelson chains with opposite nonreciprocity. At large finite $S$, the semiclassical equation $\dot J_n^x=[(\Delta+J)J_{n-1}^x+(\Delta-J)J_{n+1}^x]J_n^z$ with $J_n^z=\sqrt{1-(J_n^x)^2}$ turns the nonlinear term into a density-dependent mass that halts exponential amplification and stabilizes chiral solitons.

What would settle it

Track the full quantum dynamics for a spin chain with $S=3/2$ and $N=7$, set $\theta=\phi=\pi/2$ and $\Delta=0.8J$, and start from $\hat{U}_x$ applied to the fully polarized state. If $S^x_n(t)$ does not grow preferentially at $n_0+1$ while $S^y_n(t)$ grows at $n_0-1$ in the early-time window, or if a localized profile initialized from the nonlinear Hatano-Nelson equation disperses instead of translating at constant velocity greater than $2J$, the central transport and soliton claims fail.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that adding flip-flip and flop-flop terms to a spin-exchange chain creates a new class of spin models with transport properties beyond conventional spin dynamics. For $\theta=\phi=\pi/2$, exact diagonalization shows that x-polarized excitations are amplified toward the right and y-polarized excitations toward the left for spin S from 1/2 to 5. In the $S\to\infty$ limit, Holstein-Primakoff transformation reduces the model to a bosonic Kitaev model whose X and P quadratures each satisfy a Hatano-Nelson chain with opposite nonreciprocity. For large finite S, retaining the nonlinear factor in the semiclassical equations yields a nonlinear Hatano-Nelson model whose density-dependent mass stabilizes localized one-way solitons moving faster than 2J; with a magnetic field, x- and y-solitons bind into molecules whose direction of travel is set by the relative ordering of the two components.

Load-bearing premise

The chiral solitons and solitonic molecules are derived and simulated in the large-S semiclassical limit, where spin operators are replaced by their expectation values and $1/S$ quantum fluctuations are neglected; if those fluctuations destabilize the localized traveling waves, the advertised soliton phenomenology would not occur in the quantum spin model.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With $\theta=\phi=\pi/2$, a local x-polarized excitation in the fully polarized chain is amplified to the right, while a y-polarized excitation is amplified to the left, for spin S from 1/2 to 5 in exact diagonalization.
  • The semiclassical large-S equations reduce to a nonlinear Hatano-Nelson equation, while the $S\to\infty$ limit recovers linear Hatano-Nelson chains for the X and P quadratures with couplings $\Delta\pm J$.
  • Chiral soliton solutions exist only for $|v_s|>2J$; as $v_s$ approaches $2J$ the soliton narrows to zero width, and for $v_s\le 2J$ the localized solutions disappear.
  • A magnetic field binds one x-soliton and one y-soliton into a solitonic molecule whose travel direction is set by the internal order of the two solitons, i.e. by the sign of $p=n_x-n_y$.
  • The proposed Floquet pulse sequence realizes the spin Kitaev model with arbitrary phases $\theta$ and $\phi$, and arbitrary effective spin S built from ensembles of spin-1/2 particles.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the solitonic molecule's direction is governed by its internal polarization $p$, then reversing the internal order of the two solitons should flip the propagation direction without reversing the lattice or the field, suggesting an internal-state-controlled spin diode.
  • The same density-dependent mass mechanism could be tested in platforms other than large-spin chains, including momentum-state or cavity implementations, where the nonlinear Hatano-Nelson equation may be realized without engineering collective spins.
  • The early-time interference prediction $S^x_{n_0\pm 1}=S\alpha t(\Delta\pm J)$ offers a quantitative observable for isolating the contribution of each pathway; testing it at larger $\alpha$ would probe how the interference evolves beyond the perturbative regime.
  • The boundary-condition dependence of the soliton direction means that domain walls in $J_z$ could act as tunable launching points: flipping the global $J_z$ boundary condition reverses both soliton and molecule velocities.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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. Lv et al. propose Floquet protocols to realize a 'spin Kitaev model' whose Hamiltonian contains both exchange (flip-flop) and pair-creation-like (flip-flip/flop-flop) interactions. They study the resulting dynamics in one dimension. The paper's main results are: (i) a Floquet pulse sequence, Eq. (2), that generates the model with arbitrary phases and spin S; (ii) a demonstration, via a short-time interference calculation and exact diagonalization for S=1/2 through 5, that spin excitations polarized along x and y propagate chirally in opposite directions; (iii) a semiclassical large-S mapping of the model to a nonlinear Hatano-Nelson equation, Eqs. (7)-(8); and (iv) the construction of chiral solitons and solitonic molecules in that semiclassical limit, with dynamics shown in Figs. 2 and 3. The abstract advertises polarization-dependent chiral transport and chiral solitons as the central physics.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper introduces a new class of spin models with directional, polarization-dependent transport that is accessible in cold-molecule, magnetic-atom, and Rydberg-atom platforms. The chiral transport claim is well supported: the interference argument leading to Eq. (6) is simple and transparent, and the exact diagonalization data for S=1/2 up to 5 show clear asymmetric propagation consistent with the short-time prediction. The paper is also self-contained: the Floquet sequence is explicit, the effective Hamiltonian is derived, and the mean-field equations are obtained from the Heisenberg equations of motion. The soliton and solitonic-molecule results are intriguing and represent the main novel physics, but they currently rest entirely on the semiclassical large-S approximation, with no finite-S quantum test and no stability analysis. The paper is clearly written and the supplementary material is thorough, which strengthens its usefulness to the community even though the soliton predictions need additional support.

major comments (3)
  1. [Chiral Solitons, Eqs. (7)-(8) and Supplemental 'Mean field approach'] The chiral-soliton and solitonic-molecule results are derived and verified only in the semiclassical large-S limit, where spin operators are replaced by expectation values and 1/S quantum fluctuations are dropped (Supplement, Eq. S14). The manuscript does not provide a finite-S quantum check (e.g., exact diagonalization or truncated Wigner for moderate S) nor a linear stability analysis of the soliton profiles against perturbations. Since the abstract presents chiral solitons as a central result, this missing support is load-bearing. The traveling-wave ansatz shows that the profile is a solution of the mean-field equation, but it does not establish that it is robust in the quantum model; the directional amplification of the underlying Hatano-Nelson dynamics makes stability a nontrivial requirement.
  2. [Chiral Solitons, Eq. (8) and Fig. 2] Equation (8) is derived from Eq. (7) by replacing J^z_n with sqrt(1-(J^x_n)^2), which is only valid where J^z_n >= 0. The soliton profiles in Fig. 2(a) satisfy J^z_n -> -1 as n -> -infinity and cross zero, so the positive square root with a single sign cannot describe the full profile. The Supplement (Eq. S14 onward) correctly uses a '±' sign, but the main text omits it. As written, Eq. (8) is inconsistent with the boundary conditions used to construct the solitons; the sign of the square root must be made piecewise explicit, or the derivation must be restricted to regions where J^z > 0 and the boundary condition adjusted accordingly.
  3. [Chiral Solitonic Molecules, Eq. (9) and Fig. 3] The solitonic molecule is a bound state of x- and y-solitons in a magnetic field h, and its travel direction is shown to depend on the molecule's orientation. The demonstration is numerical solution of the semiclassical equations only. In addition, the value h = -0.0001J used in Fig. 3 is extremely small; while the Supplement shows larger h for one orientation (Fig. S7), the dependence of the binding on h for both orientations and the molecule's stability under quantum fluctuations are not addressed. These points should be discussed or supplemented for the molecule claim to be at the same level of support as the transport claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Floquet Implementation, Eq. (2)] The same symbol U is used for the Floquet propagator and for the unitary rotation operator U; this is confusing and should be disambiguated (e.g., U_F for the Floquet operator).
  2. [After Eq. (4)] The quadrature operator is written as 'ˆP = i(ˆa† - ˆa)/√2', but the text later uses P_n for its expectation value while also using p for the molecule's polarization; consider renaming one of these to avoid confusion.
  3. [Chiral Solitons, Eq. (8)] The replacement J^z_n = sqrt(1-(J^x_n)^2) should carry an explicit ± sign, as the Supplement does, to indicate that J^z can be negative.
  4. [Fig. 2 and Fig. 3] The soliton velocities vs = ±50J in Fig. 2 and vs = ±200J in Fig. 3 are much larger than the microscopic coupling scale; a brief remark on the experimental regime in which such fast, sharply localized solitons could be observed would be helpful.
  5. [Supplement, 'Boundary conditions of the solitons'] In the text near Fig. S3, the sentence 'In Fig. S3(a-d)' refers to the dependence of soliton profiles on Δ, but Fig. S3 has only two panels (a,b); the cross-reference should be corrected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Floquet construction, transport equations, and soliton solutions are self-contained; only the curved-space framing relies on same-group self-citations.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The spin Kitaev model H_sK is obtained from the exchange Hamiltonian through the explicit Floquet sequence in Eq. (2), with the effective Hamiltonian derived in Supplementary Eqs. (S5)-(S6); this is a direct construction, not an input disguised as a result. The chiral transport follows either from exact diagonalization (Fig. 1, Fig. S2) or from the Holstein-Primakoff reduction to the linear Bosonic Kitaev model, Eq. (3), which is then rewritten as the two Hatano-Nelson chains in Eq. (4). The large-spin nonlinear equations, Eqs. (7)-(8), are derived from the mean-field Heisenberg equations in Supplementary Eq. (S14), and the soliton solutions are constructed by integrating Eq. (S27) with stated boundary conditions. No parameter is fitted to the advertised chiral-soliton output, and no prediction is statistically forced by a prior fit. The only self-referential element is the 'curved space' interpretation citing Refs. [53,54] by the same authors, which is used to describe the asymmetric Hatano-Nelson couplings as hyperbolic-space curvature. That interpretation is not load-bearing: the transport direction is obtained directly from Eq. (4), and the soliton profiles are obtained by solving the equations of motion with boundary conditions, independent of the curvature language. The paper's limitation that finite-S soliton dynamics are not checked against quantum fluctuations is a correctness/robustness concern, not a circularity. Overall, the central claims do not reduce to their inputs by construction, so the circularity score is low, reflecting only the minor same-group self-citations used for framing.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No parameters are fitted to data. The Hamiltonian parameters (J, Delta, theta, phi, h) are inputs from the Floquet control sequence. The numerical values used in figures are illustrative. The key assumptions are the high-frequency Floquet expansion, the large-S semiclassical replacement, and the collective-Dicke-manifold protection for realizing S>1/2.

free parameters (3)
  • Delta/J ratio = 0.8 (illustrative)
    Chosen for Fig. 1 to make the asymmetric transport evident; the qualitative results do not depend on the exact value.
  • soliton velocity v_s = e.g., 50J, 200J (illustrative)
    Free parameter of the traveling-wave ansatz; existence requires |v_s| > 2J for the corresponding soliton type.
  • initial rotation angle alpha = 0.1 (illustrative)
    Small-angle perturbation used in the exact diagonalization; the results are presented for small alpha.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Floquet high-frequency expansion: the effective Hamiltonian Eq. (1) correctly describes stroboscopic dynamics for driving period T.
    The protocol Eq. (2) is derived in the Supplemental Material via a high-frequency Floquet expansion (Eqs. S4-S6); assumes the driving period is short enough.
  • domain assumption Large-S semiclassical approximation: spin operators are replaced by their expectation values, neglecting 1/S quantum fluctuations.
    Used to derive Eq. (7) and the soliton solutions; exact for S→infinity, approximate for finite S.
  • domain assumption Collective Dicke manifold protection: N spin-1/2's with strong intra-plane Heisenberg interactions behave as a single spin S=N/2.
    Assumed in the higher-S Floquet scheme, citing Refs. [50-52]; not proven for the specific sequence.
  • standard math Standard spin algebra and Holstein-Primakoff transformation at leading order.
    Used to map the spin Kitaev model to the bosonic Kitaev model Eq. (3).
  • domain assumption Soliton boundary conditions: Jz tends to +/-1 at +/-infinity for localized excitations.
    Required for the traveling-wave solutions; changing these conditions flips the propagation direction.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Polarization-dependent chiral transport and chiral solitons in spin Kitaev models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AHIBGJ7S

@misc{pith2026250817084,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Polarization-dependent chiral transport and chiral solitons in spin Kitaev models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AHIBGJ7S}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.17084}
}
abstract

Recent advances in synthetic quantum matter allow researchers to design quantum models inaccessible in traditional materials. Here, we propose protocols to engineer a new class of quantum spin models, which we call spin Kitaev models. The building blocks are basic spin-exchange interactions combined with locally selective Floquet pulses, a capability recently demonstrated in a range of experimental platforms. The resulting flip-flip and flop-flop terms lead to intriguing quantum transport dynamics beyond conventional spin models. For instance, in the absence of a magnetic field, spin excitations polarized along the $x$ and $y$ axes propagate chirally in opposite directions, producing polarization-dependent spin transport. In the large-spin limit, the spin Kitaev model maps to a nonlinear Hatano-Nelson model, where the interplay of nonlinearity and the underlying curvature yields polarization-dependent chiral solitons. A magnetic field binds two oppositely polarized chiral solitons into a chiral solitonic molecule, whose travel direction depends on its orientation. Our results, directly accessible in current experiments, open new opportunities for simulating transport in curved spaces and for applications in spintronics, information processing, and quantum sensing.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.17084 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Schematic plot illustrating how to realize a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Solitonic molecule propagating towards left (a,c) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

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. Symmetry as a route to generalized bosonic Kitaev chains

    quant-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    Sublattice symmetry in any 1D quadratic bosonic pairing Hamiltonian automatically implies an effective time-reversal symmetry of the dynamical matrix, enabling a symmetry-protected skin effect distinct from quadrature...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Chomaz, I

    L. Chomaz, I. Ferrier-Barbut, F. Ferlaino, B. Laburthe- Tolra, B. L. Lev, and T. Pfau, Dipolar physics: a review of experiments with magnetic quantum gases, Rep. Prog. Phys. 86, 026401 (2023)

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    K.-K. Ni, S. Ospelkaus, M. H. G. de Miranda, A. Pe’er, B. Neyenhuis, J. J. Zirbel, S. Kotochigova, P. S. Julienne, D. S. Jin, and J. Ye, A high phase-space-density gas of polar molecules, Science 322, 231-235 (2008)

    work page 2008

  3. [3]

    J. W. Park, S. A. Will, and M. W. Zwierlein, Ultracold dipolar gas of fermionic 23Na40K molecules in their abso- lute ground state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 205302 (2015)

    2015

  4. [4]

    cation, and in the Bosonic Kitaev model (BKM) [41, 42], where quadrature-dependent chiral transport arises from its decomposition into two Hatano-Nelson chains

    ∆ = 0.8J and N = 7 have been used. cation, and in the Bosonic Kitaev model (BKM) [41, 42], where quadrature-dependent chiral transport arises from its decomposition into two Hatano-Nelson chains. Our work reveals a distinct mechanism: the interplay between exchange and flip-flip/flop-flop interactions in ˆHsK gives rise to polarization-dependent chiral tr...

    work page

  5. [5]

    De Marco, G

    L. De Marco, G. Valtolina, K. Matsuda, W. G. Tobias, J. P. Covey, and J. Ye, A degenerate Fermi gas of polar molecules, Science 363, 853-856 (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Duda, X.-Y

    M. Duda, X.-Y. Chen, A. Schindewolf, R. Bause, J. von Milczewski, R. Schmidt, I. Bloch, and X.-Y. Luo, Tran- sition from a polaronic condensate to a degenerate Fermi gas of heteronuclear molecules, Nature Physics 19, 720- 725 (2023)

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Bigagli, W

    N. Bigagli, W. Yuan, S. Zhang, B. Bulatovic, T. Karman, I. Stevenson, and S. Will, Observation of Bose-Einstein condensation of dipolar molecules, Nature 631, 289-293 (2024)

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Langen, G

    T. Langen, G. Valtolina, D. Wang, and J. Ye, Quantum state manipulation and cooling of ultracold molecules, Na- ture Physics 20, 702-712 (2024)

    work page 2024

Show all 61 references
  1. [9]

    Stevenson, A

    I. Stevenson, A. Z. Lam, N. Bigagli, C. Warner, W. Yuan, S. Zhang, and S. Will, Ultracold gas of dipolar NaCs ground state molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 113002 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    Bigagli, W

    N. Bigagli, W. Yuan, S. Zhang, B. Bulatovic, T. Kar- man, I. Stevenson, and S. Will, Observation of Bose- Einstein condensation of dipolar molecules, Nature 631, 289 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    K. R. A. Hazzard, S. R. Manmana, M. Foss-Feig, and A. M. Rey, Far-from-equilibrium quantum magnetism with ultracold polar molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 075301 (2013)

    2013

  4. [12]

    Z. Z. Yan, J. W. Park, Y. Ni, H. Loh, S. Will, T. Karman, and M. Zwierlein, Resonant dipolar collisions of ultracold molecules induced by microwave dressing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 063401 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    Matsuda, L

    K. Matsuda, L. De Marco, J.-R. Li, W. G. Tobias, G. Valtolina, G. Qu´ em´ ener, and J. Ye, Resonant collisional shielding of reactive molecules using electric fields, Science 370, 1324-1327 (2020)

    2020

  6. [14]

    Anderegg, S

    L. Anderegg, S. Burchesky, Y. Bao, S. S. Yu, T. Kar- man, E. Chae, K.-K. Ni, W. Ketterle, and J. M. Doyle, Observation of microwave shielding of ultracold molecules, Science 373, 779-782 (2021)

    2021

  7. [15]

    Schindewolf, R

    A. Schindewolf, R. Bause, X.-Y. Chen, M. Duda, T. Kar- man, I. Bloch, and X.-Y. Luo, Evaporation of microwave- shielded polar molecules to quantum degeneracy, Nature 607, 677-681 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    T. V. Tscherbul, J. Ye, and A. M. Rey, Robust nu- clear spin entanglement via dipolar interactions in polar molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 143002 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    S. L. Cornish, M. R. Tarbutt, and K. R. A. Hazzard, Quantum computation and quantum simulation with ul- 6 tracold molecules, Nature Physics 20, 730-740 (2024)

    2024

  10. [18]

    J. L. Bohn, A. M. Rey, and J. Ye, Cold molecules: Progress in quantum engineering of chemistry and quan- tum matter, Science 357, 1002 (2017)

    2017

  11. [19]

    S. A. Moses, J. P. Covey, M. T. Miecnikowski, D. S. Jin, and J. Ye, New frontiers for quantum gases of polar molecules, Nature Physics 13, 13 (2017)

    2017

  12. [20]

    A. M. Kaufman and K.-K. Ni, Quantum science with optical tweezer arrays of ultracold atoms and molecules, Nature Physics 17, 1324 (2021)

    2021

  13. [21]

    Anderegg, L

    L. Anderegg, L. W. Cheuk, Y. Bao, S. Burchesky, W. Ketterle, K.-K. Ni, and J. M. Doyle, An optical tweezer array of ultracold molecules, Science 365, 1156 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    C. M. Holland, Y. Lu, and L. W. Cheuk, On-demand en- tanglement of molecules in a reconfigurable optical tweezer array, Science 382, 1143-1147 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    Browaeys and T

    A. Browaeys and T. Lahaye, Many-body physics with in- dividually controlled Rydberg atoms, Nature Physics 16, 132-142 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    Scholl, H

    P. Scholl, H. J. Williams, G. Bornet, F. Wallner, D. Barredo, L. Henriet, A. Signoles, C. Hainaut, T. Franz, S. Geier, A. Tebben, A. Salzinger, G. Z¨ urn, T. Lahaye, M. Weidem¨ uller, and A. Browaeys, Microwave engineering of programmableXXZ Hamiltonians in arrays of Rydberg a...

    2022

  17. [25]

    Nishad, A

    N. Nishad, A. Keselman, T. Lahaye, A. Browaeys, and S. Tsesses, Quantum simulation of generic spin-exchange models in Floquet-engineered Rydberg-atom arrays, Phys. Rev. A 108, 053318 (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    Saffman, T

    M. Saffman, T. G. Walker, and K. Mølmer, Quantum information with Rydberg atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 2313 (2010)

    2010

  19. [27]

    Goldman and J

    N. Goldman and J. Dalibard, Periodically driven quan- tum systems: Effective Hamiltonians and engineered gauge fields, Phys. Rev. X 4, 031027 (2014)

    2014

  20. [28]

    Bukov, L

    M. Bukov, L. D’Alessio, and A. Polkovnikov, Univer- sal high-frequency behavior of periodically driven systems: from dynamical stabilization to Floquet engineering, Ad- vances in Physics 64, 139-226 (2015)

    2015

  21. [29]

    Oka and S

    T. Oka and S. Kitamura, Floquet engineering of quantum materials, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 10, 387 (2019)

    2019

  22. [30]

    Eckardt, Colloquium: Atomic quantum gases in pe- riodically driven optical lattices, Rev

    A. Eckardt, Colloquium: Atomic quantum gases in pe- riodically driven optical lattices, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 011004 (2017)

    2017

  23. [32]

    Christakis, J

    L. Christakis, J. S. Rosenberg, R. Raj, S. Chi, A. Morn- ingstar, D. A. Huse, Z. Z. Yan, and W. S. Bakr, Prob- ing site-resolved correlations in a spin system of ultracold molecules, Nature 614, 64-69 (2023)

    2023

  24. [33]

    Miller, A

    C. Miller, A. N. Carroll, J. Lin, H. Hirzler, H. Gao, H. Zhou, M. D. Lukin, and J. Ye, Two-axis twisting using Floquet-engineered XYZ spin models with polar molecules, Nature 633, 332-337 (2024)

    2024

  25. [34]

    Geier, N

    S. Geier, N. Thaicharoen, C. Hainaut, T. Franz, A. Salzinger, A. Tebben, D. Grimshandl, G. Z¨ urn, and M. Weidem¨ uller, Floquet Hamiltonian engineering of an isolated many-body spin system, Science 374, 1149-1152 (2021)

    2021

  26. [35]

    J. Choi, H. Zhou, H. S. Knowles, R. Landig, S. Choi, and M. D. Lukin, Robust dynamic Hamiltonian engineering of many-body spin systems, Phys. Rev. X 10, 031002 (2020)

    2020

  27. [36]

    Q. Zhou, J. V. Porto, and S. Das Sarma, Condensates in- duced by interband coupling in a double-well lattice, Phys. Rev. B 83, 195106 (2011)

    2011

  28. [37]

    C. Luo, H. Zhang, A. Chu, C. Maruko, A. M. Rey, and J. K. Thompson, Hamiltonian engineering of collective XYZ spin models in an optical cavity, Nature Physics 21, 916 (2025)

    2025

  29. [38]

    Hatano and D

    N. Hatano and D. R. Nelson, Localization transitions in non-Hermitian quantum mechanics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 570 (1996)

    1996

  30. [39]

    Hatano and D

    N. Hatano and D. R. Nelson, Non-Hermitian delocaliza- tion and eigenfunctions, Phys. Rev. B 58, 8384 (1998)

    1998

  31. [40]

    Weidemann, M

    S. Weidemann, M. Kremer, T. Helbig, T. Hofmann, A. Stegmaier, M. Greiter, R. Thomale, and A. Sza- meit, Topological funneling of light, Science 368, 311-314 (2020)

    2020

  32. [41]

    Liang, D

    Q. Liang, D. Xie, Z. Dong, H. Li, H. Li, B. Gadway, W. Yi, and B. Yan, Dynamic signatures of non-Hermitian skin effect and topology in ultracold atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 070401 (2022)

    2022

  33. [42]

    McDonald, T

    A. McDonald, T. Pereg-Barnea, and A. A. Clerk, Phase- dependent chiral transport and effective non-Hermitian dynamics in a bosonic Kitaev-Majorana chain, Phys. Rev. X 8, 041031 (2018)

    2018

  34. [43]

    McDonald and A

    A. McDonald and A. A. Clerk, Exponentially-enhanced quantum sensing with non-Hermitian lattice dynamics, Nature Communications 11, 5382 (2020)

    2020

  35. [44]

    J. Lan, W. Yu, R. Wu, and J. Xiao, Spin-wave diode, Phys. Rev. X 5, 041049 (2015)

    2015

  36. [45]

    A. V. Chumak, V. I. Vasyuchka, A. A. Serga, and B. Hillebrands, Magnon spintronics, Nature Physics 11, 453-461 (2015)

    2015

  37. [46]

    S.-H. Yang, R. Naaman, Y. Paltiel, and S. S. P. Parkin, Chiral spintronics, Nature Reviews Physics 3, 328-343 (2021)

    2021

  38. [47]

    Pichler, T

    H. Pichler, T. Ramos, A. J. Daley, and P. Zoller, Quan- tum optics of chiral spin networks, Phys. Rev. A 91, 042116 (2015)

    2015

  39. [48]

    Polo and V

    J. Polo and V. Ahufinger, Soliton-based matter-wave in- terferometer, Phys. Rev. A 88, 053628 (2013)

    2013

  40. [49]

    G. D. McDonald, C. C. N. Kuhn, K. S. Hardman, S. Ben- netts, P. J. Everitt, P. A. Altin, J. E. Debs, J. D. Close, and N. P. Robins, Bright solitonic matter-wave interfer- ometer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 013002 (2014)

    2014

  41. [50]

    [50,52,58] for additional details on Floquet driving schemes, chiral transport, soliton profiles, and boundary conditions

    See Supplemental Material, which includes Refs. [50,52,58] for additional details on Floquet driving schemes, chiral transport, soliton profiles, and boundary conditions

  42. [51]

    A. M. Rey, L. Jiang, M. Fleischhauer, E. Demler, and M. D. Lukin, Many-body protected entanglement genera- tion in interacting spin systems, Phys. Rev. A 77, 052305 (2008)

    2008

  43. [52]

    M. J. Martin, M. Bishof, M. D. Swallows, X. Zhang, C. Benko, J. von Stecher, A. V. Gorshkov, A. M. Rey, and J. Ye, A quantum many-body spin system in an op- tical lattice clock, Science 341, 632 (2013)

    2013

  44. [53]

    Bilitewski and A

    T. Bilitewski and A. M. Rey, Manipulating growth and propagation of correlations in dipolar multilayers: From pair production to bosonic Kitaev models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 053001 (2023)

    2023

  45. [54]

    Lv and Q

    C. Lv and Q. Zhou, Hidden curved spaces in bosonic Kitaev model, ArXiv: 2408.05132 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  46. [55]

    C. Lv, R. Zhang, Z. Zhai, and Q. Zhou, Curving the space by non-Hermiticity, Nature communications 13, 7 2184 (2022)

    2022

  47. [56]

    Nishino, Y

    A. Nishino, Y. Umeno, and M. Wadati, Chiral nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals9, 1063- 1069 (1998)

    1998

  48. [57]

    M. J. Edmonds, M. Valiente, G. Juzeli¯ unas, L. Santos, and P. ¨Ohberg, Simulating an interacting gauge theory with ultracold Bose gases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 085301 (2013)

    2013

  49. [58]

    Fr¨ olian, C

    A. Fr¨ olian, C. S. Chisholm, E. Neri, C. R. Cabrera, R. Ramos, A. Celi, and L. Tarruell, Realizing a 1D topo- logical gauge theory in an optically dressed BEC, Nature 608, 293-297 (2022)

    2022

  50. [59]

    Polarization-dependent chiral transport and chiral solitons in spin Kitaev models

    F. Haake, M. Ku´ s, and R. Scharf, Classical and quantum chaos for a kicked top, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik B Condensed Matter 65, 381 (1987). 8 Supplementary Materials for “Polarization-dependent chiral transport and chiral solitons in spin Kitaev models” EFFECTIVE HAMIL TONIAN...

    1987

  51. [60]

    A. M. Rey, L. Jiang, M. Fleischhauer, E. Demler, and M. D. Lukin, Phys. Rev. A 77, 052305 (2008)

    2008

  52. [61]

    Bilitewski and A

    T. Bilitewski and A. M. Rey, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 053001 (2023)

    2023

  53. [62]

    Haake, M

    F. Haake, M. Ku´ s, and R. Scharf, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik B Condensed Matter65, 381 (1987)

    1987

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.