pith. sign in

arxiv: 2407.04073 · v4 · submitted 2024-07-04 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el · cond-mat.quant-gas

Deconfined quantum critical points in fermionic systems with spin-charge separation

Niccol\`o Baldelli , Arianna Montorsi , Sergi Juli\`a-Farr\'e , Maciej Lewenstein , Matteo Rizzi , Luca Barbiero This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 23:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.quant-gas
keywords deconfined quantum critical pointsspin-charge separationone-dimensional fermionsquantum phase transitionspartially gapped statesstrongly correlated electronsfield theory
0
0 comments X

The pith

Spin-charge separation in one-dimensional fermions enables partially gapped deconfined quantum critical points.

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

The paper aims to show that spin-charge separation, a feature of interacting fermions in one dimension, can produce deconfined quantum critical points that are only partially gapped. This differs from prior examples where such points remain fully gapless. Low-energy field theory analysis of generic 1D fermionic systems first indicates this possibility. The authors then construct a microscopic lattice model and perform numerical calculations of gaps, local order parameters, and correlation functions to confirm the partially gapped character at transitions between ordered phases.

Core claim

Deconfined quantum critical points are transition points between locally ordered phases not captured by the Landau-Ginzburg-Wilson paradigm. In fermionic systems the spin-charge separation peculiar to interacting low-dimensional particles allows such points to appear in a partially gapped form, as first inferred from field theory of generic one-dimensional systems and then verified by deriving a microscopic model whose numerical gaps, order parameters and correlations exhibit the expected partially gapped deconfined behavior.

What carries the argument

Spin-charge separation in one-dimensional interacting fermions, which decouples spin and charge sectors and permits selective gapping while preserving deconfined criticality.

Load-bearing premise

The low-energy field theory of generic one-dimensional fermions accurately describes the phase transitions realized in the specific microscopic model studied.

What would settle it

Numerical data on the microscopic model showing a fully gapped spectrum or fully gapless correlations at the transition between ordered phases, rather than the predicted partial gapping.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2407.04073 by Arianna Montorsi, Luca Barbiero, Maciej Lewenstein, Matteo Rizzi, Niccol\`o Baldelli, Sergi Juli\`a-Farr\'e.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Cartoon of the phase diagram of the micro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Study of the critical point between the BOW and the CDW phases appearing in Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Scaling of the order parameters around the BOW [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Study of the critical point between the BOW and the AF phases appearing in Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Scaling of the order parameters around the the AF [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. First order phase transition between the AF and the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Extrapolation of the order parameters (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Deconfined quantum critical points are intriguing transition points not predicted by the Landau-Ginzburg-Wilson symmetry-breaking paradigm which are usually identified by the appearance of a continuous phase transition between locally ordered phases. Here, we reveal the presence of deconfined quantum critical points with unexplored properties. Contrary to previously known examples, we show that the phenomenon of spin-charge separation peculiar to interacting low dimensional fermions can allow for the appearance of partially gapped deconfined quantum critical points. We first infer this point by performing a field theory analysis of generic one-dimensional fermionic systems in the low energy limit. Subsequently, we derive a microscopic model where phase transitions between different locally ordered phases can take place. Here, by performing a numerical analysis we explicitly derive, among others, the gaps, local order parameters and correlation functions behavior, supporting the presence of partially gapped deconfined quantum critical points. Our results thus provide new interesting insights on the widely investigated topic of quantum phase transitions.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that spin-charge separation in interacting one-dimensional fermions enables partially gapped deconfined quantum critical points (DQCPs), identified via a low-energy field theory analysis of generic fermionic systems followed by construction of a microscopic lattice model whose numerical results on gaps, order parameters, and correlation functions are asserted to confirm the partially gapped DQCP character.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work extends the known landscape of DQCPs by incorporating fermionic spin-charge separation to produce partially gapped transitions between locally ordered phases, offering a new mechanism distinct from prior bosonic or symmetry-breaking examples and potentially relevant to quantum phase transitions in low-dimensional systems.

major comments (2)
  1. [field theory analysis section] The field theory analysis in the low-energy limit (described in the abstract and early sections) predicts partially gapped DQCPs, but the manuscript does not explicitly demonstrate that the deconfined character survives the inclusion of all relevant inter-sector couplings that could arise from the microscopic model; a concrete check against operator relevance would strengthen the mapping.
  2. [numerical analysis] Numerical section: the reported gaps and order parameters support the partially gapped claim, yet without tabulated error estimates or finite-size scaling details for the correlation functions, it remains unclear whether the numerics rule out a weakly first-order transition or a gapped phase with small but finite correlation length.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the spin and charge velocities and Luttinger parameters should be defined consistently between the field theory and the microscopic model sections to avoid ambiguity in the mapping.
  2. Figure captions for the correlation function plots would benefit from explicit mention of the system sizes used and any fitting procedures applied.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment and recommendation of minor revision. We address the major comments point by point below and will incorporate the requested clarifications in the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [field theory analysis section] The field theory analysis in the low-energy limit (described in the abstract and early sections) predicts partially gapped DQCPs, but the manuscript does not explicitly demonstrate that the deconfined character survives the inclusion of all relevant inter-sector couplings that could arise from the microscopic model; a concrete check against operator relevance would strengthen the mapping.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit check of operator relevance for inter-sector couplings would add rigor to the mapping. Our field theory is formulated in the generic low-energy limit, but in the revision we will add an appendix that computes the scaling dimensions of the relevant inter-sector operators arising from the microscopic model and confirms that none destabilize the deconfined fixed point. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [numerical analysis] Numerical section: the reported gaps and order parameters support the partially gapped claim, yet without tabulated error estimates or finite-size scaling details for the correlation functions, it remains unclear whether the numerics rule out a weakly first-order transition or a gapped phase with small but finite correlation length.

    Authors: We acknowledge that tabulated errors and more detailed finite-size scaling would make the numerical evidence more conclusive. In the revised version we will include error estimates from the DMRG runs, present correlation-function data with explicit finite-size scaling collapses, and discuss the system sizes used to bound the correlation length and exclude a weakly first-order scenario. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper's central derivation begins with an independent low-energy field theory analysis of generic 1D fermionic systems that infers the existence of partially gapped DQCPs via spin-charge separation, then separately constructs a microscopic lattice model, and finally performs numerical analysis of gaps, order parameters, and correlations to support the claim. No load-bearing step reduces by the paper's own equations to a fitted input, self-definition, or self-citation chain; the field theory and numerics are presented as distinct, externally verifiable steps without internal reduction to the target result.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the applicability of low-energy field theory to generic 1D fermions and the existence of a microscopic model whose numerics confirm the predicted partially gapped DQCPs; no free parameters or invented entities are mentioned in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Low energy effective field theory applies to generic one-dimensional fermionic systems
    Invoked to infer the presence of partially gapped DQCPs from spin-charge separation

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5723 in / 1228 out tokens · 29608 ms · 2026-05-23T23:09:02.525861+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

115 extracted references · 115 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    and, the more exotic, symmetric mass generation [7] phase transitions. Within this diversity, the Landau–Ginzburg-Wilson symmetry-breaking paradigm [8, 9] rigorously predicts the appearance of discontinuous phase transitions con- necting locally ordered (LO) phases with different sym- metry properties. Nevertheless, pioneering analysis proved [10, 11] tha...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    (1)(a), for Jz = 0, the Hamilto- nian in Eq.(16) is the known extended Fermi-Hubbard model [76, 81–84]

    BOW-CDW phase transition As shown in Fig. (1)(a), for Jz = 0, the Hamilto- nian in Eq.(16) is the known extended Fermi-Hubbard model [76, 81–84]. For dominating U/t, the system is in MI. The situation changes drastically for larger val- ues of V . Here, two LO phases can take place: a BOW phase when V ∼ U are away from strongly interacting perturbative re...

    work page

  3. [3]

    (16) for Jz > 0 which phase diagram is shown in Fig

    AF-BOW phase transition We now move to the analysis of the model in Eq. (16) for Jz > 0 which phase diagram is shown in Fig. (1)(b). As specified, a finite antiferromagnetic coupling allows for the breaking of the discrete spin flip symmetry. A part from slightly moving the transition points, we find indeed that the main role played by small Jz is to re- ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    The size L refers to a finite MPS constructed out of L/2 unit cells

    (a) Values of the order parameters OBOW and OAF for different dimension χ; (a) Values of the Luttinger parameter Kc and Ks at fixed bond dimension. The size L refers to a finite MPS constructed out of L/2 unit cells. a SU (2) symmetry related to the spin degrees of free- dom not present in either the BOW or the AF phase. Fig. 5(c) also demonstrates that s...

    work page

  5. [5]

    As already pointed out at the level of field theory, in or- der to find such transition to be continuous, both gaps have to vanish at the transition point

    AF-CDW phase transition Finally, we study the AF-CDW phase transition. As already pointed out at the level of field theory, in or- der to find such transition to be continuous, both gaps have to vanish at the transition point. This aspect clearly rules out the possible presence of a partly gapped DQCPs while, in principle, it still allows for standard ful...

    work page

  6. [6]

    hysteresis type phenomenon

    and noise correlators measurements [98] allow for an accurate detection of local density [99] and spin [100] orderings and therefore for an accurate probing of non- local order parameters and locally ordered phases. As consequence, we believe that our results not only unveil a novel interesting type of deconfined quantum critical points but also pave the ...

    work page doi:10.13039/501100011033 2020

  7. [7]

    (A3), the competition between the quadratic and the cosine terms determines the properties of the sys- tem

    Derivation of gapped phases and symmetry breaking In Eq. (A3), the competition between the quadratic and the cosine terms determines the properties of the sys- tem. Specifically, in the first line fluctuations of the fields are promoted, whereas the cosine term in the second line favors the pinning of the field φν(x) to a x independent value minimizing th...

    work page

  8. [8]

    (A9) Based on the previous results, it is thus possible to pre- dict that the transitions between LO phases occur inde- pendently in the two channels for gν = 0

    Bosonization of the microscopic model The bosonization technique of the microscopic model H = − t X j,σ (c† j,σcj+1,σ + h.c.) + U X j nj,↑nj,↓ + X j (V S c j Sc j+1 + JzSs j Ss j+1) (A8) provides the following quantities vν = 2at(2 − Kν), Kc = 1 − 1 4πt U + 6V + 2Jz , Ks = 1 − 1 4πt −U + 2V + 6Jz , gc = − U − 2V + 2Jz a = −gs. (A9) Based on the previous r...

    work page

  9. [9]

    C. Domb, M. S. Green, and J. L. Lebowitz, Phase Tran- sitions and Critical Phenomena , Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena No. v. 8 (Academic Press, 1972)

    work page 1972

  10. [10]

    Sachdev, Quantum Phase Transitions, 2nd ed

    S. Sachdev, Quantum Phase Transitions, 2nd ed. (Cam- bridge University Press, 2011)

    work page 2011

  11. [11]

    Binder, Reports on Progress in Physics 50, 783 (1987)

    K. Binder, Reports on Progress in Physics 50, 783 (1987)

    work page 1987

  12. [12]

    V. L. Berezinsky, Sov. Phys. JETP 32, 493 (1971)

    work page 1971

  13. [13]

    J. M. Kosterlitz and D. J. Thouless, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics 6, 1181 (1973)

    work page 1973

  14. [14]

    L. D. Landau, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 7, 19 (1937)

    work page 1937

  15. [15]

    Wang and Y.-Z

    J. Wang and Y.-Z. You, Symmetry 14 (2022), 10.3390/sym14071475

    work page doi:10.3390/sym14071475 2022

  16. [16]

    L. D. Landau, E. M. Lifshitz, and M. Pitaevskii, Sta- tistical Physics (Butterworth-Heinemann, New York, 1999)

    work page 1999

  17. [17]

    K. G. Wilson and J. Kogut, Phys. Rep. 12, 75 (1974)

    work page 1974

  18. [18]

    Senthil, A

    T. Senthil, A. Vishwanath, L. Balents, S. Sachdev, and M. P. A. Fisher, Science 303, 1490 (2004)

    work page 2004

  19. [19]

    Senthil, L

    T. Senthil, L. Balents, S. Sachdev, A. Vishwanath, and M. P. A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. B 70, 144407 (2004)

    work page 2004

  20. [20]

    Senthil, (2023), arXiv:2306.12638 [cond-mat.str-el]

    T. Senthil, (2023), arXiv:2306.12638 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2023

  21. [21]

    A. W. Sandvik, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 227202 (2007)

    work page 2007

  22. [22]

    Jiang, M

    F.-J. Jiang, M. Nyfeler, S. Chandrasekharan, and U.- J. Wiese, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp 2008, P02009 (2008)

    work page 2008

  23. [23]

    J. Lou, A. W. Sandvik, and N. Kawashima, Phys. Rev. B 80, 180414 (2009)

    work page 2009

  24. [24]

    Banerjee, K

    A. Banerjee, K. Damle, and F. Alet, Phys. Rev. B 82, 155139 (2010)

    work page 2010

  25. [25]

    A. W. Sandvik, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 177201 (2010)

    work page 2010

  26. [26]

    Harada, T

    K. Harada, T. Suzuki, T. Okubo, H. Matsuo, J. Lou, H. Watanabe, S. Todo, and N. Kawashima, Phys. Rev. B 88, 220408 (2013)

    work page 2013

  27. [27]

    K. Chen, Y. Huang, Y. Deng, A. B. Kuklov, N. V. Prokof’ev, and B. V. Svistunov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 185701 (2013)

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    Nahum, J

    A. Nahum, J. T. Chalker, P. Serna, M. Ortu˜ no, and A. M. Somoza, Phys. Rev. X 5, 041048 (2015)

    work page 2015

  29. [29]

    H. Shao, W. Guo, and A. W. Sandvik, Science 352, 213 (2016)

    work page 2016

  30. [30]

    C. Wang, A. Nahum, M. A. Metlitski, C. Xu, and T. Senthil, Phys. Rev. X 7, 031051 (2017)

    work page 2017

  31. [31]

    J. Y. Lee, Y.-Z. You, S. Sachdev, and A. Vishwanath, Phys. Rev. X 9, 041037 (2019)

    work page 2019

  32. [32]

    Y.-C. Wang, N. Ma, M. Cheng, and Z. Y. Meng, SciPost Phys. 13, 123 (2022)

    work page 2022

  33. [33]

    M. Song, J. Zhao, L. Janssen, M. M. Scherer, and Z. Y. Meng, (2023), arXiv:2307.02547 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2023

  34. [34]

    Deconfined quantum criticality and emergent SO(5) symmetry in fermionic systems

    Z.-X. Li, S.-K. Jian, and H. Yao, (2019), arXiv:1904.10975 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  35. [35]

    F. F. Assaad and T. Grover, Phys. Rev. X 6, 041049 (2016)

    work page 2016

  36. [36]

    Z. H. Liu, W. Jiang, B.-B. Chen, J. Rong, M. Cheng, K. Sun, Z. Y. Meng, and F. F. Assaad, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 266501 (2023)

    work page 2023

  37. [37]

    Y. D. Liao, G. Pan, W. Jiang, Y. Qi, and Z. Y. Meng, (2023), arXiv:2302.11742 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    Charrier, F

    D. Charrier, F. Alet, and P. Pujol, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 167205 (2008)

    work page 2008

  39. [39]

    G. J. Sreejith and S. Powell, Phys. Rev. B 92, 184413 (2015)

    work page 2015

  40. [40]

    Jiang and O

    S. Jiang and O. Motrunich, Phys. Rev. B 99, 075103 (2019)

    work page 2019

  41. [41]

    Roberts, S

    B. Roberts, S. Jiang, and O. I. Motrunich, Phys. Rev. B 99, 165143 (2019)

    work page 2019

  42. [42]

    Huang, D.-C

    R.-Z. Huang, D.-C. Lu, Y.-Z. You, Z. Y. Meng, and T. Xiang, Phys. Rev. B 100, 125137 (2019)

    work page 2019

  43. [43]

    Mudry, A

    C. Mudry, A. Furusaki, T. Morimoto, and T. Hikihara, Phys. Rev. B 99, 205153 (2019)

    work page 2019

  44. [44]

    Roberts, S

    B. Roberts, S. Jiang, and O. I. Motrunich, Phys. Rev. B 103, 155143 (2021)

    work page 2021

  45. [45]

    J. Y. Lee, J. Ramette, M. A. Metlitski, V. Vuleti´ c, W. W. Ho, and S. Choi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 083601 (2023)

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    Baldelli, C

    N. Baldelli, C. R. Cabrera, S. Juli` a-Farr´ e, M. Aidels- burger, and L. Barbiero, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 153401 (2024)

    work page 2024

  47. [47]

    Romen, S

    A. Romen, S. Birnkammer, and M. Knap, SciPost Phys. Core 7, 008 (2024)

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    Tomonaga, Progress of Theoretical Physics 5, 544 (1950)

    S. Tomonaga, Progress of Theoretical Physics 5, 544 (1950)

    work page 1950

  49. [49]

    J. M. Luttinger, Journal of Mathematical Physics 4, 1154 (1963)

    work page 1963

  50. [50]

    F. D. M. Haldane, Journal of Physics C Solid State Physics 14, 2585 (1981). 13

    work page 1981

  51. [51]

    A. M. T. Alexander O. Gogolin, Alexander A. Ners- esyan, Bosonization and Strongly Correlated Systems (Cambridge University Press, 1998)

    work page 1998

  52. [52]

    Giamarchi, Quantum Physics in One Dimension (Oxford University Press, 2004)

    T. Giamarchi, Quantum Physics in One Dimension (Oxford University Press, 2004)

    work page 2004

  53. [53]

    Haegeman, T

    J. Haegeman, T. J. Osborne, and F. Verstraete, Phys. Rev. B 88, 075133 (2013)

    work page 2013

  54. [54]

    Zauner-Stauber, L

    V. Zauner-Stauber, L. Vanderstraeten, M. T. Fishman, F. Verstraete, and J. Haegeman, Phys. Rev. B 97, 045145 (2018)

    work page 2018

  55. [55]

    Tagliacozzo, T

    L. Tagliacozzo, T. R. de Oliveira, S. Iblisdir, and J. I. Latorre, Phys. Rev. B 78, 024410 (2008)

    work page 2008

  56. [56]

    M. M. Rams, P. Czarnik, and L. Cincio, Phys. Rev. X 8, 041033 (2018)

    work page 2018

  57. [57]

    Vanhecke, J

    B. Vanhecke, J. Haegeman, K. Van Acoleyen, L. Van- derstraeten, and F. Verstraete, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 250604 (2019)

    work page 2019

  58. [59]

    Montorsi and M

    A. Montorsi and M. Roncaglia, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 236404 (2012)

    work page 2012

  59. [60]

    Barbiero, A

    L. Barbiero, A. Montorsi, and M. Roncaglia, Phys. Rev. B 88, 035109 (2013)

    work page 2013

  60. [61]

    Montorsi, F

    A. Montorsi, F. Dolcini, R. C. Iotti, and F. Rossi, Phys. Rev. B 95, 245108 (2017)

    work page 2017

  61. [62]

    Pollmann, E

    F. Pollmann, E. Berg, A. M. Turner, and M. Oshikawa, Phys. Rev. B 85, 075125 (2012)

    work page 2012

  62. [63]

    Tang and X.-G

    E. Tang and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 096403 (2012)

    work page 2012

  63. [64]

    Wen, Phys

    X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B 89, 035147 (2014)

    work page 2014

  64. [65]

    Gu and X.-G

    Z.-C. Gu and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B 90, 115141 (2014)

    work page 2014

  65. [66]

    Senthil, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 6, 299 (2015)

    T. Senthil, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 6, 299 (2015)

    work page 2015

  66. [67]

    Shapourian, K

    H. Shapourian, K. Shiozaki, and S. Ryu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 216402 (2017)

    work page 2017

  67. [68]

    F. D. M. Haldane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 1153 (1983)

    work page 1983

  68. [69]

    Affleck, T

    I. Affleck, T. Kennedy, E. H. Lieb, and H. Tasaki, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 799 (1987)

    work page 1987

  69. [70]

    Barbiero, L

    L. Barbiero, L. Dell’Anna, A. Trombettoni, and V. E. Korepin, Phys. Rev. B 96, 180404 (2017)

    work page 2017

  70. [71]

    E. G. Dalla Torre, E. Berg, and E. Altman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 260401 (2006)

    work page 2006

  71. [72]

    Rossini and R

    D. Rossini and R. Fazio, New Journal of Physics 14, 065012 (2012)

    work page 2012

  72. [73]

    Sugimoto, S

    K. Sugimoto, S. Ejima, F. Lange, and H. Fehske, Phys. Rev. A 99, 012122 (2019)

    work page 2019

  73. [74]

    Fraxanet, D

    J. Fraxanet, D. Gonz´ alez-Cuadra, T. Pfau, M. Lewen- stein, T. Langen, and L. Barbiero, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 043402 (2022)

    work page 2022

  74. [75]

    Fazzini, L

    S. Fazzini, L. Barbiero, and A. Montorsi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 106402 (2019)

    work page 2019

  75. [76]

    Montorsi, S

    A. Montorsi, S. Fazzini, and L. Barbiero, Phys. Rev. A 101, 043618 (2020)

    work page 2020

  76. [77]

    Anfuso and A

    F. Anfuso and A. Rosch, Phys. Rev. B 75, 144420 (2007)

    work page 2007

  77. [78]

    S. R. Manmana, A. M. Essin, R. M. Noack, and V. Gu- rarie, Phys. Rev. B 86, 205119 (2012)

    work page 2012

  78. [79]

    Barbiero, L

    L. Barbiero, L. Santos, and N. Goldman, Phys. Rev. B 97, 201115 (2018)

    work page 2018

  79. [80]

    Juli` a-Farr´ e, D

    S. Juli` a-Farr´ e, D. Gonz´ alez-Cuadra, A. Patscheider, M. J. Mark, F. Ferlaino, M. Lewenstein, L. Barbiero, and A. Dauphin, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, L032005 (2022)

    work page 2022

  80. [81]

    L. P. Kadanoff and H. Ceva, Phys. Rev. B 3, 3918 (1971)

    work page 1971

Showing first 80 references.