pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.06461 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-07 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.stat-mech

Recognition: no theorem link

Quantum Fragmentation

Yiqiu Han , Oliver Hart , Alexey Khudorozhkov , Rahul Nandkishore
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 18:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mech
keywords quantum fragmentationHilbert space fragmentationRokhsar-Kivelson constructionKrylov sectorsentangled basisquantum many-body systemsconstrained dynamicsHilbert space sectors
0
0 comments X

The pith

A Rokhsar-Kivelson construction promotes classical or non-fragmented models into quantum Hamiltonians whose Krylov sectors require an entangled basis to resolve fully.

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

This paper develops a systematic protocol that starts with a classically fragmented model or even a non-fragmented input such as an Ising chain and applies a Rokhsar-Kivelson-type promotion to generate a quantum Hamiltonian. The resulting model exhibits Hilbert-space fragmentation whose sectors cannot be fully identified in any product basis. A sympathetic reader would care because the method supplies an explicit, reproducible route to quantum fragmentation that classical constructions lack and that generic Hamiltonians do not possess. The work further shows how to label and count the sectors in one dimension and sketches tomography-based experiments that could confirm the fragmentation. It also demonstrates that the same procedure works in two dimensions.

Core claim

We introduce a systematic protocol for constructing quantum Hilbert-space-fragmented Hamiltonians, whose Krylov-sector structure, unlike in classically fragmented models, can be fully resolved only in an entangled basis. The protocol takes as input a classically fragmented model and uses a Rokhsar-Kivelson type construction to promote it to a quantum fragmented model. Notably, the procedure also works with non-fragmented inputs (such as Ising models). We explain how the Krylov sectors of the resulting quantum fragmented model may be labeled and counted in one dimension, and outline experimentally accessible verification of quantum fragmentation, assuming the ability to prepare specific初始初始状态

What carries the argument

Rokhsar-Kivelson-type promotion that converts a classical or non-fragmented input Hamiltonian into a quantum Hamiltonian whose dynamics are confined to Krylov sectors distinguishable only in an entangled basis.

If this is right

  • Krylov sectors of the promoted Hamiltonian can be labeled and counted explicitly in one dimension.
  • Experimental verification is possible by preparing chosen initial states and performing tomography on reduced density matrices.
  • The entanglement structure of the sector basis sharply separates quantum fragmentation from both classical fragmentation and the trivial fragmentation of any Hamiltonian in its eigenbasis.
  • The same promotion procedure extends to higher dimensions and yields an explicit two-dimensional example.
  • The construction supplies a reproducible route for systematically generating and studying quantum fragmentation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The fact that the procedure succeeds even with non-fragmented inputs like Ising models indicates that quantum promotion alone can generate fragmentation without any classical seed.
  • Standard computational approaches that work in product bases will miss the full sector structure of these models.
  • Higher-dimensional versions may reveal dynamical signatures of quantum fragmentation that are inaccessible in one dimension.

Load-bearing premise

The Rokhsar-Kivelson-type promotion of a classical or non-fragmented input model produces a Hamiltonian whose Krylov sectors are genuinely quantum-fragmented and distinguishable from both classical fragmentation and trivial eigenbasis fragmentation.

What would settle it

A calculation or measurement showing that the sectors of the constructed Hamiltonian can be completely identified and labeled using only a product-state basis, without reference to entangled states.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.06461 by Alexey Khudorozhkov, Oliver Hart, Rahul Nandkishore, Yiqiu Han.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Illustration of the construction of QF models. Starting [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We introduce a systematic protocol for constructing quantum Hilbert-space-fragmented Hamiltonians, whose Krylov-sector structure, unlike in classically fragmented models, can be fully resolved only in an entangled basis. The protocol takes as input a classically fragmented model and uses a Rokhsar-Kivelson type construction to promote it to a quantum fragmented model. Notably, the procedure also works with non-fragmented inputs (such as Ising models). We explain how the Krylov sectors of the resulting quantum fragmented model may be labeled and counted in one dimension, and outline experimentally accessible verification of quantum fragmentation, assuming the ability to prepare specific initial states and perform tomography on reduced density matrices. We further analyze the entanglement structure of the entangled basis underlying quantum fragmentation, which sharply distinguishes it from both classical fragmentation and the trivial "fragmentation" of generic Hamiltonians in their eigenbasis. We also extend the construction to higher dimensions, with an explicit proof of principle example in two dimensions. We expect these results to open a new route to the systematic exploration of quantum fragmentation.

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 manuscript introduces a systematic protocol for constructing quantum Hilbert-space-fragmented Hamiltonians. It takes classically fragmented models or non-fragmented inputs (such as Ising models) and applies a Rokhsar-Kivelson-type promotion to generate a quantum Hamiltonian whose Krylov sectors, the paper claims, can be fully resolved only in an entangled basis. The work explains sector labeling and counting in one dimension, outlines experimental verification via initial-state preparation and reduced-density-matrix tomography, analyzes the entanglement structure of the basis to distinguish it from classical fragmentation and trivial eigenbasis fragmentation, and extends the construction to two dimensions with an explicit example.

Significance. If the central distinction holds, the protocol offers a new, systematic route to quantum fragmentation that applies even to non-fragmented inputs and provides concrete 1D labeling, entanglement diagnostics, and 2D examples. The explicit construction and experimental outline are strengths that could enable further exploration in many-body quantum physics and simulation. The entanglement analysis helps separate the claimed phenomenon from both classical fragmentation and generic eigenbasis cases.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and 1D construction section] Abstract and § on 1D Krylov sectors: the central claim that the sectors 'can be fully resolved only in an entangled basis' (and thus constitute genuine quantum fragmentation) is load-bearing but not established. The manuscript constructs and analyzes an explicit entangled basis for labeling/counting sectors and computes its entanglement entropy, yet provides no argument or proof that the sector projectors fail to commute with any complete set of local product operators or that no unitary change to a product basis can restore block-diagonality of H on the same sectors. This leaves open the possibility that the sectors admit a (possibly non-obvious) product resolution, undermining the distinction from classical fragmentation.
  2. [RK promotion and Hamiltonian section] Section on the Rokhsar-Kivelson promotion and Hamiltonian definition: the construction yields a Hamiltonian whose action is confined to certain subspaces, but the manuscript does not demonstrate that these subspaces cannot be separated by any product-state basis. An explicit counter-example or commutator argument showing that no product-basis resolution exists is required to support the 'quantum' qualifier.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Experimental outline] The experimental verification paragraph assumes the ability to prepare specific initial states and perform tomography; adding a brief discussion of feasibility on current quantum simulators or cold-atom platforms would improve clarity.
  2. [1D labeling section] Notation for the entangled basis states and sector projectors should be introduced with explicit definitions (e.g., via equations) at first use to aid readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting the need to more rigorously establish the distinction between our quantum fragmentation construction and classical fragmentation. We address each major comment below and commit to revisions that strengthen the central claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and 1D construction section] Abstract and § on 1D Krylov sectors: the central claim that the sectors 'can be fully resolved only in an entangled basis' (and thus constitute genuine quantum fragmentation) is load-bearing but not established. The manuscript constructs and analyzes an explicit entangled basis for labeling/counting sectors and computes its entanglement entropy, yet provides no argument or proof that the sector projectors fail to commute with any complete set of local product operators or that no unitary change to a product basis can restore block-diagonality of H on the same sectors. This leaves open the possibility that the sectors admit a (possibly non-obvious) product resolution, undermining the distinction from classical fragmentation.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript would benefit from an explicit argument establishing that no product-state basis can resolve the sectors. The current text provides an explicit entangled basis together with its entanglement entropy, which already distinguishes the construction from classical fragmentation (where a product basis suffices by definition). In the revision we will add a commutator argument in the 1D section showing that the sector projectors P_s fail to commute with any complete set of local product operators that could label the sectors; this follows directly from the non-local constraints generated by the Rokhsar-Kivelson promotion. We will also include a brief proof that any unitary mapping to a product basis necessarily mixes sectors under the action of H. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [RK promotion and Hamiltonian section] Section on the Rokhsar-Kivelson promotion and Hamiltonian definition: the construction yields a Hamiltonian whose action is confined to certain subspaces, but the manuscript does not demonstrate that these subspaces cannot be separated by any product-state basis. An explicit counter-example or commutator argument showing that no product-basis resolution exists is required to support the 'quantum' qualifier.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the RK-promotion section focuses on the construction and the resulting block-diagonal structure in the entangled basis without a general no-go result for product bases. To close this gap we will add, in the revised version, both a commutator argument (showing that the projectors onto the Krylov sectors do not commute with the algebra generated by local product operators) and a minimal explicit counter-example on a small system where any assumed product basis leads to sector mixing under time evolution. These additions will be placed immediately after the Hamiltonian definition. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: forward protocol from independent inputs with explicit 1D construction

full rationale

The paper defines a forward map that takes any classically fragmented or non-fragmented (e.g., Ising) input Hamiltonian and applies an RK-type promotion (sum of local projectors onto allowed configurations or their superpositions) to produce a new Hamiltonian whose Krylov sectors are then labeled and counted explicitly in 1D via an entangled basis whose entanglement entropy is computed. This construction is self-contained; the claim that the sectors are resolvable only in an entangled basis follows directly from the explicit basis choice and the fact that the input models are not assumed to be fragmented in a product basis. No parameter is fitted to data and then relabeled as a prediction, no load-bearing step reduces to a prior self-citation, and the uniqueness of the entangled resolution is demonstrated by direct construction rather than imported from the authors' earlier work. The derivation therefore does not collapse to its inputs by definition.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The abstract relies on the existence and properties of the Rokhsar-Kivelson construction (imported from prior literature) and standard quantum mechanics; no new free parameters, ad-hoc axioms, or invented entities are mentioned.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Standard quantum mechanics and Hilbert-space structure for many-body systems
    Invoked implicitly throughout the description of Hamiltonians and bases.
  • domain assumption Rokhsar-Kivelson-type construction preserves or induces fragmentation when applied to classical inputs
    Central to the protocol but not derived in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5482 in / 1415 out tokens · 46892 ms · 2026-05-10T18:39:30.370370+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Hilbert Space Fragmentation from Generalized Symmetries

    hep-lat 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Generalized symmetries generate exponentially many Krylov sectors in quantum many-body systems, showing that Hilbert space fragmentation does not by itself imply ergodicity breaking.

  2. Quantum Hilbert Space Fragmentation and Entangled Frozen States

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Rank deficiency of local Hamiltonians in classically fragmented models generates entangled frozen states, splitting mobile sectors into quantum Krylov subspaces and frozen entangled parts, with weak and strong quantum...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    smooth” boundary conditions along the horizontal edges and “rough

    We can also have larger frozen areas, e.g., the state + ∼ + − + − + , (63) is annihilated by ˆAv which acts on the frozen region highlighted by the shaded area enclosed by a dashed line and filled with slanted lines, with the alternating colors representing the quantum states of the spins involved. Taking a horizontal cut through thebulkof the frozen 5 We...

  2. [2]

    one of the irreducible strings becomes empty, or

  3. [3]

    absorbed

    one of the segments becomes a frozen product state. 16 Without loss of generality, assume Ls > L s′ and l− Ls > l ′ −L s′, so that the second segment is progressively “absorbed” into the first. In the first case, suppose at time t = T the second segment becomes a frozen state with an empty irreducible string. It is then a superposition of product states c...

  4. [4]

    Khemani, M

    V. Khemani, M. Hermele, and R. Nandkishore, Physical Review B101, 174204 (2020)

    2020

  5. [5]

    P. Sala, T. Rakovszky, R. Verresen, M. Knap, and F. Poll- mann, Physical Review X10, 011047 (2020). 17

    2020

  6. [6]

    Moudgalya, B

    S. Moudgalya, B. A. Bernevig, and N. Regnault, Reports on Progress in Physics85, 086501 (2022)

    2022

  7. [7]

    H. N. V. Temperley and E. H. Lieb, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences322, 251 (1971)

    1971

  8. [8]

    Moudgalya and O

    S. Moudgalya and O. I. Motrunich, Physical Review X 12, 011050 (2022)

    2022

  9. [9]

    Brighi, M

    P. Brighi, M. Ljubotina, and M. Serbyn, SciPost Phys. 15, 093 (2023)

    2023

  10. [10]

    B.-T. Chen, A. Prem, N. Regnault, and B. Lian, Phys. Rev. B110, 165109 (2024)

    2024

  11. [11]

    Balducci and A

    F. Balducci and A. A. Ziolkowska, The deep hilbert space of all-to-all interacting su(3) atoms: from quantum to classical (2025), arXiv:2512.05184 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Quantum Hilbert Space Fragmentation and Entangled Frozen States

    Z. Zhou, T.-H. Yang, and B.-T. Chen, Quantum hilbert space fragmentation and entangled frozen states (2026), arXiv:2604.05218 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  13. [13]

    D. S. Rokhsar and S. A. Kivelson, Phys. Rev. Lett.61, 2376 (1988)

    1988

  14. [14]

    M. T. Batchelor and A. Kuniba, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General24, 2599 (1991)

    1991

  15. [15]

    Aufgebauer and A

    B. Aufgebauer and A. Kl¨ umper, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2010, P05018 (2010)

    2010

  16. [16]

    Zhang, M

    S. Zhang, M. Karbach, G. M¨ uller, and J. Stolze, Phys. Rev. B55, 6491 (1997)

    1997

  17. [17]

    C. D. Batista and G. Ortiz, Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 4755 (2000)

    2000

  18. [18]

    S. Pai, M. Pretko, and R. M. Nandkishore, Phys. Rev. X 9, 021003 (2019)

    2019

  19. [19]

    Khemani, M

    V. Khemani, M. Hermele, and R. Nandkishore, Phys. Rev. B101, 174204 (2020)

    2020

  20. [20]

    P. Sala, T. Rakovszky, R. Verresen, M. Knap, and F. Poll- mann, Phys. Rev. X10, 011047 (2020)

    2020

  21. [21]

    Wang and Z.-C

    C. Wang and Z.-C. Yang, Phys. Rev. B108, 144308 (2023)

    2023

  22. [22]

    X. Chen, A. Dua, M. Hermele, D. T. Stephen, N. Tanti- vasadakarn, R. Vanhove, and J.-Y. Zhao, Phys. Rev. B 109, 075116 (2024)

    2024

  23. [23]

    Balasubramanian, S

    S. Balasubramanian, S. Gopalakrishnan, A. Khu- dorozhkov, and E. Lake, Phys. Rev. X14, 021034 (2024)

    2024

  24. [24]

    Caha and D

    L. Caha and D. Nagaj, The pair-flip model: a very entangled translationally invariant spin chain (2018), arXiv:1805.07168

    work page arXiv 2018

  25. [25]

    Read and H

    N. Read and H. Saleur, Nuclear Physics B777, 263 (2007)

    2007

  26. [26]

    Saito, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan59, 482 (1990)

    R. Saito, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan59, 482 (1990)

    1990

  27. [27]

    Y. Han, X. Chen, and E. Lake, Exponentially slow ther- malization and the robustness of hilbert space fragmenta- tion (2026), arXiv:2401.11294 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  28. [28]

    Stahl, R

    C. Stahl, R. Nandkishore, and O. Hart, SciPost Phys.16, 068 (2024)

    2024

  29. [29]

    Chen, Z.-X

    X. Chen, Z.-X. Liu, and X.-G. Wen, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics84, 235141 (2011)

    2011

  30. [30]

    Levin and Z.-C

    M. Levin and Z.-C. Gu, Phys. Rev. B86, 115109 (2012)

    2012

  31. [31]

    Zhang, Y

    Z. Zhang, Y. Li, and T.-C. Lu, arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.05004 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    C. Wang, S. Balasubramanian, Y. Han, E. Lake, X. Chen, and Z.-C. Yang, Exponentially slow thermalization in 1d fragmented dynamics (2025), arXiv:2501.13930 [quant- ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Y. Li, P. Sala, F. Pollmann, S. Moudgalya, and O. Motrunich, Phys. Rev. B112, 155108 (2025)

    2025

  34. [34]

    Iadecola, Symmetry fragmentation (2025), arXiv:2510.06333 [quant-ph]

    T. Iadecola, Symmetry fragmentation (2025), arXiv:2510.06333 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Iadecola and R

    T. Iadecola and R. Nandkishore, Profusion of symmetry- protected qubits from stable ergodicity breaking (2025), arXiv:2512.20393 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Rakovszky, P

    T. Rakovszky, P. Sala, R. Verresen, M. Knap, and F. Poll- mann, Phys. Rev. B101, 125126 (2020)

    2020