Finite-density phase diagram of a $(1+1)-d$ non-abelian lattice gauge theory with tensor networks

Pietro Silvi1,2, Enrique Rico3, Marcello Dalmonte4,5, Ferdinand Tschirsich1, and Simone Montangero1,6

1Institute for complex quantum systems & Center for Integrated Quantum Science and Technologies (IQST), Universität Ulm, D-89069 Ulm, Germany
2Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Innsbruck, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria
3Department of Physical Chemistry, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Apartado 644, E-48080 Bilbao, Spain & IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science, Maria Diaz de Haro 3, E-48013 Bilbao, Spain
4Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Innsbruck, A-6020, Innsbruck, Austria & Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information, Austrian Academy of Sciences, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria
5Abdus Salam International Center for Theoretical Physics, Strada Costiera 11, Trieste, Italy
6Institute for Complex Quantum Systems & Center for Integrated Quantum Science and Technologies, Universität Ulm, D- 89069 Ulm, Germany

We investigate the finite-density phase diagram of a non-abelian $SU(2)$ lattice gauge theory in $(1+1)$-dimensions using tensor network methods. We numerically characterise the phase diagram as a function of the matter filling and of the matter-field coupling, identifying different phases, some of them appearing only at finite densities. For weak matter-field coupling we find a meson BCS liquid phase, which is confirmed by second-order analytical perturbation theory. At unit filling and for strong coupling, the system undergoes a phase transition to a charge density wave of single-site (spin-0) mesons via spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking. At finite densities, the chiral symmetry is restored almost everywhere, and the meson BCS liquid becomes a simple liquid at strong couplings, with the exception of filling two-thirds, where a charge density wave of mesons spreading over neighbouring sites appears. Finally, we identify two tri-critical points between the chiral and the two liquid phases which are compatible with a $SU(2)_2$ Wess-Zumino-Novikov-Witten model. Here we do not perform the continuum limit but we explicitly address the global $U(1)$ charge conservation symmetry.

Share

► BibTeX data

► References

[1] Sheldon L. Glashow. Partial-symmetries of weak interactions. Nuclear Physics, 22(4):579 - 588, 1961. doi:10.1016/​0029-5582(61)90469-2.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-5582(61)90469-2

[2] Steven Weinberg. A model of leptons. Phys. Rev. Lett., 19:1264-1266, Nov 1967. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.19.1264.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.19.1264

[3] Ian Affleck, Z. Zou, T. Hsu, and P. W. Anderson. Su(2) gauge symmetry of the large-$u$ limit of the hubbard model. Phys. Rev. B, 38:745-747, Jul 1988. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevB.38.745.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.38.745

[4] Qiu-Hong Huo, Yunguo Jiang, Ru-Zhi Wang, and Hui Yan. Non-abelian vortices in the emergent u(2) gauge theory of the hubbard model. EPL (Europhysics Letters), 101(2):27001, 2013. doi:10.1209/​0295-5075/​101/​27001.
https://doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/101/27001

[5] Owe Philipsen. Status of the qcd phase diagram from lattice calculations. [hep-ph], 11 2011. arXiv:https:/​/​arxiv.org/​abs/​1111.5370.
arXiv:1111.5370

[6] Philippe de Forcrand. Simulating qcd at finite density. PoS LAT2010, 05 2010. arXiv:https:/​/​arxiv.org/​abs/​1005.0539.
arXiv:1005.0539

[7] I. Montvay and G. Muenster. Quantum Fields on a lattice. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1994.

[8] M. Creutz. Quarks, gluons and lattices. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997.

[9] C. Gattringer and C. B. Lang. Quantum Chromodynamics on the Lattice. Springer-Verlag, 2010.

[10] L. Tagliacozzo, A Celi, P. Orland, M. W. Mitchell, and M. Lewenstein. Simulation of non-Abelian gauge theories with optical lattices. Nat. Commun., 4:1-8, 2013. doi:10.1038/​ncomms3615.
https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3615

[11] D. Banerjee, M. Bögli, M. Dalmonte, E. Rico, P. Stebler, U.-J. Wiese, and P. Zoller. Atomic Quantum Simulation of U(N) and SU(N) Non-Abelian Lattice Gauge Theories. Phys. Rev. Lett., 110(12):125303, mar 2013. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.110.125303.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.125303

[12] Erez Zohar, J. Ignacio Cirac, and Benni Reznik. Quantum simulations of gauge theories with ultracold atoms: Local gauge invariance from angular-momentum conservation. Phys. Rev. A, 88:023617, Aug 2013. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevA.88.023617.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.88.023617

[13] K. Stannigel, P. Hauke, D. Marcos, M. Hafezi, S. Diehl, M. Dalmonte, and P. Zoller. Constrained dynamics via the zeno effect in quantum simulation: Implementing non-abelian lattice gauge theories with cold atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett., 112:120406, Mar 2014. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.112.120406.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.120406

[14] Uwe-Jens Wiese. Towards quantum simulating QCD. Nucl. Phys. A, 931:246-256, 2014. doi:10.1016/​j.nuclphysa.2014.09.102.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2014.09.102

[15] A. Mezzacapo, E. Rico, C. Sabín, I. L. Egusquiza, L. Lamata, and E. Solano. Non-abelian su(2) lattice gauge theories in superconducting circuits. Phys. Rev. Lett., 115:240502, Dec 2015. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.115.240502.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.240502

[16] Erez Zohar, J Ignacio Cirac, and Benni Reznik. Quantum simulations of lattice gauge theories using ultracold atoms in optical lattices. Reports on Progress in Physics, 79(1):014401, 2016. doi:10.1088/​0034-4885/​79/​1/​014401.
https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/79/1/014401

[17] Esteban A. Martinez, Christine A. Muschik, Philipp Schindler, Daniel Nigg, Alexander Erhard, Markus Heyl, Philipp Hauke, Marcello Dalmonte, Thomas Monz, Peter Zoller, and Rainer Blatt. Real-time dynamics of lattice gauge theories with a few-qubit quantum computer. Nature, 534(7608):516-519, 06 2016. doi:10.1038/​nature18318.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18318

[18] M Dalmonte and S Montangero. Lattice gauge theory simulations in the quantum information era. Contemporary Physics, pages 1-25, 2016. doi:10.1080/​00107514.2016.1151199.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00107514.2016.1151199

[19] Stellan Östlund and Stefan Rommer. Thermodynamic Limit of Density Matrix Renormalization. Phys. Rev. Lett., 75(19):3537-3540, nov 1995. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.75.3537.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.75.3537

[20] F. Verstraete, D. Porras, and J. I. Cirac. Density matrix renormalization group and periodic boundary conditions: A quantum information perspective. Phys. Rev. Lett., 93:227205, Nov 2004. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.93.227205.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.227205

[21] G. Vidal. Entanglement renormalization. Phys. Rev. Lett., 99:220405, Nov 2007. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.99.220405.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.220405

[22] Ulrich Schollwoeck. The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states. Ann. Phys., 326(1):96, 2011. doi:10.1016/​j.aop.2010.09.012.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2010.09.012

[23] Román Orús. A practical introduction to tensor networks: Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states. Annals of Physics, 349:117-158, 2014. doi:10.1016/​j.aop.2014.06.013.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2014.06.013

[24] X.-G. Wen. Quantum Field Theory of Many-Body Systems. Oxford University Press, 2004.

[25] Mark Alford, Krishna Rajagopal, and Frank Wilczek. Qcd at finite baryon density: Nucleon droplets and color superconductivity. Physics Letters B, 422(1):247-256, 1998. doi:10.1016/​S0370-2693(98)00051-3.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(98)00051-3

[26] Ralf Rapp, T Schäfer, E Shuryak, and Momchil Velkovsky. Diquark bose condensates in high density matter and instantons. Physical Review Letters, 81(1):53, 1998. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.81.53.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.53

[27] D. Horn. Finite matrix models with continuous local gauge invariance. Physics Letters B, 100:149, 1981. doi:10.1016/​0370-2693(81)90763-2.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(81)90763-2

[28] P. Orland and D. Rohrlich. Lattice gauge magnets: local isospin from spin. Nucl. Phys. B, 338:647, 1990. doi:10.1016/​0550-3213(90)90646-U.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(90)90646-U

[29] S. Chandrasekharan and U. J. Wiese. Quantum link models : A discrete approach to gauge theories. Nucl. Phys. B, 492(1-2):455-471, 1997. arXiv:9609042, doi:10.1016/​S0550-3213(97)80041-7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0550-3213(97)80041-7
arXiv:9609042

[30] R. Brower, S. Chandrasekharan, and U.-J. Wiese. Qcd as a quantum link model. Phys. Rev. D, 60:094502, 1999. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevD.60.094502.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.60.094502

[31] John Kogut and Leonard Susskind. Hamiltonian formulation of Wilson's lattice guage theoreis. Phys. Rev. D, 11, 1975. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevD.11.395.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.11.395

[32] Julius Wess and Bruno Zumino. Consequences of anomalous ward identities. Physics Letters B, 37(1):95-97, 1971. doi:10.1016/​0370-2693(71)90582-X.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(71)90582-X

[33] Edward Witten. Global aspects of current algebra. Nuclear Physics B, 223(2):422-432, 1983. doi:10.1016/​0550-3213(83)90063-9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(83)90063-9

[34] Sergei Petrovich Novikov. The hamiltonian formalism and a many-valued analogue of morse theory. Russian mathematical surveys, 37(5):1-56, 1982. URL: http:/​/​stacks.iop.org/​0036-0279/​37/​i=5/​a=R01.
http:/​/​stacks.iop.org/​0036-0279/​37/​i=5/​a=R01

[35] RM Konik, T Pálmai, G Takács, and AM Tsvelik. Studying the perturbed wess-zumino-novikov-witten su (2) k theory using the truncated conformal spectrum approach. Nuclear Physics B, 899:547-569, 2015. doi:10.1016/​j.nuclphysb.2015.08.016.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2015.08.016

[36] Steven R. White. Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalization groups. Phys. Rev. Lett., 69(19):2863-2866, nov 1992. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.69.2863.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.69.2863

[37] Steven R. White. Density-matrix algorithms for quantum renormalization groups. Phys. Rev. B, 48(14):10345-10356, oct 1993. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevB.48.10345.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.48.10345

[38] Guifré Vidal. Efficient simulation of one-dimensional quantum many-body systems. Phys. Rev. Lett., 93:040502, Jul 2004. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.93.040502.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.040502

[39] Horacio Casini, Marina Huerta, and José Alejandro Rosabal. Remarks on entanglement entropy for gauge fields. Physical Review D, 89(8):085012, 2014. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevD.89.085012.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.085012

[40] William Donnelly. Decomposition of entanglement entropy in lattice gauge theory. Physical Review D, 85(8):085004, 2012. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevD.85.085004.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.85.085004

[41] Karel Van Acoleyen, Nick Bultinck, Jutho Haegeman, Michael Marien, Volkher B. Scholz, and Frank Verstraete. Entanglement of distillation for lattice gauge theories. Phys. Rev. Lett., 117:131602, Sep 2016. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.117.131602.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.131602

[42] T. M. R. Byrnes, P. Sriganesh, R. J. Bursill, and C. J. Hamer. Density matrix renormalization group approach to the massive schwinger model. Phys. Rev. D, 66:013002, Jul 2002. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevD.66.013002.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.66.013002

[43] Takanori Sugihara. Matrix product representation of gauge invariant states in a $z_2$ lattice gauge theory. Journal of High Energy Physics, 2005(07):022, 2005. doi:10.1088/​1126-6708/​2005/​07/​022.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2005/07/022

[44] E. Rico, T. Pichler, M. Dalmonte, P. Zoller, and S. Montangero. Tensor networks for lattice gauge theories and atomic quantum simulation. Phys. Rev. Lett., 112(20):1-5, 2014. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.112.201601.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.201601

[45] Pietro Silvi, Enrique Rico, Tommaso Calarco, and Simone Montangero. Lattice gauge tensor networks. New Journal of Physics, 16(10):103015, 2014. doi:10.1088/​1367-2630/​16/​10/​103015.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/16/10/103015

[46] Luca Tagliacozzo and Guifre Vidal. Entanglement renormalization and gauge symmetry. Phys. Rev. B, 83(11):115127, mar 2011. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevB.83.115127.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.83.115127

[47] L. Tagliacozzo, A. Celi, and M. Lewenstein. Tensor Networks for Lattice Gauge Theories with Continuous Groups. Phys. Rev. X, 4(4):041024, nov 2014. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevX.4.041024.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.4.041024

[48] M.C. Bañuls, K Cichy, J.I. Cirac, and K Jansen. The mass spectrum of the Schwinger model with matrix product states. J. High Energy Phys., 2013(11):158, nov 2013. doi:10.1007/​JHEP11(2013)158.
https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2013)158

[49] Stefan Kühn, J. Ignacio Cirac, and Mari-Carmen Bañuls. Quantum simulation of the Schwinger model: A study of feasibility. Phys. Rev. A, 90(4):042305, oct 2014. arXiv:1407.4995, doi:10.1103/​PhysRevA.90.042305.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.90.042305
arXiv:1407.4995

[50] Stefan Kühn, Erez Zohar, J. Ignacio Cirac, and Mari Carmen Bañuls. Non-Abelian string breaking phenomena with matrix product states. J. High Energy Phys., 2015(7):130, jul 2015. arXiv:1505.04441, doi:10.1007/​JHEP07(2015)130.
https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2015)130
arXiv:1505.04441

[51] Boye Buyens, Jutho Haegeman, Karel Van Acoleyen, Henri Verschelde, and Frank Verstraete. Matrix product states for gauge field theories. Phys. Rev. Lett., 113:091601, Aug 2014. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.113.091601.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.091601

[52] Boye Buyens, Karel Van Acoleyen, Jutho Haegeman, and Frank Verstraete. Matrix product states for hamiltonian lattice gauge theories. In PROCEEDINGS OF SCIENCE, page 7, 2014.

[53] Boye Buyens, Jutho Haegeman, Henri Verschelde, Frank Verstraete, and Karel Van Acoleyen. Confinement and string breaking for ${\mathrm{qed}}_{2}$ in the hamiltonian picture. Phys. Rev. X, 6:041040, Nov 2016. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevX.6.041040.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.6.041040

[54] Boye Buyens, Jutho Haegeman, Frank Verstraete, and Karel Van Acoleyen. Tensor networks for gauge field theories. In PROCEEDINGS OF SCIENCE, page 7, 2016.

[55] H. Saito, M. C. Bañuls, K. Cichy, J. I. Cirac, and K. Jansen. Thermal evolution of the one-flavour schwinger model using matrix product states. [hep-lat], 11 2015. arXiv:https:/​/​arxiv.org/​abs/​1511.00794.
arXiv:1511.00794

[56] Mari Carmen Bañuls, K Cichy, J Ignacio Cirac, K Jansen, and H Saito. Thermal evolution of the schwinger model with matrix product operators. Physical Review D, 92(3):034519, 2015. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevD.92.034519.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.034519

[57] Ashley Milsted. Matrix product states and the non-abelian rotor model. Phys. Rev. D, 93:085012, Apr 2016. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevD.93.085012.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.085012

[58] Yannick Meurice, Alan Denbleyker, Yuzhi Liu, Tao Xiang, Zhiyuan Xie, Ji-Feng Yu, Judah Unmuth-Yockey, and Haiyuan Zou. Comparing Tensor Renormalization Group and Monte Carlo calculations for spin and gauge models. PoS, LATTICE2013:329, 2014. arXiv:1311.4826.
arXiv:1311.4826

[59] Benjamin Bahr, Bianca Dittrich, Frank Hellmann, and Wojciech Kaminski. Holonomy spin foam models: Definition and coarse graining. Phys. Rev. D, 87:044048, Feb 2013. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevD.87.044048.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.87.044048

[60] Mark Alford, Krishna Rajagopal, and Frank Wilczek. Qcd at finite baryon density: Nucleon droplets and color superconductivity. Physics Letters B, 422(1):247-256, 1998. doi:10.1016/​S0370-2693(98)00051-3.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(98)00051-3

[61] Mark G. Alford, Andreas Schmitt, Krishna Rajagopal, and Thomas Schäfer. Color superconductivity in dense quark matter. Rev. Mod. Phys., 80:1455-1515, Nov 2008. doi:10.1103/​RevModPhys.80.1455.
https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.80.1455

[62] D Banerjee, F-J Jiang, P Widmer, and U-J Wiese. The (2+1)-d u(1) quantum link model masquerading as deconfined criticality. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2013(12):P12010, 2013. doi:10.1088/​1742-5468/​2013/​12/​P12010.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2013/12/P12010

[63] Pasquale Calabrese and John Cardy. Entanglement entropy and quantum field theory. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2004(06):P06002, 2004. doi:10.1088/​1742-5468/​2004/​06/​P06002.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2004/06/P06002

[64] Pasquale Calabrese, Massimo Campostrini, Fabian Essler, and Bernard Nienhuis. Parity effects in the scaling of block entanglement in gapless spin chains. Phys. Rev. Lett., 104:095701, Mar 2010. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.104.095701.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.095701

[65] Pasquale Calabrese, John Cardy, and Ingo Peschel. Corrections to scaling for block entanglement in massive spin chains. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2010(09):P09003, 2010. doi:10.1088/​1742-5468/​2010/​09/​P09003.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2010/09/P09003

[66] Michael E. Fisher and Michael N. Barber. Scaling theory for finite-size effects in the critical region. Phys. Rev. Lett., 28:1516-1519, Jun 1972. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.28.1516.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.28.1516

[67] Pietro Silvi, Tommaso Calarco, Giovanna Morigi, and Simone Montangero. Ab initio characterization of the quantum linear-zigzag transition using density matrix renormalization group calculations. Phys. Rev. B, 89:094103, Mar 2014. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevB.89.094103.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.89.094103

[68] Erik S Sørensen, Ming-Shyang Chang, Nicolas Laflorencie, and Ian Affleck. Quantum impurity entanglement. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2007(08):P08003, 2007. doi:10.1088/​1742-5468/​2007/​08/​P08003.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2007/08/P08003

[69] L. Tagliacozzo, Thiago. R. de Oliveira, S. Iblisdir, and J. I. Latorre. Scaling of entanglement support for matrix product states. Phys. Rev. B, 78:024410, Jul 2008. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevB.78.024410.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.78.024410

[70] Vid Stojevic, Jutho Haegeman, I. P. McCulloch, Luca Tagliacozzo, and Frank Verstraete. Conformal data from finite entanglement scaling. Phys. Rev. B, 91:035120, Jan 2015. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevB.91.035120.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.91.035120

[71] B. Pirvu, G. Vidal, F. Verstraete, and L. Tagliacozzo. Matrix product states for critical spin chains: Finite-size versus finite-entanglement scaling. Phys. Rev. B, 86:075117, Aug 2012. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevB.86.075117.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.86.075117

[72] Alexander O. Gogolin, Alexander A. Nersesyan, and Alexei M. Tsvelik. Bosonization and Strongly Correlated Systems. Cambridge University Press, 2004.

[73] Thierry Giamarchi. Quantum Physics in One Dimension. Oxford University Press, 2003.

[74] Alexander Moreno, Alejandro Muramatsu, and Salvatore R Manmana. Ground-state phase diagram of the one-dimensional t-j model. Physical Review B, 83(20):205113, 2011. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevB.83.205113.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.83.205113

[75] P. C. Hohenberg. Existence of long-range order in 1 and 2 dimensions. Phys. Rev., 158:383-386, 1967. doi:10.1103/​PhysRev.158.383.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.158.383

[76] N. D. Mermin and H. Wagner. Absence of ferromagnetism or antiferromagnetism in one- or two-dimensional isotropic heisenberg models. Phys. Rev. Lett., 17:1133-1136, 1966. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.17.1133.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.17.1133

[77] T.D. Kühner, S.R. White, and H. Monien. One-dimensional Bose-Hubbard model with nearest-neighbor interaction. Phys. Rev. B, 61(18):12474, 2000. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevB.61.12474.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.61.12474

[78] Erez Zohar, Michele Burrello, Thorsten B. Wahl, and J. Ignacio Cirac. Fermionic projected entangled pair states and local u(1) gauge theories. Annals of Physics (2015), pp. 385-439, 07 2015. doi:10.1016/​j.aop.2015.10.009.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2015.10.009

[79] Erez Zohar and Michele Burrello. Formulation of lattice gauge theories for quantum simulations. Phys. Rev. D, 91(5):054506, mar 2015. arXiv:1409.3085, doi:10.1103/​PhysRevD.91.054506.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.054506
arXiv:1409.3085

[80] Alexei Kitaev and John Preskill. Topological entanglement entropy. Phys. Rev. Lett., 96:110404, Mar 2006. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.96.110404.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.110404

[81] Michael Levin and Xiao-Gang Wen. Detecting topological order in a ground state wave function. Phys. Rev. Lett., 96:110405, Mar 2006. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.96.110405.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.110405

[82] Mari Carmen Bañuls, Krzysztof Cichy, J Ignacio Cirac, Karl Jansen, Stefan Kühn, and Hana Saito. The multi-flavor schwinger model with chemical potential-overcoming the sign problem with matrix product states. DESY 16-198, 2016. arXiv:https:/​/​arxiv.org/​abs/​1611.01458.
arXiv:1611.01458

[83] Mari Carmen Bañuls, Krzysztof Cichy, J. Ignacio Cirac, Karl Jansen, and Stefan Kühn. Density induced phase transitions in the schwinger model: A study with matrix product states. Phys. Rev. Lett., 118:071601, Feb 2017. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.118.071601.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.071601

[84] D. Perez-Garcia, F. Verstraete, M. M. Wolf, and J. I. Cirac. Matrix product state representations. Quant. Inf. Comput., 7:401, 2007. arXiv:https:/​/​arxiv.org/​abs/​quant-ph/​0608197.
arXiv:quant-ph/0608197

[85] Jorge Dukelsky, Miguel A Martín-Delgado, Tomotoshi Nishino, and Germán Sierra. Equivalence of the variational matrix product method and the density matrix renormalization group applied to spin chains. EPL (Europhysics Letters), 43(4):457, 1998. doi:10.1209/​epl/​i1998-00381-x.
https://doi.org/10.1209/epl/i1998-00381-x

[86] Sukhwinder Singh, Robert NC Pfeifer, and Guifré Vidal. Tensor network decompositions in the presence of a global symmetry. Physical Review A, 82(5):050301, 2010. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevA.82.050301.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.82.050301

[87] Sukhwinder Singh, Robert N. C. Pfeifer, and Guifre Vidal. Tensor network states and algorithms in the presence of a global u(1) symmetry. Phys. Rev. B, 83:115125, Mar 2011. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevB.83.115125.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.83.115125

[88] Steven R. White and Adrian E. Feiguin. Real-time evolution using the density matrix renormalization group. Phys. Rev. Lett., 93:076401, 2004. doi:10.1103/​PhysRevLett.93.076401.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.076401

► Cited by (beta)

[1] Mari Carmen Bañuls, Krzysztof Cichy, J. Ignacio Cirac, Karl Jansen, Stefan Kühn, "Efficient Basis Formulation for ( 1+1 )-Dimensional SU(2) Lattice Gauge Theory: Spectral Calculations with Matrix Product States", Physical Review X 7, 041046 (2017).

[2] Ilya Kull, Andras Molnar, Erez Zohar, J. Ignacio Cirac, "Classification of matrix product states with a local (gauge) symmetry", Annals of Physics 386, 199 (2017).

[3] Boye Buyens, Simone Montangero, Jutho Haegeman, Frank Verstraete, Karel Van Acoleyen, "Finite-representation approximation of lattice gauge theories at the continuum limit with tensor networks", Physical Review D 95, 094509 (2017).

[4] Boye Buyens, Jutho Haegeman, Florian Hebenstreit, Frank Verstraete, Karel Van Acoleyen, "Real-time simulation of the Schwinger effect with matrix product states", Physical Review D 96, 114501 (2017).

[5] Kai Zapp, Román Orús, "Tensor network simulation of QED on infinite lattices: Learning from (1+1) d , and prospects for (2+1) d", Physical Review D 95, 114508 (2017).

(The above data is from Crossref's cited-by service. Unfortunately not all publishers provide suitable and complete citation data so that some citing works or bibliographic details may be missing.)