4.6 Article

Quantum phases and topological properties of interacting fermions in one-dimensional superlattices

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW A
卷 99, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.99.053614

关键词

-

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [FOR 2414, 277974659]
  2. Germany's Excellence Strategy [EXC-2111, 390814868]
  3. NSF [NSF PHY-1748958]
  4. European Research Council QUENO-COBA ERC-2016-ADG Grant [742102]
  5. European Research Council (ERC) [742102] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The realization of artificial gauge fields in ultracold atomic gases has opened up a path towards experimental studies of topological insulators and, as an ultimate goal, topological quantum matter in many-body systems. As an alternative to the direct implementation of two-dimensional lattice Hamiltonians that host the quantum Hall effect and its variants, topological charge-pumping experiments provide an additional avenue towards studying many-body systems. Here, we consider an interacting two-component gas of fermions realizing a family of one-dimensional superlattice Hamiltonians with onsite interactions and a unit cell of three sites, the ground states of which would be visited in an appropriately defined charge pump. First, we investigate the grand canonical quantum phase diagram of individual Hamiltonians, focusing on insulating phases. For a certain commensurate filling, there is a sequence of phase transitions from a band insulator to other insulating phases (related to the physics of ionic Hubbard models) for some members of the manifold of Hamiltonians. Second, we compute the Chern numbers for the whole manifold in a many-body formulation and show that, related to the aforementioned quantum phase transitions, a topological transition results in a change of the value and sign of the Chern number. We provide both an intuitive and a conceptual explanation and argue that these properties could be observed in quantum-gas experiments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据