MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981467236 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.101.041108

Determining topological order from infinite projected entangled pair states

2020· article· en· W2981467236 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna Francuz, Jacek Dziarmaga, Guifré Vidal, Łukasz Cincio

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum many-body systems
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersGovernment of CanadaNarodowe Centrum NaukiU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsToric codeAnyonTopological quantum computerTopological orderDegenerate energy levelsSuperposition principlePhysicsMatrix product stateTopological degeneracyGround stateTorusTopology (electrical circuits)Phase transitionPauli matricesEmbeddingMatrix multiplicationQuantumQuantum mechanicsMathematicsSymmetry protected topological orderCombinatoricsComputer scienceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a method of extracting information about the topological order from the ground state of a strongly correlated two-dimensional system computed with the infinite projected entangled pair state (iPEPS). For topologically ordered systems, the iPEPS wrapped on a torus becomes a superposition of degenerate, locally indistinguishable ground states. Projectors in the form of infinite matrix product operators onto states with well-defined anyon flux are used to compute topological $S$ and $T$ matrices (encoding mutual and self-statistics of emergent anyons). The algorithm is shown to be robust against a perturbation driving string-net toric code across a phase transition to a ferromagnetic phase. Our approach provides accurate results near quantum phase transition, where the correlation length is prohibitively large for other numerical methods. Moreover, we used numerically optimized iPEPS describing the ground state of the Kitaev honeycomb model in the toric code phase and obtained topological data in excellent agreement with theoretical prediction.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.329 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicQuantum many-body systemsFrench-language works237,207