Floquet codes and phases in twist-defect networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce a class of models, dubbed paired twist-defect networks, that generalize the structure of Kitaev's honeycomb model for which there is a direct equivalence between: (i) Floquet codes (FCs), (ii) adiabatic loops of gapped Hamiltonians, and (iii) unitary loops or Floquet-enriched topological orders (FETs) many-body localized phases. This formalism allows one to apply well-characterized topological index theorems for FETs to understand the dynamics of FCs, and to rapidly assess the code properties of many FC models. As an application, we show that the honeycomb Floquet code of Haah and Hastings is governed by an irrational value of the chiral Floquet index, which implies a topological obstruction to forming a simple, logical boundary with the same periodicity as the bulk measurement schedule. In addition, we construct generalizations of the honeycomb Floquet code exhibiting arbitrary anyon-automorphism dynamics for general types of Abelian topological order.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".