Quantum many-body scarring in a non-Abelian lattice gauge theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantum many-body scarring (QMBS) is an intriguing mechanism of weak ergodicity breaking that has recently spurred significant attention. Particularly prominent in Abelian lattice gauge theories (LGTs), an open question is whether QMBS nontrivially arises in non-Abelian LGTs. Here, we present evidence of robust QMBS in a non-Abelian <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <a:mrow> <a:mi>SU</a:mi> <a:mo>(</a:mo> <a:mn>2</a:mn> <a:mo>)</a:mo> </a:mrow> </a:math> LGT with dynamical matter. Starting in product states that require little experimental overhead, we show that prominent QMBS arises for certain quenches, facilitated through meson and baryon-antibaryon excitations, highlighting its non-Abelian nature. The uncovered scarred dynamics manifests as long-lived coherent oscillations in experimentally accessible local observables as well as prominent revivals in the state fidelity. Our findings bring QMBS to the realm of non-Abelian LGTs, highlighting the intimate connection between scarring and gauge symmetry, and are amenable for observation in a recently proposed trapped-ion qudit quantum computer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".