Non-thermal eigenstates and slow relaxation in quantum Fredkin spin chains
Abstract: We study the dynamics and thermalization of the Fredkin spin chain, a system with local three-body interactions, particle conservation and explicit kinetic constraints. We consider deformations away from its stochastic point in order to tune between regimes where kinetic energy dominates and those where potential energy does. By means of exact diagonalisation, perturbation theory and variational matrix product states, we show there is a sudden change of behaviour in the dynamics that occurs, from one of fast thermalization to one of slow metastable (prethermal) dynamics near the stochastic point. This change in relaxation is connected to the emergence of additional kinetic constraints which lead to the fragmentation of Hilbert space in the limit of a large potential energy. We also show that this change can lead to thermalization being evaded for special initial conditions due to non-thermal eigenstates (akin to quantum many-body scars). We provide clear evidence for the existence of these non-thermal states for large system sizes even when far from the large-potential-energy limit, and explain their connection to the emergent kinetic constraints.
- J. M. Deutsch, Phys. Rev. A 43, 2046 (1991).
- M. Srednicki, Phys. Rev. E 50, 888 (1994).
- J. M. Deutsch, Rep. Prog. Phys 81, 082001 (2018).
- M. Rigol, V. Dunjko, and M. Olshanii, Nature 452, 854 (2008).
- W. Beugeling, R. Moessner, and M. Haque, Phys. Rev. E 89, 042112 (2014).
- W. Beugeling, R. Moessner, and M. Haque, Phys. Rev. E 91, 012144 (2015).
- A. Dymarsky, N. Lashkari, and H. Liu, Phys. Rev. E 97, 012140 (2018).
- S. Sugimoto, R. Hamazaki, and M. Ueda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 030602 (2022).
- L. Vidmar and M. Rigol, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp. 2016 (6), 064007.
- D. Basko, I. Aleiner, and B. Altshuler, Ann. Phys. 321, 1126 (2006).
- V. Oganesyan and D. A. Huse, Phys. Rev. B 75, 155111 (2007).
- R. Nandkishore and D. A. Huse, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 6, 15 (2015).
- D. Sels, Phys. Rev. B 106, L020202 (2022).
- P. Fendley, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp 2012, P11020 (2012).
- S. D. Sarma, M. Freedman, and C. Nayak, npj Quantum Inf. 1, 15001 (2015).
- P. Fendley, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 49, 30LT01 (2016).
- M. van Horssen, E. Levi, and J. P. Garrahan, Phys. Rev. B 92, 100305 (2015).
- J. M. Hickey, S. Genway, and J. P. Garrahan, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp 2016, 054047 (2016).
- J. Feldmeier, F. Pollmann, and M. Knap, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 040601 (2019).
- B. Bertini, P. Kos, and T. Prosen, arXiv: 2306.12467 (2023).
- E. van Nieuwenburg, Y. Baum, and G. Refael, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 116, 9269 (2019).
- G. Cipolloni and J. Kudler-Flam, arXiv: 2303.03448 (2023).
- M. Žnidarič, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 033041 (2022).
- M. Serbyn, D. A. Abanin, and Z. Papić, Nat. Phys. 17, 675 (2021).
- S. Moudgalya, B. A. Bernevig, and N. Regnault, Rep. Prog. Phys 85, 086501 (2022).
- Z. Papić, Weak ergodicity breaking through the lens of quantum entanglement, in Entanglement in Spin Chains: From Theory to Quantum Technology Applications, edited by A. Bayat, S. Bose, and H. Johannesson (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2022) pp. 341–395.
- P. Fendley, K. Sengupta, and S. Sachdev, Phys. Rev. B 69, 075106 (2004).
- I. Lesanovsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 025301 (2011).
- S. Moudgalya, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, Phys. Rev. B 98, 235156 (2018).
- C.-J. Lin and O. I. Motrunich, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 173401 (2019).
- M. Schecter and T. Iadecola, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 147201 (2019).
- C. M. Langlett and S. Xu, Phys. Rev. B 103, L220304 (2021).
- G. Francica and L. Dell’Anna, arXiv: 2302.11680 (2023).
- J. Richter and A. Pal, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, L012003 (2022).
- O. Salberger and V. Korepin, arXiv: 1605.03842 (2016).
- L. Zadnik and M. Fagotti, SciPost Phys. Core 4, 010 (2021).
- L. Zadnik, K. Bidzhiev, and M. Fagotti, SciPost Phys. 10, 099 (2021).
- F. Sugino and V. Korepin, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 32, 1850306 (2018).
- L. Causer, J. P. Garrahan, and A. Lamacraft, Phys. Rev. E 106, 014128 (2022).
- Z. Zhang and I. Klich, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 50, 425201 (2017).
- S. N. Majumdar and A. Comtet, J. Stat. Phys. 119, 777 (2005).
- S. Papanikolaou, E. Luijten, and E. Fradkin, Phys. Rev. B 76, 134514 (2007).
- R. Movassagh, Ann. Math. Sci. Appl. 3, 531 (2018).
- T. Udagawa and H. Katsura, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 50, 405002 (2017).
- A. Bastianello, U. Borla, and S. Moroz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 196601 (2022).
- L. Zadnik and J. P. Garrahan, arXiv: 2304.10394 (2023).
- S. Moudgalya and O. I. Motrunich, Phys. Rev. X 12, 011050 (2022).
- The states |𝒮1⟩ketsubscript𝒮1\mathinner{|{{\mathcal{S}}_{1}}\rangle}| caligraphic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ and |𝒮N/2⟩ketsubscript𝒮𝑁2\mathinner{|{{\mathcal{S}}_{N/2}}\rangle}| caligraphic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N / 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ are not strictly scars, as they correspond to the extreme eigenstates of the Hamiltonian. Since they are at the edge of the spectrum, they also show “thermal” values for local observables. We nevertheless include them in the sequence of scarred states as they fit into the same spatial pattern.
- S. R. White, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2863 (1992).
- M. C. Bañuls, D. A. Huse, and J. I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. B 101, 144305 (2020).
- An alternative approach for estimating scarred states with MPS worth mentioning is Ref. [92], which uses a shift-invert like method to estimate eigenstates at a particular energy.
- V. Khemani, F. Pollmann, and S. L. Sondhi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 247204 (2016).
Paper Prompts
Sign up for free to create and run prompts on this paper using GPT-5.
Top Community Prompts
Collections
Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.