- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review A

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Algebraic structure of Fock-state lattices

Piergiorgio Ferraro*

Caio B. Naves† and Jonas Larson‡

  • *Contact author: piergiorgio.ferraro@edu.unito.it
  • †Contact author: caio.naves@fysik.su.se
  • ‡Contact author: jolarson@fysik.su.se
PDF

Phys. Rev. A 114, 022214 – Published 20 August, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/yt2d-mwqq

Abstract

We analyze Fock-state lattices (FSLs) from an algebraic viewpoint. Starting from a Lie algebra, we associate a FSL constructed from the action of its generators: diagonal (Cartan) generators define the lattice sites, while off-diagonal (root) generators determine the lattice bonds. This construction reveals that identifying an underlying algebraic structure provides direct physical insight into FSLs, including their dimensionality, connectivity, symmetry constraints, and possible transport and revival phenomena. By examining several common Lie algebras, we identify not only their associated FSLs but also the corresponding Lie phase spaces, thereby establishing a systematic connection between FSL dynamics and phase-space geometry. In many cases, both the phase space and the FSL exhibit nontrivial curvature, opening possibilities for exploring quantum dynamics in curved synthetic spaces. We further address whether every integrable Hamiltonian admits an underlying Lie algebra that reproduces the same FSL structure. We show that this is not generally the case, particularly for Hamiltonians that are nonlinear in the generators, and that for systems combining different types of degrees of freedom the appropriate underlying structure may instead be a Lie superalgebra.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (75)

  1. I. M. Georgescu, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori, Quantum simulation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 153 (2014).
  2. E. Altman, K. R. Brown, G. Carleo, L. D. Carr, E. Demler, C. Chin, B. DeMarco, S. E. Economou, M. A. Eriksson, K.-M. C. Fu, et al., Quantum simulators: Architectures and opportunities, PRX Quantum 2, 017003 (2021).
  3. I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Many-body physics with ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 885 (2008).
  4. M. Lewenstein, A. Sanpera, V. Ahufinger, B. Damski, A. Sen, and U. Sen, Ultracold atomic gases in optical lattices: Mimicking condensed matter physics and beyond, Adv. Phys. 56, 243 (2007).
  5. R. Blatt and C. F. Roos, Quantum simulations with trapped ions, Nat. Phys. 8, 277 (2012).
  6. J. W. Britton, B. C. Sawyer, A. C. Keith, C.-C. J. Wang, J. K. Freericks, H. Uys, M. J. Biercuk, and J. J. Bollinger, Engineered two-dimensional Ising interactions in a trapped-ion quantum simulator with hundreds of spins, Nature (London) 484, 489 (2012).
  7. C. Schneider, D. Porras, and T. Schaetz, Experimental quantum simulations of many-body physics with trapped ions, Rep. Prog. Phys. 75, 024401 (2012).
  8. A. Aspuru-Guzik and P. Walther, Photonic quantum simulators, Nat. Phys. 8, 285 (2012).
  9. M. J. Hartmann, Quantum simulation with interacting photons, J. Opt. 18, 104005 (2016).
  10. T. Grass, D. Bercioux, U. Bhattacharya, M. Lewenstein, H. S. Nguyen, and C. Weitenberg, Colloquium: Synthetic quantum matter in nonstandard geometries, Rev. Mod. Phys. 97, 011001 (2025).
  11. A. Celi, P. Massignan, J. Ruseckas, N. Goldman, I. B. Spielman, G. Juzeliūnas, and M. Lewenstein, Synthetic gauge fields in synthetic dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 043001 (2014).
  12. T. Ozawa, H. M. Price, N. Goldman, O. Zilberberg, and I. Carusotto, Synthetic dimensions in integrated photonics: From optical isolation to four-dimensional quantum Hall physics, Phys. Rev. A 93, 043827 (2016).
  13. J. Argüello-Luengo, U. Bhattacharya, A. Celi, R. W. Chhajlany, T. Grass, M. Płodzień, D. Rakshit, T. Salamon, P. Stornati, L. Tarruell, et al., Synthetic dimensions for topological and quantum phases, Commun. Phys. 7, 143 (2024).
  14. D. Yu, W. Song, L. Wang, R. Srikanth, S. Kaushik Sridhar, T. Chen, C. Huang, G. Li, X. Qiao, X. Wu, et al., Comprehensive review on developments of synthetic dimensions, Photonics Insights 4, R06 (2025).
  15. H. M. Price, T. Ozawa, and N. Goldman, Synthetic dimensions for cold atoms from shaking a harmonic trap, Phys. Rev. A 95, 023607 (2017).
  16. T. Chen, C. Huang, I. Velkovsky, K. R. Hazzard, J. P. Covey, and B. Gadway, Strongly interacting Rydberg atoms in synthetic dimensions with a magnetic flux, Nat. Commun. 15, 2675 (2024).
  17. O. Boada, A. Celi, J. I. Latorre, and M. Lewenstein, Dirac equation for cold atoms in artificial curved spacetimes, New J. Phys. 13, 035002 (2011).
  18. A. Bermudez, T. Schaetz, and D. Porras, Synthetic gauge fields for vibrational excitations of trapped ions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 150501 (2011).
  19. T. Manovitz, Y. Shapira, N. Akerman, A. Stern, and R. Ozeri, Quantum simulations with complex geometries and synthetic gauge fields in a trapped ion chain, PRX Quantum 1, 020303 (2020).
  20. D.-W. Wang, H. Cai, R.-B. Liu, and M. O. Scully, Mesoscopic superposition states generated by synthetic spin-orbit interaction in Fock-state lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 220502 (2016).
  21. P. Saugmann and J. Larson, Fock-state-lattice approach to quantum optics, Phys. Rev. A 108, 033721 (2023).
  22. J. Larson and T. Mavrogordatos, The Jaynes-Cummings Model and its Descendants: Modern Research Directions (IoP Publishing, Bristol, 2021).
  23. J. Yuan, H. Cai, and D.-W. Wang, Quantum simulation in Fock-state lattices, Adv. Phys. X 9, 2325611 (2024).
  24. H. Cai and D.-W. Wang, Topological phases of quantized light, Natl. Sci. Rev. 8, nwaa196 (2021).
  25. R. Moessner and A. P. Ramirez, Geometrical frustration, Phys. Today 59(2), 24 (2006).
  26. J. Deng, H. Dong, C. Zhang, Y. Wu, J. Yuan, X. Zhu, F. Jin, H. Li, Z. Wang, H. Cai, C. Song, H. Wang, J. Q. You, and D.-W. Wang, Observing the quantum topology of light, Science 378, 966 (2022).
  27. C. Wu, W. Liu, Y. Jia, G. Chen, and F. Chen, Observation of topological pumping of a defect state in a Fock photonic lattice, Phys. Rev. A 107, 033501 (2023).
  28. M. Yang, J.-S. Xu, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Simulating topological materials with photonic synthetic dimensions in cavities, Quantum Front. 1, 10 (2022).
  29. S. Sriram, S. K. Sridhar, and A. Dutt, Quantized topological phases beyond square lattices in Floquet synthetic dimensions, Opt. Mater. Express 15, 272 (2025).
  30. J. Yang, Y. Li, Y. Yang, X. Xie, Z. Zhang, J. Yuan, H. Cai, D.-W. Wang, and F. Gao, Realization of all-band-flat photonic lattices, Nat. Commun. 15, 1484 (2024).
  31. J. Zhang, W. Huang, J. Chu, J. Qiu, X. Sun, Z. Tao, J. Zhang, L. Zhang, Y. Zhou, Y. Chen, et al., Synthetic multidimensional Aharonov-Bohm cages in Fock state lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 070601 (2025).
  32. Y. Yao, L. Xiang, Z. Guo, Z. Bao, Y.-F. Yang, Z. Song, H. Shi, X. Zhu, F. Jin, J. Chen, et al., Observation of many-body Fock space dynamics in two dimensions, Nat. Phys. 19, 1459 (2023).
  33. J. Larson, Floquet analysis perspective of driven light–matter interaction models, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 41, C235 (2024).
  34. X. Zhao, Y. Xu, L.-M. Kuang, and J.-Q. Liao, Dark-state engineering in Fock-state lattices, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 033070 (2025).
  35. M. Li, W. Cai, Z. Hua, Y. Xu, Y. Zhou, Z.-J. Chen, X.-B. Zou, G.-C. Guo, L. Sun, and C.-L. Zou, Scalable generation of macroscopic Fock states exceeding 10,000 photons, arXiv:2601.05118.
  36. T. Ben-Ami, M. Heyl, and R. Moessner, Many-body cages: Disorder-free glassiness from flat bands in Fock space, and many-body Rabi oscillations, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2026), doi:10.1103/gmw6-x94c.
  37. C. Jonay and F. Pollmann, Localized Fock space cages in kinetically constrained models, Phys. Rev. B 113, 134313 (2026).
  38. W. Yao, S. Li, Z. Liu, Y. Li, Z. Xie, X. Zhao, X. Cheng, Y. Li, Z.-Y. Xue, and Y. Lin, Non-Abelian Aharonov-Bohm caging in synthetic dimensions with a trapped ion, arXiv:2602.13796.
  39. C. B. Naves and J. Larson, Liouville-Fock-state lattices: From environment-induced frustration to synthetic lattice dynamics, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 043233 (2025).
  40. D. M. Basko, I. L. Aleiner, and B. L. Altshuler, Metal–insulator transition in a weakly interacting many-electron system with localized single-particle states, Ann. Phys. 321, 1126 (2006).
  41. C. C. Gerry and P. L. Knight, Introductory Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2023).
  42. J. J. Sakurai and J. Napolitano, Modern Quantum Mechanics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2020).
  43. A. Auerbach, Interacting Electrons and Quantum Magnetism (Springer, New York, 2012).
  44. R. Anishetty, M. Mathur, and I. Raychowdhury, Irreducible SU (3) Schwinger bosons, J. Math. Phys. 50, 053503 (2009).
  45. H. Georgi, Lie Algebras in Particle Physics: From Isospin to Unified Theories (Taylor & Francis, London, 2000).
  46. R. Gilmore, Lie Groups, Lie Algebras, and Some of their Applications (Dover, New York, 2006).
  47. A. M. Perelomov, Generalized coherent states and some of their applications, Sov. Phys. Usp. 20, 703 (1977).
  48. A. M. Perelomov, Generalized Coherent States and their Applications, Theoretical and Mathematical Physics (Springer, Berlin, 1986).
  49. M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997).
  50. H. J. Carmichael, Statistical Methods in Quantum Optics 1: Master Equations and Fokker-Planck Equations (Springer, New York, 2013).
  51. W. P. Schleich, Quantum Optics in Phase Space (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2015).
  52. G. S. Agarwal, Relation between atomic coherent-state representation, state multipoles, and generalized phase-space distributions, Phys. Rev. A 24, 2889 (1981).
  53. C. Brif and A. Mann, Phase-space formulation of quantum mechanics and quantum state reconstruction for physical systems with Lie-group symmetries, Phys. Rev. A 59, 971 (1998).
  54. A. B. Klimov and H. De Guise, General approach to quasi-distribution functions, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 43, 402001 (2010).
  55. T. Tilma, M. J. Everitt, J. H. Samson, W. J. Munro, and K. Nemoto, Wigner functions for arbitrary quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 180401 (2016).
  56. A. B. Klimov and S. M. Chumakov, A Group-Theoretical Approach to Quantum Optics: Models of Atom-Field Interactions (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2009), Vol. 10.
  57. W.-M. Zhang, D. H. Feng, and R. Gilmore, Coherent states: Theory and some applications, Rev. Mod. Phys. 62, 867 (1990).
  58. L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995).
  59. R. Y. Chiao and T. F. Jordan, Lorentz-group Berry phases in squeezed light, Phys. Lett. A 132, 77 (1988).
  60. F. Hong-Yi and H. Zaidi, Berry phase for the SU (1, 1) coherent state, Can. J. Phys. 66, 978 (1988).
  61. S. M. Carroll, Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity (Addison-Wesley, San Francisco, 2004).
  62. D. Braak, Integrability of the Rabi model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 100401 (2011).
  63. J.-P. Gazeau, Coherent States in Quantum Physics (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2009).
  64. V. I. Arnol'd, Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics (Springer, New York, 2013), Vol. 60.
  65. T. Hartmann, F. Keck, H. Korsch, and S. Mossmann, Dynamics of Bloch oscillations, New J. Phys. 6, 2 (2004).
  66. L. Susskind and J. Glogower, Quantum mechanical phase and time operator, Phys. Phys. Fiz. 1, 49 (1964).
  67. D. T. Pegg and S. M. Barnett, Phase properties of the quantized single-mode electromagnetic field, Phys. Rev. A 39, 1665 (1989).
  68. M. Christandl, N. Datta, A. Ekert, and A. J. Landahl, Perfect state transfer in quantum spin networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 187902 (2004).
  69. M. Mathur and D. Sen, Coherent states for SU (3), J. Math. Phys. 42, 4181 (2001).
  70. V. Bužek, SU (1, 1) squeezing of SU (1, 1) generalized coherent states, J. Mod. Opt. 37, 303 (1990).
  71. B. Buck and C. Sukumar, Exactly soluble model of atom-phonon coupling showing periodic decay and revival, Phys. Lett. A 81, 132 (1981).
  72. V. Bužek, Jaynes-Cummings model with intensity-dependent coupling interacting with Holstein-Primakoff SU (1, 1) coherent state, Phys. Rev. A 39, 3196 (1989).
  73. T. Holstein and H. Primakoff, Field dependence of the intrinsic domain magnetization of a ferromagnet, Phys. Rev. 58, 1098 (1940).
  74. C. C. Gerry, Correlated two-mode SU (1, 1) coherent states: Nonclassical properties, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 8, 685 (1991).
  75. L. Gilles and P. Knight, Non-classical properties of two-mode SU (1, 1) coherent states, J. Mod. Opt. 39, 1411 (1992).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. A 114, 022214– Published 20 August, 2026
  • Received 12 May 2026
  • Accepted 24 July 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by Bibsam.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation