- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review B

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

Manipulating non-Abelian anyons of Kitaev quantum spin liquids with local magnetic fields

Haoran Wang* and Alessandro Principi†

  • *Contact author: haoran.wang-6@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk
  • †Contact author: alessandro.principi@manchester.ac.uk
PDF

Phys. Rev. B 113, 014434 – Published 26 January, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/m2w7-54mp

Abstract

Non-Abelian anyonic excitations of quantum spin liquids have potential for application to topological quantum computation, but designing logical operations requires developing protocols to faithfully create, move, and read out such quasiparticles. In this paper, we test two such protocols for manipulating Z2 fluxes (“visons”) of ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic Kitaev models perturbed by a small uniform magnetic field. We show that a protocol that employs a driving magnetic field locally applied to the sites of the lattice suffers from significant unavoidable errors. These errors, accumulating over time, prevent reaching high probabilities of generating and displacing flux pairs. However, individual spin couplings can also be turned on and off, thus it is possible to create and displace fluxes with nearly 100% probability. We show that braiding non-Abelian anyons can be achieved with good precision with our second protocol. We comment on the feasibility of our protocols in solid-state devices and quantum emulators.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (69)

  1. I. L. Chuang, R. Laflamme, P. W. Shor, and W. H. Zurek, Quantum computers, factoring, and decoherence, Science 270, 1633 (1995).
  2. W. H. Zurek, Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 715 (2003).
  3. K. Hornberger, Introduction to decoherence theory, in Entanglement and Decoherence: Foundations and Modern Trends (Springer, New York, 2009), p. 221 .
  4. M. A. Schlosshauer, Decoherence: And the Quantum-to-Classical Transition (Springer, New York, 2007).
  5. W. H. Zurek, et al., Decoherence and the transition from quantum to classical, Phys. Today 44(10), 36 (1991).
  6. P. W. Shor, Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory, Phys. Rev. A 52, R2493 (1995).
  7. S. P. Jordan, E. Farhi, and P. W. Shor, Error-correcting codes for adiabatic quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A 74, 052322 (2006).
  8. E. Knill and R. Laflamme, Theory of quantum error-correcting codes, Phys. Rev. A 55, 900 (1997).
  9. P. W. Shor, Fault-tolerant quantum computation, in Proceedings of 37th Conference on Foundations of Computer Science (IEEE, New York, 1996), pp. 56–65.
  10. D. G. Cory, M. D. Price, W. Maas, E. Knill, R. Laflamme, W. H. Zurek, T. F. Havel, and S. S. Somaroo, Experimental quantum error correction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 2152 (1998).
  11. J. Chiaverini, D. Leibfried, T. Schaetz, M. D. Barrett, R. Blakestad, J. Britton, W. M. Itano, J. D. Jost, E. Knill, C. Langer, et al., Realization of quantum error correction, Nature (London) 432, 602 (2004).
  12. E. Knill, R. Laflamme, R. Martinez, and C. Negrevergne, Benchmarking quantum computers: The five-qubit error correcting code, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5811 (2001).
  13. M. Freedman, A. Kitaev, M. Larsen, and Z. Wang, Topological quantum computation, Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 40, 31 (2003).
  14. A. Kitaev, Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons, Ann. Phys. (NY) 303, 2 (2003).
  15. E. Dennis, A. Kitaev, A. Landahl, and J. Preskill, Topological quantum memory, J. Math. Phys. 43, 4452 (2002).
  16. A. Stern and N. H. Lindner, Topological quantum computation—From basic concepts to first experiments, Science 339, 1179 (2013).
  17. S. Das Sarma, M. Freedman, and C. Nayak, Topological quantum computation, Phys. Today 59(7), 32 (2006).
  18. X. G. Wen and Q. Niu, Ground-state degeneracy of the fractional quantum Hall states in the presence of a random potential and on high-genus Riemann surfaces, Phys. Rev. B 41, 9377 (1990).
  19. C. Nayak, S. H. Simon, A. Stern, M. Freedman, and S. Das Sarma, Non-Abelian anyons and topological quantum computation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1083 (2008).
  20. A. Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond, Ann. Phys. (NY) 321, 2 (2006).
  21. M. Hermanns, I. Kimchi, and J. Knolle, Physics of the Kitaev model: Fractionalization, dynamic correlations, and material connections, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 9, 17 (2018).
  22. G. Jackeli and G. Khaliullin, Mott insulators in the strong spin-orbit coupling limit: From Heisenberg to a quantum compass and Kitaev models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 017205 (2009).
  23. H. Takagi, T. Takayama, G. Jackeli, G. Khaliullin, and S. E. Nagler, Concept and realization of Kitaev quantum spin liquids, Nat. Rev. Phys. 1, 264 (2019).
  24. S. M. Winter, A. A. Tsirlin, M. Daghofer, J. van den Brink, Y. Singh, P. Gegenwart, and R. Valentí, Models and materials for generalized Kitaev magnetism, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 29, 493002 (2017).
  25. M. Gohlke, R. Moessner, and F. Pollmann, Dynamical and topological properties of the Kitaev model in a [111] magnetic field, Phys. Rev. B 98, 014418 (2018).
  26. A. Banerjee, J. Yan, J. Knolle, C. A. Bridges, M. B. Stone, M. D. Lumsden, D. G. Mandrus, D. A. Tennant, R. Moessner, and S. E. Nagler, Neutron scattering in the proximate quantum spin liquid α−RuCl3, Science 356, 1055 (2017).
  27. S.-H. Do, S. Y. Park, J. Yoshitake, J. Nasu, Y. Motome, Y. S. Kwon, D. T. Adroja, D. J. Voneshen, K. Kim, T.-H. Jang, J.-H. Park, and K.-Y. Choi, Majorana fermions in the Kitaev quantum spin system α−RuCl3, Nat. Phys. 13, 1079 (2017).
  28. A. Banerjee, C. A. Bridges, J. Yan, A. A. Aczel, L. Li, M. B. Stone, G. E. Granroth, M. D. Lumsden, Y. Yiu, J. Knolle, S. Bhattacharjee, D. A. Tennant, D. G. Mandrus, and S. E. Nagler, Excitations in the field-induced quantum spin liquid state of α−RuCl3, npj Quantum Mater. 3, 8 (2018).
  29. Y. Kasahara, T. Ohnishi, Y. Mizukami, O. Tanaka, S. Ma, K. Sugii, N. Kurita, H. Tanaka, J. Nasu, Y. Motome, T. Shibauchi, and Y. Matsuda, Majorana quantization and half-integer thermal quantum Hall effect in a Kitaev spin-liquid candidate, Nature (London) 559, 227 (2018).
  30. T. Yokoi, S. Ma, Y. Kasahara, S. Kasahara, T. Shibauchi, N. Kurita, H. Tanaka, J. Nasu, Y. Motome, C. Hickey, S. Trebst, and Y. Matsuda, Half-integer quantized anomalous thermal Hall effect in the Kitaev material α−RuCl3, Science 373, 568 (2021).
  31. J. A. N. Bruin, H. Sakai, N. Kurita, H. Tanaka, J. Nasu, Y. Motome, Y. Matsuda, T. Shibauchi, and Y. Kasahara, Robustness of the thermal Hall effect close to half-quantization in a field-induced spin-liquid state, Nat. Phys. 18, 401 (2022).
  32. R. Acharya, L. Aghababaie-Beni, I. Aleiner, T. I. Andersen, M. Ansmann, F. Arute, K. Arya, A. Asfaw, N. Astrakhantsev, J. Atalaya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, B. Ballard, J. C. Bardin, J. Bausch, A. Bengtsson, A. Bilmes, S. Blackwell, S. Boixo, G. Bortoli, et al. (Google Quantum AI and Collaborators), Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold, Nature (London) 638, 920 (2025).
  33. S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Semeghini, A. Omran, D. Bluvstein, R. Samajdar, H. Pichler, W. W. Ho, et al., Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simulator, Nature (London) 595, 227 (2021).
  34. M. Morgado and S. Whitlock, Quantum simulation and computing with Rydberg-interacting qubits, AVS Quantum Sci. 3, 023501 (2021).
  35. Y.-H. Chen, B.-Z. Wang, T.-F. J. Poon, X.-C. Zhou, Z.-X. Liu, and X.-J. Liu, Proposal for realization and detection of Kitaev quantum spin liquid with Rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, L042054 (2024).
  36. E. H. Lieb, Flux phase of the half-filled band, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 2158 (1994).
  37. The quadratic mean field Hamiltonian is generated in the following way: given a product m1m2m3m4, we transform it into ∑p(−1)p2−p1+1mp1mp2〈mq1mq2〉, where p1<p2 are two numbers picked from {1,2,3,4}, and q1<q2 are the other two numbers. For m1m2m3m4m5m6, we transform it as ∑p(−1)p2−p1+1mp1mp2Υmq1,mq2,mq3,mq4, where Υ(mq1,mq2,mq3,mq4)=〈mq1mq2〉〈mq3mq4〉+〈mq1mq4〉〈mq2mq3〉−〈mq1mq3〉〈mq2mq4〉 where p1<p2 are now picked from {1,2,3,4,5,6}, and q1<q2<q3<q4 are the rest of the numbers.
  38. F. Zschocke and M. Vojta, Physical states and finite-size effects in Kitaev's honeycomb model: Bond disorder, spin excitations, and NMR line shape, Phys. Rev. B 92, 014403 (2015).
  39. J. A. Sears, Y. Zhao, Z. Xu, J. W. Lynn, and Y.-J. Kim, Phase diagram of α−RuCl3 in an in-plane magnetic field, Phys. Rev. B 95, 180411(R) (2017).
  40. A. U. B. Wolter, L. T. Corredor, L. Janssen, K. Nenkov, S. Schönecker, S.-H. Do, K.-Y. Choi, R. Albrecht, J. Hunger, T. Doert, M. Vojta, and B. Büchner, Field-induced quantum criticality in the Kitaev system α−RuCl3, Phys. Rev. B 96, 041405(R) (2017).
  41. H.-C. Jiang, Z.-C. Gu, X.-L. Qi, and S. Trebst, Possible proximity of the Mott insulating iridate Na2IrO3 to a topological phase: Phase diagram of the Heisenberg-Kitaev model in a magnetic field, Phys. Rev. B 83, 245104 (2011).
  42. D. A. S. Kaib, S. M. Winter, and R. Valentí, Kitaev honeycomb models in magnetic fields: Dynamical response and dual models, Phys. Rev. B 100, 144445 (2019).
  43. C. Hickey, M. Gohlke, C. Berke, and S. Trebst, Generic field-driven phenomena in Kitaev spin liquids: Canted magnetism and proximate spin liquid physics, Phys. Rev. B 103, 064417 (2021).
  44. F. Yilmaz, A. P. Kampf, and S. K. Yip, Phase diagrams of Kitaev models for arbitrary magnetic field orientations, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 043024 (2022).
  45. Z. Zhu, I. Kimchi, D. N. Sheng, and L. Fu, Robust non-Abelian spin liquid and a possible intermediate phase in the antiferromagnetic Kitaev model with magnetic field, Phys. Rev. B 97, 241110(R) (2018).
  46. S.-S. Zhang, G. B. Halász, and C. D. Batista, Theory of the Kitaev model in a [111] magnetic field, Nat. Commun. 13, 399 (2022).
  47. N. D. Patel and N. Trivedi, Magnetic field-induced intermediate quantum spin liquid with a spinon Fermi surface, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116, 12199 (2019).
  48. H.-C. Jiang, C.-Y. Wang, B. Huang, and Y.-M. Lu, Field induced quantum spin liquid with spinon Fermi surfaces in the Kitaev model, arXiv:1809.08247.
  49. M. Gohlke, G. Wachtel, Y. Yamaji, F. Pollmann, and Y. B. Kim, Quantum spin liquid signatures in Kitaev-like frustrated magnets, Phys. Rev. B 97, 075126 (2018).
  50. A. Ralko and J. Merino, Novel chiral quantum spin liquids in Kitaev magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 217203 (2020).
  51. A. P. Joy and A. Rosch, Dynamics of visons and thermal Hall effect in perturbed Kitaev models, Phys. Rev. X 12, 041004 (2022).
  52. C. Chen and I. S. Villadiego, Nature of visons in the perturbed ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic Kitaev honeycomb models, Phys. Rev. B 107, 045114 (2023).
  53. C. Chen and I. S. Villadiego, Anyon polarons as a window into competing phases of the Kitaev honeycomb model under a Zeeman field, Phys. Rev. B 111, 245140 (2025).
  54. A. Panigrahi, P. Coleman, and A. Tsvelik, Analytic calculation of the vison gap in the Kitaev spin liquid, Phys. Rev. B 108, 045151 (2023).
  55. C. Harada, A. Ono, and J. Nasu, Field-driven spatiotemporal manipulation of Majorana zero modes in Kitaev spin liquid, Phys. Rev. B 108, L241118 (2023).
  56. E. Persky, I. Sochnikov, and B. Kalisky, Studying quantum materials with scanning squid microscopy, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 13, 385 (2022).
  57. O. Tanaka, Y. Mizukami, R. Harasawa, K. Hashimoto, K. Hwang, N. Kurita, H. Tanaka, S. Fujimoto, Y. Matsuda, E.-G. Moon, et al., Thermodynamic evidence for a field-angle-dependent Majorana gap in a Kitaev spin liquid, Nat. Phys. 18, 429 (2022).
  58. K. Imamura, Y. Mizukami, O. Tanaka, R. Grasset, M. Konczykowski, N. Kurita, H. Tanaka, Y. Matsuda, M. G. Yamada, K. Hashimoto, and T. Shibauchi, Defect-induced low-energy Majorana excitations in the Kitaev magnet α−RuCl3, Phys. Rev. X 14, 011045 (2024).
  59. D. Barredo, S. De Léséleuc, V. Lienhard, T. Lahaye, and A. Browaeys, An atom-by-atom assembler of defect-free arbitrary two-dimensional atomic arrays, Science 354, 1021 (2016).
  60. H. J. Manetsch, G. Nomura, E. Bataille, K. H. Leung, X. Lv, and M. Endres, A tweezer array with 6100 highly coherent atomic qubits, Nature (London) 647, 60 (2025).
  61. C. Hölzl, A. Götzelmann, E. Pultinevicius, M. Wirth, and F. Meinert, Long-lived circular Rydberg qubits of alkaline-earth atoms in optical tweezers, Phys. Rev. X 14, 021024 (2024).
  62. A. J. Willans, J. T. Chalker, and R. Moessner, Disorder in a quantum spin liquid: Flux binding and local moment formation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 237203 (2010).
  63. W.-H. Kao, N. B. Perkins, and G. B. Halász, Vacancy spectroscopy of non-Abelian Kitaev spin liquids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 136503 (2024).
  64. S. G., V. Sreenath, A. Lakshminarayan, and R. Narayanan, Localized zero-energy modes in the Kitaev model with vacancy disorder, Phys. Rev. B 85, 054204 (2012).
  65. W.-H. Kao, J. Knolle, G. B. Halász, R. Moessner, and N. B. Perkins, Vacancy-induced low-energy density of states in the Kitaev spin liquid, Phys. Rev. X 11, 011034 (2021).
  66. The signs chosen in Eq. (40) are arbitrary. One could define the Majorana modes as γ̂1′=−γ̂1, in which case γ̂1(Tf)=+γ̂2. Once a sign definition for the clockwise exchange of γ̂1 and γ̂2 is chosen, then the opposite choice of signs corresponds to counterclockwise exchange of the two Majorana modes.
  67. L. Anderegg, L. W. Cheuk, Y. Bao, S. Burchesky, W. Ketterle, K.-K. Ni, and J. M. Doyle, An optical tweezer array of ultracold molecules, Science 365, 1156 (2019).
  68. M. Endres, H. Bernien, A. Keesling, H. Levine, E. R. Anschuetz, A. Krajenbrink, C. Senko, V. Vuletic, M. Greiner, and M. D. Lukin, Atom-by-atom assembly of defect-free one-dimensional cold atom arrays, Science 354, 1024 (2016).
  69. M. Will, T. Cochran, E. Rosenberg, B. Jobst, N. M. Eassa, P. Roushan, M. Knap, A. Gammon-Smith, and F. Pollmann, Probing non-equilibrium topological order on a quantum processor, Nature (London) 645, 348 (2025).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. B 113, 014434– Published 26 January, 2026
  • Received 1 August 2025
  • Revised 5 November 2025
  • Accepted 23 December 2025
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.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation