- 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

Mass-assisted local deconfinement in a confined Z2 lattice gauge theory

Jean-Yves Desaules1,*, Thomas Iadecola2,3,†, and Jad C. Halimeh4,5,6,‡

  • *Contact author: jean-yves.desaules@ist.ac.at
  • †Contact author: iadecola@iastate.edu
  • ‡Contact author: jad.halimeh@physik.lmu.de
PDF

Phys. Rev. B 112, 014301 – Published 1 July, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/mfg2-t6gb

Abstract

Confinement is a prominent phenomenon in condensed-matter and high-energy physics that has recently become the focus of quantum-simulation experiments of lattice gauge theories (LGTs). As such, a theoretical understanding of the effect of confinement on LGT dynamics is not only of fundamental importance but also can lend itself to upcoming experiments. Here we show how confinement in a Z2 LGT can be locally avoided by proximity to a resonance between the fermion mass and the electric field strength. Furthermore, we show that this local deconfinement can become global for certain initial conditions, where information transport occurs over the entire chain. In addition, we show how this can lead to strong quantum many-body scarring starting in different initial states. Our findings provide deeper insights into the nature of confinement in Z2 LGTs and can be tested on current and near-term quantum devices.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (86)

  1. K. G. Wilson, Confinement of quarks, Phys. Rev. D 10, 2445 (1974).
  2. H. J. Rothe, Lattice Gauge Theories: An Introduction, EBSCO Ebook Academic Collection (World Scientific, Singapore, 2005).
  3. M. Dalmonte and S. Montangero, Lattice gauge theory simulations in the quantum information era, Contemp. Phys. 57, 388 (2016).
  4. M. C. Bañuls, R. Blatt, J. Catani, A. Celi, J. I. Cirac, M. Dalmonte, L. Fallani, K. Jansen, M. Lewenstein, S. Montangero, C. A. Muschik, B. Reznik, E. Rico, L. Tagliacozzo, K. Van Acoleyen, F. Verstraete, U.-J. Wiese, M. Wingate, J. Zakrzewski, and P. Zoller, Simulating lattice gauge theories within quantum technologies, Eur. Phys. J. D 74, 165 (2020).
  5. E. Zohar, J. I. Cirac, and B. Reznik, Quantum simulations of lattice gauge theories using ultracold atoms in optical lattices, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 014401 (2016).
  6. Y. Alexeev, D. Bacon, K. R. Brown, R. Calderbank, L. D. Carr, F. T. Chong, B. DeMarco, D. Englund, E. Farhi, B. Fefferman, A. V. Gorshkov, A. Houck, J. Kim, S. Kimmel, M. Lange, S. Lloyd, M. D. Lukin, D. Maslov, P. Maunz, C. Monroe, J. Preskill, M. Roetteler, M. J. Savage, and J. Thompson, Quantum computer systems for scientific discovery, PRX Quantum 2, 017001 (2021).
  7. M. Aidelsburger, L. Barbiero, A. Bermudez, T. Chanda, A. Dauphin, D. González-Cuadra, P. R. Grzybowski, S. Hands, F. Jendrzejewski, J. Jünemann, G. Juzeliūnas, V. Kasper, A. Piga, S.-J. Ran, M. Rizzi, G. Sierra, L. Tagliacozzo, E. Tirrito, T. V. Zache, J. Zakrzewski, E. Zohar, and M. Lewenstein, Cold atoms meet lattice gauge theory, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 380, 20210064 (2022).
  8. E. Zohar, Quantum simulation of lattice gauge theories in more than one space dimension: Requirements, challenges and methods, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 380, 20210069 (2022).
  9. N. Klco, A. Roggero, and M. J. Savage, Standard model physics and the digital quantum revolution: Thoughts about the interface, Rep. Prog. Phys. 85, 064301 (2022).
  10. C. W. Bauer, Z. Davoudi, A. B. Balantekin, T. Bhattacharya, M. Carena, W. A. de Jong, P. Draper, A. El-Khadra, N. Gemelke, M. Hanada, D. Kharzeev, H. Lamm, Y.-Y. Li, J. Liu, M. Lukin, Y. Meurice, C. Monroe, B. Nachman, G. Pagano, J. Preskill, E. Rinaldi, A. Roggero, D. I. Santiago, M. J. Savage, I. Siddiqi, G. Siopsis, D. Van Zanten, N. Wiebe, Y. Yamauchi, K. Yeter-Aydeniz, and S. Zorzetti, Quantum simulation for high-energy physics, PRX Quantum 4, 027001 (2023).
  11. A. Di Meglio, K. Jansen, I. Tavernelli, C. Alexandrou, S. Arunachalam, C. W. Bauer, K. Borras, S. Carrazza, A. Crippa, V. Croft, R. de Putter, A. Delgado, V. Dunjko, D. J. Egger, E. Fernández-Combarro, E. Fuchs, L. Funcke, D. González-Cuadra, M. Grossi, J. C. Halimeh, Z. Holmes, S. Kühn, D. Lacroix, R. Lewis, D. Lucchesi, M. L. Martinez, F. Meloni, A. Mezzacapo, S. Montangero, L. Nagano, V. R. Pascuzzi, V. Radescu, E. R. Ortega, A. Roggero, J. Schuhmacher, J. Seixas, P. Silvi, P. Spentzouris, F. Tacchino, K. Temme, K. Terashi, J. Tura, C. Tüysüz, S. Vallecorsa, U.-J. Wiese, S. Yoo, and J. Zhang, Quantum computing for high-energy physics: State of the art and challenges, PRX Quantum 5, 037001 (2024).
  12. J. C. Halimeh, M. Aidelsburger, F. Grusdt, P. Hauke, and B. Yang, Cold-atom quantum simulators of gauge theories, Nat. Phys. 21, 25 (2025).
  13. Y. Cheng and H. Zhai, Emergent U(1) lattice gauge theory in Rydberg atom arrays, Nat. Rev. Phys. 6, 566 (2024).
  14. E. A. Martinez, C. A. Muschik, P. Schindler, D. Nigg, A. Erhard, M. Heyl, P. Hauke, M. Dalmonte, T. Monz, P. Zoller, and R. Blatt, Real-time dynamics of lattice gauge theories with a few-qubit quantum computer, Nature (Lond.) 534, 516 (2016).
  15. N. Klco, E. F. Dumitrescu, A. J. McCaskey, T. D. Morris, R. C. Pooser, M. Sanz, E. Solano, P. Lougovski, and M. J. Savage, Quantum-classical computation of Schwinger model dynamics using quantum computers, Phys. Rev. A 98, 032331 (2018).
  16. F. Görg, K. Sandholzer, J. Minguzzi, R. Desbuquois, M. Messer, and T. Esslinger, Realization of density-dependent Peierls phases to engineer quantized gauge fields coupled to ultracold matter, Nat. Phys. 15, 1161 (2019).
  17. C. Schweizer, F. Grusdt, M. Berngruber, L. Barbiero, E. Demler, N. Goldman, I. Bloch, and M. Aidelsburger, Floquet approach to Z2 lattice gauge theories with ultracold atoms in optical lattices, Nat. Phys. 15, 1168 (2019).
  18. A. Mil, T. V. Zache, A. Hegde, A. Xia, R. P. Bhatt, M. K. Oberthaler, P. Hauke, J. Berges, and F. Jendrzejewski, A scalable realization of local U(1) gauge invariance in cold atomic mixtures, Science 367, 1128 (2020).
  19. B. Yang, H. Sun, R. Ott, H.-Y. Wang, T. V. Zache, J. C. Halimeh, Z.-S. Yuan, P. Hauke, and J.-W. Pan, Observation of gauge invariance in a 71-site Bose–Hubbard quantum simulator, Nature (Lond.) 587, 392 (2020).
  20. Z. Wang, Z.-Y. Ge, Z. Xiang, X. Song, R.-Z. Huang, P. Song, X.-Y. Guo, L. Su, K. Xu, D. Zheng, and H. Fan, Observation of emergent Z2 gauge invariance in a superconducting circuit, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, L022060 (2022).
  21. Z.-Y. Zhou, G.-X. Su, J. C. Halimeh, R. Ott, H. Sun, P. Hauke, B. Yang, Z.-S. Yuan, J. Berges, and J.-W. Pan, Thermalization dynamics of a gauge theory on a quantum simulator, Science 377, 311 (2022).
  22. J. Mildenberger, W. Mruczkiewicz, J. C. Halimeh, Z. Jiang, and P. Hauke, Confinement in a Z2 lattice gauge theory on a quantum computer, Nat. Phys. 21, 312 (2025).
  23. W.-Y. Zhang, Y. Liu, Y. Cheng, M.-G. He, H.-Y. Wang, T.-Y. Wang, Z.-H. Zhu, G.-X. Su, Z.-Y. Zhou, Y.-G. Zheng, H. Sun, B. Yang, P. Hauke, W. Zheng, J. C. Halimeh, Z.-S. Yuan, and J.-W. Pan, Observation of microscopic confinement dynamics by a tunable topological θ-angle, Nat. Phys. 21, 155 (2025).
  24. R. C. Farrell, M. Illa, A. N. Ciavarella, and M. J. Savage, Scalable circuits for preparing ground states on digital quantum computers: The Schwinger model vacuum on 100 qubits, PRX Quantum 5, 020315 (2024).
  25. T. Angelides, P. Naredi, A. Crippa, K. Jansen, S. Kühn, I. Tavernelli, and D. S. Wang, First-order phase transition of the Schwinger model with a quantum computer, npj Quantum Inf. 11, 6 (2025).
  26. C. Charles, E. J. Gustafson, E. Hardt, F. Herren, N. Hogan, H. Lamm, S. Starecheski, R. S. Van de Water, and M. L. Wagman, Simulating Z2 lattice gauge theory on a quantum computer, Phys. Rev. E 109, 015307 (2024).
  27. J. C. Halimeh, I. P. McCulloch, B. Yang, and P. Hauke, Tuning the topological θ-angle in cold-atom quantum simulators of gauge theories, PRX Quantum 3, 040316 (2022).
  28. Y. Cheng, S. Liu, W. Zheng, P. Zhang, and H. Zhai, Tunable confinement-deconfinement transition in an ultracold-atom quantum simulator, PRX Quantum 3, 040317 (2022).
  29. H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. Keesling, H. Levine, A. Omran, H. Pichler, S. Choi, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V. Vuletić, and M. D. Lukin, Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator, Nature (Lond.) 551, 579 (2017).
  30. C. J. Turner, A. A. Michailidis, D. A. Abanin, M. Serbyn, and Z. Papić, Weak ergodicity breaking from quantum many-body scars, Nat. Phys. 14, 745 (2018).
  31. S. Moudgalya, S. Rachel, B. A. Bernevig, and N. Regnault, Exact excited states of nonintegrable models, Phys. Rev. B 98, 235155 (2018).
  32. H. Zhao, J. Vovrosh, F. Mintert, and J. Knolle, Quantum many-body scars in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 160604 (2020).
  33. P. N. Jepsen, Y. K. ‘E.’ Lee, H. Lin, I. Dimitrova, Y. Margalit, W. W. Ho, and W. Ketterle, Long-lived phantom helix states in Heisenberg quantum magnets, Nat. Phys. 18, 899 (2022).
  34. M. Serbyn, D. A. Abanin, and Z. Papić, Quantum many-body scars and weak breaking of ergodicity, Nat. Phys. 17, 675 (2021).
  35. S. Moudgalya, B. A. Bernevig, and N. Regnault, Quantum many-body scars and Hilbert space fragmentation: A review of exact results, Rep. Prog. Phys. 85, 086501 (2022).
  36. A. Chandran, T. Iadecola, V. Khemani, and R. Moessner, Quantum many-body scars: A quasiparticle perspective, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 14, 443 (2023).
  37. S. Moudgalya, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, Entanglement of exact excited states of Affleck-Kennedy-Lieb-Tasaki models: Exact results, many-body scars, and violation of the strong eigenstate thermalization hypothesis, Phys. Rev. B 98, 235156 (2018).
  38. M. Schecter and T. Iadecola, Weak ergodicity breaking and quantum many-body scars in spin-1 XY magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 147201 (2019).
  39. C.-J. Lin and O. I. Motrunich, Exact quantum many-body scar states in the Rydberg-blockaded atom chain, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 173401 (2019).
  40. D. Bluvstein, A. Omran, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Semeghini, S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, A. A. Michailidis, N. Maskara, W. W. Ho, S. Choi, M. Serbyn, M. Greiner, V. Vuletić, and M. D. Lukin, Controlling quantum many-body dynamics in driven Rydberg atom arrays, Science 371, 1355 (2021).
  41. D. Bluvstein, H. Levine, G. Semeghini, T. T. Wang, S. Ebadi, M. Kalinowski, A. Keesling, N. Maskara, H. Pichler, M. Greiner, V. Vuletić, and M. D. Lukin, A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entangled atom arrays, Nature (Lond.) 604, 451 (2022).
  42. G.-X. Su, H. Sun, A. Hudomal, J.-Y. Desaules, Z.-Y. Zhou, B. Yang, J. C. Halimeh, Z.-S. Yuan, Z. Papić, and J.-W. Pan, Observation of many-body scarring in a Bose-Hubbard quantum simulator, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 023010 (2023).
  43. P. Zhang, H. Dong, Y. Gao, L. Zhao, J. Hao, J.-Y. Desaules, Q. Guo, J. Chen, J. Deng, B. Liu, W. Ren, Y. Yao, X. Zhang, S. Xu, K. Wang, F. Jin, X. Zhu, B. Zhang, H. Li, C. Song, Z. Wang, F. Liu, Z. Papić, L. Ying, H. Wang, and Y.-C. Lai, Many-body Hilbert space scarring on a superconducting processor, Nat. Phys. 19, 120 (2023).
  44. H. Dong, J.-Y. Desaules, Y. Gao, N. Wang, Z. Guo, J. Chen, Y. Zou, F. Jin, X. Zhu, P. Zhang, H. Li, Z. Wang, Q. Guo, J. Zhang, L. Ying, and Z. Papić, Disorder-tunable entanglement at infinite temperature, Sci. Adv. 9, eadj3822 (2023).
  45. F. M. Surace, P. P. Mazza, G. Giudici, A. Lerose, A. Gambassi, and M. Dalmonte, Lattice gauge theories and string dynamics in Rydberg atom quantum simulators, Phys. Rev. X 10, 021041 (2020).
  46. T. Iadecola and M. Schecter, Quantum many-body scar states with emergent kinetic constraints and finite-entanglement revivals, Phys. Rev. B 101, 024306 (2020).
  47. D. Banerjee and A. Sen, Quantum scars from zero modes in an Abelian lattice gauge theory on ladders, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 220601 (2021).
  48. J. C. Halimeh, L. Barbiero, P. Hauke, F. Grusdt, and A. Bohrdt, Robust quantum many-body scars in lattice gauge theories, Quantum 7, 1004 (2023).
  49. A. Hudomal, J.-Y. Desaules, B. Mukherjee, G.-X. Su, J. C. Halimeh, and Z. Papić, Driving quantum many-body scars in the PXP model, Phys. Rev. B 106, 104302 (2022).
  50. J.-Y. Desaules, D. Banerjee, A. Hudomal, Z. Papić, A. Sen, and J. C. Halimeh, Weak ergodicity breaking in the Schwinger model, Phys. Rev. B 107, L201105 (2023).
  51. J.-Y. Desaules, A. Hudomal, D. Banerjee, A. Sen, Z. Papić, and J. C. Halimeh, Prominent quantum many-body scars in a truncated Schwinger model, Phys. Rev. B 107, 205112 (2023).
  52. A. S. Aramthottil, U. Bhattacharya, D. González-Cuadra, M. Lewenstein, L. Barbiero, and J. Zakrzewski, Scar states in deconfined Z2 lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. B 106, L041101 (2022).
  53. S. Biswas, D. Banerjee, and A. Sen, Scars from protected zero modes and beyond in U(1) quantum link and quantum dimer models, SciPost Phys. 12, 148 (2022).
  54. A. Daniel, A. Hallam, J.-Y. Desaules, A. Hudomal, G.-X. Su, J. C. Halimeh, and Z. Papić, Bridging quantum criticality via many-body scarring, Phys. Rev. B 107, 235108 (2023).
  55. L. Ebner, A. Schäfer, C. Seidl, B. Müller, and X. Yao, Entanglement entropy of (2+1)-dimensional SU(2) lattice gauge theory on plaquette chains, Phys. Rev. D 110, 014505 (2024).
  56. I. Sau, P. Stornati, D. Banerjee, and A. Sen, Sublattice scars and beyond in two-dimensional U(1) quantum link lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 109, 034519 (2024).
  57. J. Osborne, I. P. McCulloch, and J. C. Halimeh, Quantum many-body scarring in 2+1D gauge theories with dynamical matter, arXiv:2403.08858.
  58. T. Budde, M. Krstic Marinkovic, and J. C. Pinto Barros, Quantum many-body scars for arbitrary integer spin in 2+1D Abelian gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 110, 094506 (2024).
  59. U. Borla, R. Verresen, F. Grusdt, and S. Moroz, Confined phases of one-dimensional spinless fermions coupled to Z2 gauge theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 120503 (2020).
  60. Matjaž Kebrič, L. Barbiero, C. Reinmoser, U. Schollwöck, and F. Grusdt, Confinement and Mott transitions of dynamical charges in one-dimensional lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 167203 (2021).
  61. M. Kebrič, U. Borla, U. Schollwöck, S. Moroz, L. Barbiero, and F. Grusdt, Confinement induced frustration in a one-dimensional Z2 lattice gauge theory, New J. Phys. 25, 013035 (2023).
  62. L. Homeier, A. Bohrdt, S. Linsel, E. Demler, J. C. Halimeh, and F. Grusdt, Realistic scheme for quantum simulation of Z2 lattice gauge theories with dynamical matter in (2 + 1)D, Commun. Phys. 6, 127 (2023).
  63. S. M. Linsel, A. Bohrdt, L. Homeier, L. Pollet, and F. Grusdt, Percolation as a confinement order parameter in Z2 lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. B 110, L241101 (2024).
  64. M. ž. Kebrič, J. C. Halimeh, U. Schollwöck, and F. Grusdt, Confinement in (1+1)-dimensional Z2 lattice gauge theories at finite temperature, Phys. Rev. B 109, 245110 (2024).
  65. M. Fromm, O. Philipsen, M. Spannowsky, and C. Winterowd, Simulating Z2 lattice gauge theory with the variational quantum thermalizer, EPJ Quantum Technol. 11, 20 (2024).
  66. E. J. Gustafson, A. C. Y. Li, A. Khan, J. Kim, D. M. Kurkcuoglu, M. S. Alam, P. P. Orth, A. Rahmani, and T. Iadecola, Preparing quantum many-body scar states on quantum computers, Quantum 7, 1171 (2023).
  67. J. Kogut and L. Susskind, Hamiltonian formulation of Wilson's lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 11, 395 (1975).
  68. Z.-C. Yang, F. Liu, A. V. Gorshkov, and T. Iadecola, Hilbert-space fragmentation from strict confinement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 207602 (2020).
  69. S. Bravyi, D. P. DiVincenzo, and D. Loss, Schrieffer–Wolff transformation for quantum many-body systems, Ann. Phys. 326, 2793 (2011).
  70. S. Inokuchi, On behaviors of cellular automata with rule 156, Bull. Inf. Cybernet. 30, 121 (1998).
  71. R. J. Valencia-Tortora, N. Pancotti, M. Fleischhauer, H. Bernien, and J. Marino, Rydberg platform for nonergodic chiral quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 223201 (2024).
  72. S. Maity and R. Hamazaki, Kinetically constrained models constructed from dissipative quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. B 110, 014301 (2024).
  73. P. Sala, T. Rakovszky, R. Verresen, M. Knap, and F. Pollmann, Ergodicity breaking arising from hilbert space fragmentation in dipole-conserving Hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. X 10, 011047 (2020).
  74. V. Khemani, M. Hermele, and R. Nandkishore, Localization from Hilbert space shattering: From theory to physical realizations, Phys. Rev. B 101, 174204 (2020).
  75. I. Lesanovsky and H. Katsura, Interacting Fibonacci anyons in a Rydberg gas, Phys. Rev. A 86, 041601(R) (2012).
  76. S Chandrasekharan and U.-J Wiese, Quantum link models: A discrete approach to gauge theories, Nucl. Phys. B 492, 455 (1997).
  77. U.-J. Wiese, Ultracold quantum gases and lattice systems: Quantum simulation of lattice gauge theories, Ann. Phys. 525, 777 (2013).
  78. J.-Y. Desaules, G.-X. Su, I. P. McCulloch, B. Yang, Z. Papić, and J. C. Halimeh, Ergodicity breaking under confinement in cold-atom quantum simulators, Quantum 8, 1274 (2024).
  79. A. Kay, Perfect, efficient, state transfer and its application as a constructive tool, Int. J. Quantum Inf. 08, 641 (2010).
  80. V. Oganesyan and D. A. Huse, Localization of interacting fermions at high temperature, Phys. Rev. B 75, 155111 (2007).
  81. Y. Y. Atas, E. Bogomolny, O. Giraud, and G. Roux, Distribution of the ratio of consecutive level spacings in random matrix ensembles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 084101 (2013).
  82. This is because unfrozen spins on odd sites are always in the opposite state as unfrozen spins on even sites. When an even site j is ↓, this allows the term P̂jẐj+1Q̂j+2 to be +1. But at the same time, the odd site k=j+3 is ↑, allowing Q̂kẐk+1P̂k+2 to be −1. The same can be seen when j is ↑ and k is ↓, but with the terms P̂j−1Ẑj−1Q̂j and Q̂k−2Ẑk−1P̂k.
  83. J.-Y. Desaules, A. Hudomal, C. J. Turner, and Z. Papić, Proposal for realizing quantum scars in the tilted 1D Fermi-Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 210601 (2021).
  84. A. Bastianello, U. Borla, and S. Moroz, Fragmentation and emergent integrable transport in the weakly tilted Ising chain, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 196601 (2022).
  85. Research data for Mass-assisted local deconfinement in a confined Z2 lattice gauge theory, Institute of Science and Technology Austria (2025), https://doi.org/10.15479/AT:ISTA:19791.
  86. B. J. J. Khor, D. M. Kürkcüoglu, T. J. Hobbs, G. N. Perdue, and I. Klich, Confinement and kink entanglement asymmetry on a quantum Ising chain, Quantum 8, 1462 (2024).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. B 112, 014301– Published 1 July, 2025
  • Received 15 May 2024
  • Revised 24 March 2025
  • Accepted 13 June 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