- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

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

Geometric fragmentation and anomalous thermalization in cubic dimer model

Joel Steinegger1,*, Debasish Banerjee2,†, Emilie Huffman3,4,‡, and Lukas Rammelmüller5

  • *Contact author: joel.steinegger@dlr.de
  • †Contact author: D.Banerjee@soton.ac.uk
  • ‡Contact author: ehuffman@wfu.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 112, 114512 – Published 24 December, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/4kzq-t1zs

Abstract

While quantum statistical mechanics triumphs in explaining many equilibrium phenomena, there is an increasing focus on going beyond conventional scenarios of thermalization. Traditionally examples of nonthermalizing systems are either integrable or disordered. Recently, examples of translationally invariant physical systems have been discovered whose excited energies avoid thermalization either due to local constraints (whether exact or emergent) or due to higher-form symmetries. In this article, we extend these investigations for the case of 3D U(1) quantum dimer models, which are lattice gauge theories with finite-dimensional local Hilbert spaces (also generically called quantum link models) with staggered charged static matter. Using a combination of analytical and numerical methods, we uncover a class of athermal states that arise in large winding sectors, when the system is subjected to external electric fields. The polarization of the dynamical fluxes in the direction of applied field traps excitations in 2D planes, while an interplay with the Gauss law constraint in the perpendicular direction causes exotic athermal behavior due to the emergence of new conserved quantities. This causes a geometric fragmentation of the system. We provide analytical arguments showing that the scaling of the number of fragments is exponential in the linear system size, leading to weak fragmentation. Further, we identify sectors which host fractonic excitations with severe mobility restrictions. The unitary evolution of fragments dominated by fractons is qualitatively different from the one dominated by nonfractonic excitations.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (98)

  1. J. M. Deutsch, Quantum statistical mechanics in a closed system, Phys. Rev. A 43, 2046 (1991).
  2. M. Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys. Rev. E 50, 888 (1994).
  3. M. Rigol, V. Dunjko, and M. Olshanii, Thermalization and its mechanism for generic isolated quantum systems, Nature (London) 452, 854 (2008).
  4. L. D’Alessio, Y. Kafri, A. Polkovnikov, and M. Rigol, From quantum chaos and eigenstate thermalization to statistical mechanics and thermodynamics, Adv. Phys. 65, 239 (2016).
  5. G. D. Tomasi, D. Hetterich, P. Sala, and F. Pollmann, Dynamics of strongly interacting systems: From Fock-space fragmentation to many-body localization, Phys. Rev. B 100, 214313 (2019).
  6. F. Alet and N. Laflorencie, Many-body localization: An introduction and selected topics, C. R. Phys. 19, 498 (2018).
  7. H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. Keesling, H. Levine, A. Omran, H. Pichler, S. Choi, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner et al., Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator, Nature (London) 551, 579 (2017).
  8. 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).
  9. C. J. Turner, A. A. Michailidis, D. A. Abanin, M. Serbyn, and Z. Papić, Quantum scarred eigenstates in a Rydberg atom chain: Entanglement, breakdown of thermalization, and stability to perturbations, Phys. Rev. B 98, 155134 (2018).
  10. S. Choi, C. J. Turner, H. Pichler, W. W. Ho, A. A. Michailidis, Z. Papić, M. Serbyn, M. D. Lukin, and D. A. Abanin, Emergent su(2) dynamics and perfect quantum many-body scars, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 220603 (2019).
  11. S. Sachdev, K. Sengupta, and S. M. Girvin, Mott insulators in strong electric fields, Phys. Rev. B 66, 075128 (2002).
  12. 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).
  13. D. Banerjee, M. Dalmonte, M. Muller, E. Rico, P. Stebler, U. J. Wiese, and P. Zoller, Atomic quantum simulation of dynamical gauge fields coupled to fermionic matter: From string breaking to evolution after a quench, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 175302 (2012).
  14. Y.-P. Huang, D. Banerjee, and M. Heyl, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in U(1) quantum link models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 250401 (2019).
  15. A. Chandran, T. Iadecola, V. Khemani, and R. Moessner, Quantum many-body scars: A quasiparticle perspective, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 14, 443 (2023).
  16. A. Pizzi, B. Evrard, C. B. Dag, and J. Knolle, Quantum scars in many-body systems, Nat. Commun. 16, 6722 (2025).
  17. N. Shiraishi and T. Mori, Systematic construction of counterexamples to the eigenstate thermalization hypothesis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 030601 (2017).
  18. M. Schulz, C. A. Hooley, R. Moessner, and F. Pollmann, Stark many-body localization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 040606 (2019).
  19. F. M. Surace, M. Votto, E. G. Lazo, A. Silva, M. Dalmonte, and G. Giudici, Exact many-body scars and their stability in constrained quantum chains, Phys. Rev. B 103, 104302 (2021).
  20. J. Wildeboer, A. Seidel, N. S. Srivatsa, A. E. B. Nielsen, and O. Erten, Topological quantum many-body scars in quantum dimer models on the kagome lattice, Phys. Rev. B 104, L121103 (2021).
  21. B. Mukherjee, S. Nandy, A. Sen, D. Sen, and K. Sengupta, Collapse and revival of quantum many-body scars via Floquet engineering, Phys. Rev. B 101, 245107 (2020).
  22. B. Mukherjee, A. Sen, D. Sen, and K. Sengupta, Dynamics of the vacuum state in a periodically driven Rydberg chain, Phys. Rev. B 102, 075123 (2020).
  23. M. Serbyn, D. A. Abanin, and Z. Papić, Quantum many-body scars and weak breaking of ergodicity, Nat. Phys. 17, 675 (2021).
  24. 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).
  25. S. Moudgalya and O. I. Motrunich, Exhaustive characterization of quantum many-body scars using commutant algebras, Phys. Rev. X 14, 041069 (2024).
  26. A. Udupa, S. Sur, S. Nandy, A. Sen, and D. Sen, Weak universality, quantum many-body scars, and anomalous infinite-temperature autocorrelations in a one-dimensional spin model with duality, Phys. Rev. B 108, 214430 (2023).
  27. A. Lerose, T. Parolini, R. Fazio, D. A. Abanin, and S. Pappalardi, Theory of robust quantum many-body scars in long-range interacting systems, Phys. Rev. X 15, 011020 (2025).
  28. M. Pal, M. Sarkar, K. Sengupta, and A. Sen, Scar-induced imbalance in staggered Rydberg ladders, Phys. Rev. B 111, L161101 (2025).
  29. K. Pakrouski, P. N. Pallegar, F. K. Popov, and I. R. Klebanov, Many-body scars as a group invariant sector of Hilbert space, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 230602 (2020).
  30. K. Pakrouski, P. N. Pallegar, F. K. Popov, and I. R. Klebanov, Group theoretic approach to many-body scar states in fermionic lattice models, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 043156 (2021).
  31. S. Moudgalya, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, η-pairing in Hubbard models: From spectrum generating algebras to quantum many-body scars, Phys. Rev. B 102, 085140 (2020).
  32. F. Schindler, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, Exact quantum scars in the chiral nonlinear Luttinger liquid, Phys. Rev. B 105, 035146 (2022).
  33. P. Kolb and K. Pakrouski, Stability of the many-body scars in fermionic spin-1/2 models, PRX Quantum 4, 040348 (2023).
  34. D. Banerjee and A. Sen, Quantum scars from zero modes in an Abelian lattice gauge theory on ladders, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 220601 (2021).
  35. 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).
  36. A. S. Aramthottil, U. Bhattacharya, D. González-Cuadra, M. Lewenstein, L. Barbiero, and J. Zakrzewski, Scar states in deconfined ϝ2 lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. B 106, L041101 (2022).
  37. 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).
  38. 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).
  39. 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).
  40. T. Hayata and Y. Hidaka, String-net formulation of Hamiltonian lattice Yang-Mills theories and quantum many-body scars in a nonAbelian gauge theory, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2023) 126.
  41. T. Budde, M. Krstić Marinković, and J. C. P. Barros, Quantum many-body scars for arbitrary integer spin in 2+1D Abelian gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 110, 094506 (2024).
  42. J. Osborne, I. P. McCulloch, and J. C. Halimeh, Quantum many-body scarring in 2+1D gauge theories with dynamical matter, arXiv:2403.08858.
  43. G. Calajò, G. Cataldi, M. Rigobello, D. Wanisch, G. Magnifico, P. Silvi, S. Montangero, and J. C. Halimeh, Quantum many-body scarring in a non-Abelian lattice gauge theory, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 013322 (2025).
  44. I. Sau, D. Banerjee, and A. Sen, Fate of many-body localization in an Abelian lattice gauge theory, arXiv:2405.20379.
  45. M. Brenes, M. Dalmonte, M. Heyl, and A. Scardicchio, Many-body localization dynamics from gauge invariance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 030601 (2018).
  46. A. Smith, J. Knolle, D. L. Kovrizhin, and R. Moessner, Disorder-free localization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 266601 (2017).
  47. P. A. McClarty, M. Haque, A. Sen, and J. Richter, Disorder-free localization and many-body quantum scars from magnetic frustration, Phys. Rev. B 102, 224303 (2020).
  48. P. Karpov, R. Verdel, Y.-P. Huang, M. Schmitt, and M. Heyl, Disorder-free localization in an interacting 2D lattice gauge theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 130401 (2021).
  49. J. Osborne, I. P. McCulloch, and J. C. Halimeh, Disorder-free localization in 2+1D lattice gauge theories with dynamical matter, arXiv:2301.07720.
  50. J. Jeyaretnam, T. Bhore, J. J. Osborne, J. C. Halimeh, and Z. Papić, Hilbert space fragmentation at the origin of disorder-free localization in the lattice Schwinger model, Commun. Phys. 8, 172 (2025).
  51. 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).
  52. V. Khemani, M. Hermele, and R. Nandkishore, Localization from Hilbert space shattering: From theory to physical realizations, Phys. Rev. B 101, 174204 (2020).
  53. B. Mukherjee, D. Banerjee, K. Sengupta, and A. Sen, Minimal model for Hilbert space fragmentation with local constraints, Phys. Rev. B 104, 155117 (2021).
  54. K. Lee, A. Pal, and H. J. Changlani, Frustration-induced emergent Hilbert space fragmentation, Phys. Rev. B 103, 235133 (2021).
  55. A. Chattopadhyay, B. Mukherjee, K. Sengupta, and A. Sen, Strong Hilbert space fragmentation via emergent quantum drums in two dimensions, SciPost Phys. 14, 146 (2023).
  56. A. Khudorozhkov, A. Tiwari, C. Chamon, and T. Neupert, Hilbert space fragmentation in a 2D quantum spin system with subsystem symmetries, SciPost Phys. 13, 098 (2022).
  57. S. Ghosh, K. Sengupta, and I. Paul, Hilbert space fragmentation imposed real spectrum of non-Hermitian systems, Phys. Rev. B 109, 045145 (2024).
  58. A. N. Ciavarella, C. W. Bauer, and J. C. Halimeh, Generic Hilbert space fragmentation in Kogut–Susskind lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 112, L091501 (2025).
  59. Y. H. Kwan, P. H. Wilhelm, S. Biswas, and S. A. Parameswaran, Minimal Hubbard models of maximal Hilbert space fragmentation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 010411 (2025).
  60. P. H. Harkema, M. Iversen, and A. E. B. Nielsen, Hilbert space fragmentation from lattice geometry, Phys. Rev. A 110, 023301 (2024).
  61. C. Stahl, O. Hart, and R. Nandkishore, Towards absolutely stable ergodicity breaking in two and three dimensions, Phys. Rev. B 111, L020302 (2025).
  62. D. S. Rokhsar and S. A. Kivelson, Superconductivity and the quantum hard-core dimer gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2376 (1988).
  63. S. A. Kivelson, D. S. Rokhsar, and J. P. Sethna, Topology of the resonating valence-bond state: Solitons and high−Tc superconductivity, Phys. Rev. B 35, 8865 (1987).
  64. R. Moessner and S. L. Sondhi, Three-dimensional resonating-valence-bond liquids and their excitations, Phys. Rev. B 68, 184512 (2003).
  65. J. Bonča, S. Maekawa, and T. Tohyama, Numerical approach to the low-doping regime of the t−j model, Phys. Rev. B 76, 035121 (2007).
  66. M. Hermele, M. P. A. Fisher, and L. Balents, Pyrochlore photons: The U(1) spin liquid in a S=1/2 three-dimensional frustrated magnet, Phys. Rev. B 69, 064404 (2004).
  67. A. Banerjee, S. V. Isakov, K. Damle, and Y. B. Kim, Unusual liquid state of hard-core bosons on the pyrochlore lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 047208 (2008).
  68. O. Sikora, F. Pollmann, N. Shannon, K. Penc, and P. Fulde, Quantum liquid with deconfined fractional excitations in three dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 247001 (2009).
  69. O. Sikora, N. Shannon, F. Pollmann, K. Penc, and P. Fulde, Extended quantum u(1)-liquid phase in a three-dimensional quantum dimer model, Phys. Rev. B 84, 115129 (2011).
  70. M. J. P. Gingras and P. A. McClarty, Quantum spin ice: A search for gapless quantum spin liquids in pyrochlore magnets, Rep. Prog. Phys. 77, 056501 (2014).
  71. O. Benton, O. Sikora, and N. Shannon, Seeing the light: Experimental signatures of emergent electromagnetism in a quantum spin ice, Phys. Rev. B 86, 075154 (2012).
  72. K. A. Ross, L. Savary, B. D. Gaulin, and L. Balents, Quantum excitations in quantum spin ice, Phys. Rev. X 1, 021002 (2011).
  73. C. Castelnovo, R. Moessner, and S. L. Sondhi, Spin ice, fractionalization, and topological order, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 3, 35 (2012).
  74. J. Shah, G. Nambiar, A. V. Gorshkov, and V. Galitski, Quantum spin ice in three-dimensional Rydberg atom arrays, Phys. Rev. X 15, 011025 (2025).
  75. D. Horn, Finite matrix models with continuous local gauge invariance, Phys. Lett. 100B, 149 (1981).
  76. P. Orland and D. Rohrlich, Lattice gauge magnets: Local isospin from spin, Nucl. Phys. B338, 647 (1990).
  77. S. Chandrasekharan, Quantum link models: A discrete approach to gauge theories, Nucl. Phys. B492, 455 (1997).
  78. R. Brower, S. Chandrasekharan, and U. J. Wiese, QCD as a quantum link model, Phys. Rev. D 60, 094502 (1999).
  79. H. Liu and S. Chandrasekharan, Qubit regularization and qubit embedding algebras, Symmetry 14, 305 (2022).
  80. D. Berenstein, H. Kawai, and R. Brower, U(1) fields from qubits: An approach via D-theory algebra, Phys. Rev. D 110, 014506 (2024).
  81. K. G. Wilson, Confinement of quarks, Phys. Rev. D 10, 2445 (1974).
  82. J. Kogut and L. Susskind, Hamiltonian formulation of Wilson’s lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 11, 395 (1975).
  83. D. Banerjee, F. J. Jiang, P. Widmer, and U. J. Wiese, The (2+1)−d U(1) quantum link model masquerading as deconfined criticality, J. Stat. Mech. (2013) P12010.
  84. D. Banerjee, M. Bögli, C. P. Hofmann, F.-J. Jiang, P. Widmer, and U.-J. Wiese, Interfaces, strings, and a soft mode in the square lattice quantum dimer model, Phys. Rev. B 90, 245143 (2014).
  85. F. Tschirsich, S. Montangero, and M. Dalmonte, Phase diagram and conformal string excitations of square ice using gauge invariant matrix product states, SciPost Phys. 6, 028 (2019).
  86. G. Magnifico, T. Felser, P. Silvi, and S. Montangero, Lattice quantum electrodynamics in (3+1)-dimensions at finite density with tensor networks, Nat. Commun. 12, 3600 (2021).
  87. D. Banerjee, Recent progress on cluster and meron algorithms for strongly correlated systems, Indian J. Phys. 95, 1669 (2021).
  88. S. Chandrasekharan, R. X. Siew, and T. Bhattacharya, Monomer-dimer tensor-network basis for qubit-regularized lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 111, 114502 (2025).
  89. D. González-Cuadra, E. Zohar, and J. I. Cirac, Quantum simulation of the Abelian-Higgs lattice gauge theory with ultracold atoms, New J. Phys. 19, 063038 (2017).
  90. J. Bender, E. Zohar, A. Farace, and J. I. Cirac, Digital quantum simulation of lattice gauge theories in three spatial dimensions, New J. Phys. 20, 093001 (2018).
  91. R. Ott, T. V. Zache, F. Jendrzejewski, and J. Berges, Scalable cold-atom quantum simulator for two-dimensional QED, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 130504 (2021).
  92. M. C. Bañuls, R. Blatt, J. Catani, A. Celi, J. I. Cirac, M. Dalmonte, L. Fallani, K. Jansen, M. Lewenstein, S. Montangero et al., Simulating lattice gauge theories within quantum technologies, Eur. Phys. J. D 74, 165 (2020).
  93. J. C. Halimeh, M. Aidelsburger, F. Grusdt, P. Hauke, and B. Yang, Cold-atom quantum simulators of gauge theories, Nat. Phys. 21, 25 (2025).
  94. C. W. Bauer, Z. Davoudi, N. Klco, and M. J. Savage, Quantum simulation of fundamental particles and forces, Nat. Rev. Phys. 5, 420 (2023).
  95. D. Banerjee, E. Huffman, and L. Rammelmüller, Exploring bosonic and fermionic link models on (3+1)D tubes, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 033174 (2022).
  96. T. V. Zache, M. V. Damme, J. C. Halimeh, P. Hauke, and D. Banerjee, Towards the continuum limit of a (1+1)d quantum link Schwinger model, Phys. Rev. D 106, L091502 (2022).
  97. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/4kzq-t1zs for a generalized fragmentation proof, a proof of weak fragmentation in nonzero-winding sectors, and examples illustrating constructions of fractonic winding sectors.
  98. S.-L. Lee, Y.-L. Luo, B. E. Sagan, and Y.-N. Yeh, Eigenvector and eigenvalues of some special graphs. IV. Multilevel circulants, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 41, 105 (1992).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 112, 114512– Published 24 December, 2025
  • Received 15 August 2025
  • Accepted 4 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. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation