- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review E

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
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Multicriticality in stochastic dynamics protected by self-duality

Konstantinos Sfairopoulos, Luke Causer, and Juan P. Garrahan

  • School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, United Kingdom and Centre for the Mathematics and Theoretical Physics of Quantum Non-Equilibrium Systems, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, United Kingdom

PDF

Phys. Rev. E 113, L062101 – Published 8 June, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/g1mv-p72z

Abstract

In light of the recent interest in finding multicritical behavior in stochastic systems, we compute the trajectory phase diagram of one-dimensional kinetically constrained models (KCMs), demonstrating the existence of dynamical phases separated by lines of self-duality. We further reveal that multicritical points delimit first-order from continuous active-inactive transition lines. For illustration, we consider four representative KCMs in detail: the domain-wall (DW), Fredrickson-Andersen (FA), the DW East, the ZZZ-FA, and the XOR-FA models. Via exact diagonalization and tensor network methods we achieve three goals: (i) we find that dynamical phases and their transitions can be related by duality arguments in a broad class of KCMs, (ii) we establish the presence of multicritical points on their self-dual lines, and (iii) we intertwine concepts related to dualities of quantum spin systems, classical stochastic dynamics, and large deviation theory.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (155)

  1. R. A. Blythe and M. R. Evans, Nonequilibrium steady states of matrix-product form: A solver's guide, J. Phys. A 40, R333 (2007).
  2. K. Mallick, The exclusion process: A paradigm for non-equilibrium behaviour, Physica A 418, 17 (2015).
  3. G. H. Fredrickson and H. C. Andersen, Kinetic Ising model of the glass transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 1244 (1984).
  4. J. Jöckle and S. Eisinger, A hierarchically constrained kinetic Ising model, Z. Phys. B 84, 115 (1991).
  5. F. Ritort and P. Sollich, Glassy dynamics of kinetically constrained models, Adv. Phys. 52, 219 (2003).
  6. J. P. Garrahan, P. Sollich, and C. Toninelli, in Dynamical Heterogeneities in Glasses, Colloids, and Granular Media, edited by L. Berthier, G. Biroli, J.-P. Bouchaud, L. Cipelletti, and W. van Saarloos (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2011), Chap. 10.
  7. I. Hartarsky and C. Toninelli, Kinetically Constrained Models, Springer Briefs in Mathematical Physics (Springer, Cham, 2025), Vol. 53.
  8. M. Merolle, J. P. Garrahan, and D. Chandler, Space–time thermodynamics of the glass transition, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102, 10837 (2005).
  9. V. Lecomte, C. Appert-Rolland, and F. van Wijland, Chaotic properties of systems with Markov dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 010601 (2005).
  10. J. P. Garrahan, R. L. Jack, V. Lecomte, E. Pitard, K. van Duijvendijk, and F. van Wijland, Dynamical first-order phase transition in kinetically constrained models of glasses, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 195702 (2007).
  11. V. Lecomte, C. Appert-Rolland, and F. van Wijland, Thermodynamic formalism for systems with Markov dynamics, J. Stat. Phys. 127, 51 (2007).
  12. L. O. Hedges, R. L. Jack, J. P. Garrahan, and D. Chandler, Dynamic order-disorder in atomistic models of structural glass formers, Science 323, 1309 (2009).
  13. J. P. Garrahan, R. L. Jack, V. Lecomte, E. Pitard, K. van Duijvendijk, and F. van Wijland, First-order dynamical phase transition in models of glasses: An approach based on ensembles of histories, J. Phys. A 42, 075007 (2009).
  14. H. Touchette, The large deviation approach to statistical mechanics, Phys. Rep. 478, 1 (2009).
  15. J. P. Garrahan, Aspects of non-equilibrium in classical and quantum systems: Slow relaxation and glasses, dynamical large deviations, quantum non-ergodicity, and open quantum dynamics, Physica A 504, 130 (2018).
  16. R. L. Jack, Ergodicity and large deviations in physical systems with stochastic dynamics, Eur. Phys. J. B 93, 74 (2020).
  17. I. N. Burenev, D. W. H. Cloete, V. Kharbanda, and H. Touchette, An introduction to large deviations with applications in physics, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes 104 (2025).
  18. F. Verstraete, V. Murg, and J. Cirac, Matrix product states, projected entangled pair states, and variational renormalization group methods for quantum spin systems, Adv. Phys. 57, 143 (2008).
  19. U. Schollwöck, The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Ann. Phys. 326, 96 (2011).
  20. R. Orús, A practical introduction to tensor networks: Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states, Ann. Phys. 349, 117 (2014).
  21. P. Silvi, F. Tschirsich, M. Gerster, J. Jünemann, D. Jaschke, M. Rizzi, and S. Montangero, The tensor networks anthology: Simulation techniques for many-body quantum lattice systems, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes 8 (2019).
  22. K. Okunishi, T. Nishino, and H. Ueda, Developments in the tensor network — From statistical mechanics to quantum entanglement, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 91, 062001 (2022).
  23. M. C. Bañuls, Tensor network algorithms: A route map, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 14, 173 (2023).
  24. M. Gorissen, J. Hooyberghs, and C. Vanderzande, Density-matrix renormalization-group study of current and activity fluctuations near nonequilibrium phase transitions, Phys. Rev. E 79, 020101 (2009).
  25. M. Gorissen and C. Vanderzande, Current fluctuations in the weakly asymmetric exclusion process with open boundaries, Phys. Rev. E 86, 051114 (2012).
  26. J. P. Garrahan, Classical stochastic dynamics and continuous matrix product states: Gauge transformations, conditioned and driven processes, and equivalence of trajectory ensembles, J. Stat. Mech. (2016) 073208.
  27. M. C. Bañuls and J. P. Garrahan, Using matrix product states to study the dynamical large deviations of kinetically constrained models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 200601 (2019).
  28. P. Helms, U. Ray, and G. K.-L. Chan, Dynamical phase behavior of the single- and multi-lane asymmetric simple exclusion process via matrix product states, Phys. Rev. E 100, 022101 (2019).
  29. P. Helms and G. K.-L. Chan, Dynamical phase transitions in a 2D classical nonequilibrium model via 2D tensor networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 140601 (2020).
  30. L. Causer, I. Lesanovsky, M. C. Bañuls, and J. P. Garrahan, Dynamics and large deviation transitions of the XOR-Fredrickson-Andersen kinetically constrained model, Phys. Rev. E 102, 052132 (2020).
  31. L. Causer, M. C. Bañuls, and J. P. Garrahan, Finite time large deviations via matrix product states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 090605 (2022).
  32. N. E. Strand, H. Vroylandt, and T. R. Gingrich, Using tensor network states for multi-particle Brownian ratchets, J. Chem. Phys. 156, 221103 (2022).
  33. L. Causer, M. C. Bañuls, and J. P. Garrahan, Optimal sampling of dynamical large deviations in two dimensions via tensor networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 147401 (2023).
  34. J. P. Zima, S. B. Nicholson, and T. R. Gingrich, Chemical master equation parameter exploration using DMRG, JCP 163, 054118 (2025).
  35. D. Aasen, R. S. K. Mong, and P. Fendley, Topological defects on the lattice: I. The Ising model, J. Phys. A 49, 354001 (2016).
  36. W. Ji and X.-G. Wen, Categorical symmetry and noninvertible anomaly in symmetry-breaking and topological phase transitions, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033417 (2020).
  37. D. Aasen, P. Fendley, and R. S. K. Mong, Topological defects on the lattice: Dualities and degeneracies, arXiv:2008.08598.
  38. L. Lootens, C. Delcamp, G. Ortiz, and F. Verstraete, Dualities in one-dimensional quantum lattice models: Symmetric Hamiltonians and matrix product operator intertwiners, PRX Quantum 4, 020357 (2023).
  39. L. Lootens, C. Delcamp, and F. Verstraete, Dualities in one-dimensional quantum lattice models: Topological sectors, PRX Quantum 5, 010338 (2024).
  40. L. Li, M. Oshikawa, and Y. Zheng, Noninvertible duality transformation between symmetry-protected topological and spontaneous symmetry breaking phases, Phys. Rev. B 108, 214429 (2023).
  41. N. Seiberg and S.-H. Shao, Majorana chain and Ising model - (non-invertible) translations, anomalies, and emanant symmetries, SciPost Phys. 16, 064 (2024).
  42. N. Seiberg, S. Seifnashri, and S.-H. Shao, Non-invertible symmetries and LSM-type constraints on a tensor product Hilbert space, SciPost Phys. 16, 154 (2024).
  43. P. Gorantla, S.-H. Shao, and N. Tantivasadakarn, Tensor networks for noninvertible symmetries in 3+1D and beyond, Phys. Rev. X 15, 041006 (2025).
  44. X. Chen, A. Dua, M. Hermele, D. T. Stephen, N. Tantivasadakarn, R. Vanhove, and J.-Y. Zhao, Sequential quantum circuits as maps between gapped phases, Phys. Rev. B 109, 075116 (2024).
  45. L. Lootens, C. Delcamp, and F. Verstraete, Entanglement and the density matrix renormalization group in the generalized Landau paradigm, Nat. Phys. 21, 1657 (2025).
  46. O. O'Brien, L. Lootens, and F. Verstraete, Local Jordan-Wigner transformations and topological sectors on the torus, Phys. Rev. B 111, 115126 (2025).
  47. D. Gaiotto, A. Kapustin, N. Seiberg, and B. Willett, Generalized global symmetries, J. High Energ. Phys. 02 (2015) 172.
  48. B. Yoshida, Topological phases with generalized global symmetries, Phys. Rev. B 93, 155131 (2016).
  49. J. McGreevy, Generalized symmetries in condensed matter, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 14, 57 (2023).
  50. C. Cordova, T. T. Dumitrescu, K. Intriligator, and S.-H. Shao, Snowmass white paper: Generalized symmetries in quantum field theory and beyond, arXiv:2205.09545.
  51. L. Bhardwaj, L. E. Bottini, L. Fraser-Taliente, L. Gladden, D. S. Gould, A. Platschorre, and H. Tillim, Lectures on generalized symmetries, Phys. Rep. 1051, 1 (2024).
  52. S. Schäfer-Nameki, ICTP lectures on (non-)invertible generalized symmetries, Phys. Rep. 1063, 1 (2024).
  53. L. Bhardwaj, L. E. Bottini, D. Pajer, and S. Schäfer-Nameki, Categorical Landau paradigm for gapped phases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 161601 (2024).
  54. L. Bhardwaj, L. E. Bottini, S. Schafer-Nameki, and A. Tiwari, Lattice models for phases and transitions with non-invertible symmetries, SciPost Phys. 20, 134 (2025).
  55. D. Tapias, C. Marteau, F. Aguirre-López, and P. Sollich, Bringing together two paradigms of nonequilibrium: Fragile versus robust aging in driven glassy systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 197101 (2024).
  56. T. Agranov, M. E. Cates, and R. L. Jack, Tricritical behavior in dynamical phase transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 017102 (2023).
  57. A. Buhot and J. Garrahan, Crossover from fragile to strong glassy behavior in kinetically constrained systems, Phys. Rev. E 64, 021505 (2001).
  58. Y. S. Elmatad, R. L. Jack, D. Chandler, and J. P. Garrahan, Finite-temperature critical point of a glass transition, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107, 12793 (2010).
  59. Y. S. Elmatad and R. L. Jack, Space-time phase transitions in the East model with a softened kinetic constraint, J. Chem. Phys. 138, 12A531 (2013).
  60. The flat state is the unique stationary state if the dynamics is irreducible. This may not be the case in the hard constraint case, where the flat state in each ergodic component is stationary. For ε>0, ergodicity is restored, up to global symmetries.
  61. O. Blondel, Front progression in the East model, Stoch. Proc. Appl. 123, 3430 (2013).
  62. S. Katira, K. K. Mandadapu, S. Vaikuntanathan, B. Smit, and D. Chandler, Pre-transition effects mediate forces of assembly between transmembrane proteins, eLife 5, e13150 (2016).
  63. C. Maes, Frenesy: Time-symmetric dynamical activity in nonequilibria, Phys. Rep. 850, 1 (2020).
  64. E. O'Brien and P. Fendley, Lattice supersymmetry and order-disorder coexistence in the tricritical Ising model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 206403 (2018).
  65. H. Nicolai, Supersymmetry and spin systems, J. Phys. A 9, 1497 (1976).
  66. Y. Zou, A. Milsted, and G. Vidal, Conformal data and renormalization group flow in critical quantum spin chains using periodic uniform matrix product states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 230402 (2018).
  67. Y. Zou and G. Vidal, Emergence of conformal symmetry in quantum spin chains: Antiperiodic boundary conditions and supersymmetry, Phys. Rev. B 101, 045132 (2020).
  68. Y. Zou, K. Siva, T. Soejima, R. S. Mong, and M. P. Zaletel, Universal tripartite entanglement in one-dimensional many-body systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 120501 (2021).
  69. E.-J. Kuo, A. Seif, R. Lundgren, S. Whitsitt, and M. Hafezi, Decoding conformal field theories: From supervised to unsupervised learning, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 043031 (2022).
  70. S. Vardhan, A. Y. Wei, and Y. Zou, Petz recovery from subsystems in conformal field theory, J. High Energ. Phys. 03 (2024) 016.
  71. C. V. Cogburn, A. L. Fitzpatrick, and H. Geng, CFT and lattice correlators near an RG domain wall between minimal models, SciPost Phys. Core 7, 021 (2024).
  72. N. U. Köylüoğlu, S. Majumder, M. Amico, S. Mostame, E. van den Berg, M. A. Rajabpour, Z. Minev, and K. Najafi, Measuring central charge on a universal quantum processor, Nat. Commun. 17, 305 (2026).
  73. A. Milsted, J. Liu, J. Preskill, and G. Vidal, Collisions of false-vacuum bubble walls in a quantum spin chain, PRX Quantum 3, 020316 (2022).
  74. R. A. Patil and A. W. W. Ludwig, Highly complex novel critical behavior from the intrinsic randomness of quantum mechanical measurements on critical ground states – a controlled renormalization group analysis, arXiv:2409.02107.
  75. A. Roy, S. Erramilli, and R. M. Konik, Efficient quantum circuits based on the quantum natural gradient, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 043083 (2024).
  76. N. Sannomiya and H. Katsura, Supersymmetry breaking and Nambu-Goldstone fermions in interacting Majorana chains, Phys. Rev. D 99, 045002 (2019).
  77. K. Slagle, D. Aasen, H. Pichler, R. S. K. Mong, P. Fendley, X. Chen, M. Endres, and J. Alicea, Microscopic characterization of Ising conformal field theory in Rydberg chains, Phys. Rev. B 104, 235109 (2021).
  78. P. Fendley, Free fermions in disguise, J. Phys. A 52, 335002 (2019).
  79. M. Blume, V. J. Emery, and R. B. Griffiths, Ising model for the λ transition and phase separation in He3−He4 mixtures, Phys. Rev. A 4, 1071 (1971).
  80. B. Nienhuis, A. N. Berker, E. K. Riedel, and M. Schick, First- and second-order phase transitions in Potts models: Renormalization-group solution, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43, 737 (1979).
  81. M. Levin, Constraints on order and disorder parameters in quantum spin chains, Commun. Math. Phys. 378, 1081 (2020).
  82. P. Gorantla and T.-C. Huang, Duality-preserving deformation of 3+1d lattice Z2 gauge theory with exact gapped ground states, Phys. Rev. B 111, 245110 (2025).
  83. V. Zauner-Stauber, L. Vanderstraeten, M. T. Fishman, F. Verstraete, and J. Haegeman, Variational optimization algorithms for uniform matrix product states, Phys. Rev. B 97, 045145 (2018).
  84. S. R. White, Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalization groups, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2863 (1992).
  85. M. Fishman, S. R. White, and E. M. Stoudenmire, The ITensor software library for tensor network calculations, SciPost Phys. Codebases 4 (2022).
  86. J. C. Xavier and F. C. Alcaraz, Precise determination of quantum critical points by the violation of the entropic area law, Phys. Rev. B 84, 094410 (2011).
  87. C. Holzhey, F. Larsen, and F. Wilczek, Geometric and renormalized entropy in conformal field theory, Nucl. Phys. B 424, 443 (1994).
  88. P. Calabrese and J. Cardy, Entanglement entropy and quantum field theory, J. Stat. Mech. (2004) P06002.
  89. P. Di Francesco, P. Mathieu, and D. Sénéchal, Conformal field theory, Graduate Texts in Contemporary Physics (Springer, New York, NY, 1997).
  90. U. Miura, K. Shimomura, and K. Totsuka, Interacting Kitaev chain with N=1 supersymmetry, Phys. Rev. B 109, 085141 (2024).
  91. U. Miura and K. Totsuka, Emergent spacetime supersymmetry in an interacting Kitaev chain with explicit supersymmetry, Phys. Rev. B 111, 075136 (2025).
  92. N. Sannomiya, Spontaneous supersymmetry breaking and Nambu-Goldstone modes in interacting Majorana chains, arXiv:2401.07419.
  93. Y. Nakayama, Is chiral supersymmetry emanant or emergent? J. High Energ. Phys. 10 (2025) 101.
  94. K. A. Penson, R. Jullien, and P. Pfeuty, Phase transitions in systems with multispin interactions, Phys. Rev. B 26, 6334 (1982).
  95. L. Turban, Self-dual Ising chain in a transverse field with multispin interactions, J. Phys. C 15, L65 (1982).
  96. A. Maritan, A. Stella, and C. Vanderzande, First- and second-order phase transitions in a system with multispin interactions, Phys. Rev. B 29, 519 (1984).
  97. F. Igloi, D. V. Kapor, M. Skrinjar, and J. Solyom, Series expansion study of first- and second-order phase transitions in a model with multispin coupling, J. Phys. A 19, 1189 (1986).
  98. M. Kolb and K. A. Penson, Conformal invariance and the phase transition of a spin chain with three-spin interaction, J. Phys. A 19, L779 (1986).
  99. F. C. Alcaraz and M. N. Barber, Conformal invariance and the critical behaviour of a quantum spin Hamiltonian with three-spin coupling, J. Phys. A 20, 179 (1987).
  100. 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).
  101. H. Yan and L. Li, Generalized Kramers-Wanier duality from bilinear phase map, arXiv:2403.16017.
  102. D. Seo, G. Y. Cho, and R.-J. Slager, Noninvertible duality and symmetry topological order of one-dimensional lattice models with spatially modulated symmetry, Phys. Rev. B 111, 115112 (2025).
  103. Based on exact diagonalization of small systems (not shown), we estimate a dynamical critical exponent z=1 at the tricritical point from the size scaling of the spectral gap. From our results, it remains unclear whether this tricritical point is described by a rational or not CFT and, in particular, which one [155].
  104. R. Verresen, R. Thorngren, N. G. Jones, and F. Pollmann, Gapless topological phases and symmetry-enriched quantum criticality, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041059 (2021).
  105. H. Moradi, S. F. Moosavian, and A. Tiwari, Topological holography: Towards a unification of Landau and beyond-Landau physics, SciPost Phys. Core 6, 066 (2023).
  106. T. Ando, Self-G-ality in 1+1 dimensions, Phys. Rev. B 113, 155144 (2026).
  107. L. Eck and P. Fendley, Critical lines and ordered phases in a Rydberg-blockade ladder, Phys. Rev. B 108, 125135 (2023).
  108. L. Eck and P. Fendley, From the XXZ chain to the integrable Rydberg-blockade ladder via non-invertible duality defects, SciPost Phys. 16, 127 (2024).
  109. W. Cao, Y. Miao, and M. Yamazaki, Global symmetries of quantum lattice models under non-invertible dualities, SciPost Phys. Core 8, 070 (2025).
  110. S. Seifnashri, S.-H. Shao, and X. Yang, Gauging non-invertible symmetries on the lattice, SciPost Phys. 19, 063 (2025).
  111. S.-H. Shao, J. Sorce, and M. Srivastava, Additivity, Haag duality, and non-invertible symmetries, J. High Energ. Phys. 08 (2025) 009.
  112. T. Tavares and G. Ribeiro, Finite temperature properties of an integrable zigzag ladder chain, Nucl. Phys. B 995, 116333 (2023).
  113. L. Zadnik and J. P. Garrahan, Slow heterogeneous relaxation due to constraints in dual XXZ models, Phys. Rev. B 108, L100304 (2023).
  114. M. Dober, On antiferromagnetic regimes in the Ashkin–Teller model, Electron. J. Probab. 30, 1 (2024).
  115. R. Baxter, Exactly Solved Models in Statistical Mechanics, Dover Books on Physics (Dover Publications, 2007).
  116. P. Fendley and P. Ginsparg, Non-critical orbifolds, Nucl. Phys. B 324, 549 (1989).
  117. L. Su, Z2 gauging and self-dualities of the XX model and its cousins, Phys. Rev. B 112, 035105 (2025).
  118. K. Minami, Solvable Hamiltonians and fermionization transformations obtained from operators satisfying specific commutation relations, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 85, 024003 (2016).
  119. K. Minami, Infinite number of solvable generalizations of XY-chain, with cluster state, and with central charge c = m/2, Nucl. Phys. B 925, 144 (2017).
  120. Y. Yanagihara and K. Minami, Exact solution of a cluster model with next-nearest-neighbor interaction, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2020, 113A01 (2020).
  121. S. D. Pace, A. Chatterjee, and S.-H. Shao, Lattice T-duality from non-invertible symmetries in quantum spin chains, SciPost Phys. 18, 121 (2024).
  122. In our notation this occurs when ε=s, s=−2, or ε=−2. The latter is unphysical for stochastics as it corresponds to non-positive generators.
  123. P. Fendley, B. Nienhuis, and K. Schoutens, Lattice fermion models with supersymmetry, J. Phys. A 36, 12399 (2003).
  124. X. Yang and P. Fendley, Non-local spacetime supersymmetry on the lattice, J. Phys. A 37, 8937 (2004).
  125. R. Weston and J. Yang, Lattice supersymmetry in the open XXZ model: An algebraic Bethe ansatz analysis, J. Stat. Mech. (2017) 123104.
  126. R. Raussendorf, D. E. Browne, and H. J. Briegel, Measurement-based quantum computation on cluster states, Phys. Rev. A 68, 022312 (2003).
  127. A. C. Doherty and S. D. Bartlett, Identifying phases of quantum many-body systems that are universal for quantum computation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 020506 (2009).
  128. W. Son, L. Amico, and V. Vedral, Topological order in 1D cluster state protected by symmetry, Quantum Inf. Process. 11, 1961 (2012).
  129. X. Chen, Y.-M. Lu, and A. Vishwanath, Symmetry-protected topological phases from decorated domain walls, Nat. Commun. 5, 3507 (2014).
  130. S. Seifnashri and S.-H. Shao, Cluster state as a noninvertible symmetry-protected topological phase, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 116601 (2024).
  131. A. Parayil Mana, Y. Li, H. Sukeno, and T.-C. Wei, Kennedy-Tasaki transformation and noninvertible symmetry in lattice models beyond one dimension, Phys. Rev. B 109, 245129 (2024).
  132. E. H. Lieb, Exact solution of the two-dimensional Slater KDP model of a ferroelectric, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19, 108 (1967).
  133. E. H. Lieb, Exact solution of the problem of the entropy of two-dimensional ice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 18, 692 (1967).
  134. M. Kohmoto, M. den Nijs, and L. P. Kadanoff, Hamiltonian studies of the d=2 Ashkin-Teller model, Phys. Rev. B 24, 5229 (1981).
  135. M. Baake, G. von Gehlen, and V. Rittenberg, Operator content of the Ashkin-Teller quantum chain, superconformal and Zamolodchikov-Fateev invariance. I. Free boundary conditions, J. Phys. A 20, L479 (1987).
  136. M. Henkel and A. Patkos, Conformal invariance and line defects in the two-dimensional Ising model, J. Phys. A 21, L231 (1988).
  137. S.-K. Yang, Modular invariant partition function of the Ashkin-Teller model on the critical line and N = 2 superconformal invariance, Nucl. Phys. B 285, 183 (1987).
  138. S.-K. Yang and H. B. Zheng, Superconformal invariance in the two-dimensional Ashkin-Teller model, Nucl. Phys. B 285, 410 (1987).
  139. J. C. Bridgeman, A. O'Brien, S. D. Bartlett, and A. C. Doherty, Multiscale entanglement renormalization ansatz for spin chains with continuously varying criticality, Phys. Rev. B 91, 165129 (2015).
  140. A. O'Brien, S. D. Bartlett, A. C. Doherty, and S. T. Flammia, Symmetry-respecting real-space renormalization for the quantum Ashkin-Teller model, Phys. Rev. E 92, 042163 (2015).
  141. F. Y. Wu, The Potts model, Rev. Mod. Phys. 54, 235 (1982).
  142. E. O'Brien and P. Fendley, Self-dual S3-invariant quantum chains, SciPost Phys. 9, 088 (2020).
  143. E. O'Brien, E. Vernier, and P. Fendley, “Not-A ”, representation symmetry-protected topological, and Potts phases in an S3-invariant chain, Phys. Rev. B 101, 235108 (2020).
  144. G. Ortiz, E. Cobanera, and Z. Nussinov, Dualities and the phase diagram of the p-clock model, Nucl. Phys. B 854, 780 (2012).
  145. A. Kitaev, Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons, Ann. Phys. 303, 2 (2003).
  146. A. Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond, Ann. Phys. 321, 2 (2006).
  147. T. Senthil, A. Vishwanath, L. Balents, S. Sachdev, and M. P. A. Fisher, Deconfined quantum critical points, Science 303, 1490 (2004).
  148. C. Wang, A. Nahum, M. A. Metlitski, C. Xu, and T. Senthil, Deconfined quantum critical points: Symmetries and dualities, Phys. Rev. X 7, 031051 (2017).
  149. T. Senthil, Deconfined quantum critical points: A review, in 50 Years of the Renormalization Group (World Scientific, Singapore, 2023), Chap. 14, pp. 169–195.
  150. A. Chatterjee, Ö. M. Aksoy, and X.-G. Wen, Quantum phases and transitions in spin chains with non-invertible symmetries, SciPost Phys. 17, 115 (2024).
  151. N. Sannomiya, H. Katsura, and Y. Nakayama, Supersymmetry breaking and Nambu-Goldstone fermions in an extended Nicolai model, Phys. Rev. D 94, 045014 (2016).
  152. A. Rey, Ömer M. Aksoy, D. P. Arovas, C. Chamon, and C. Mudry, Incommensurate gapless ferromagnetism connecting competing symmetry-enriched deconfined quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B 112, L161110 (2025).
  153. K. Dasbiswas, K. K. Mandadapu, and S. Vaikuntanathan, Topological localization in out-of-equilibrium dissipative systems, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 115, E9031 (2018).
  154. J. P. Garrahan and F. Pollmann, Topological phases in the dynamics of the simple exclusion process, Phys. Rev. E 109, L032105 (2024).
  155. J. L. Jacobsen and K. J. Wiese, Lattice realization of complex conformal field theories: Two-dimensional Potts model with Q>4 states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 077101 (2024).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. E 113, L062101– Published 8 June, 2026
  • Received 29 April 2025
  • Revised 5 February 2026
  • Accepted 27 April 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.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation