Quantum dimer model with Z2 liquid ground state: Interpolation between cylinder and disk topologies and toy model for a topological quantum bit

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 71, Issue 18, 2005, Pages

  Misguich, Grégoire ^a   Pasquier, Vincent ^a   Mila, Frédéric ^b   Lhuillier, Claire ^c  

^a CEA SACLAY   (France)

^b EPFL   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITÉ PIERRE ET MARIE CURIE   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33644503243     PISSN: 10980121     EISSN: 1550235X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.71.184424     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. D. S. Rokhsar and S. A. Kivelson, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.61.2376 61, 2376 (1988).
2. The configurations of a classical dimer model are subsets of lattice bonds in which every site is taken once. In other words, every site is occupied by exactly one dimer. In a quantum dimer model, these configurations form an orthonormal basis of the Hilbert space. The Hamiltonian generally has dimer hopping terms (kinetic energy) which allow n≥2 dimers to hop on empty bonds around closed loops of length 2n. The Hamiltonian may also include diagonal (potential) terms that favor or penalize some particular local patterns. For a brief introduction to QDM, see, for instance, Sec. 5 of G. Misguich and C. Lhuillier. Review chapter published in the book Frustrated spin systems, edited by, H. T. Diep,, (World-Scientific, Singapore, (2005).
3. R. Moessner and S. L. Sondhi, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.1881 86, 1881 (2001).
4. G. Misguich, D. Serban, and V. Pasquier, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.137202 89, 137202 (2002).
5. X. G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.44.2664 44, 2664 (1991).
6. A. Yu. Kitaev, Ann. Phys. (San Diego) APNYA6 0003-4916 10.1016/S0003-4916(02)00018-0 303, 2 (2003).
7. L. B. Ioffe, M. V. Feigel'man, A. Ioselevich, D. Ivanov, M. Troyer, and G. Blatter, Nature (London) NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/415503A 415, 503 (2002).
8. A. Ioselevich, D. A. Ivanov, and M. V. Feigelman, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.66.174405 66, 174405 (2002).
9. N. Read and B. Chakraborty, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.40.7133 40, 7133 (1989);
10. S. Kivelson Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.39.259 39, 259 (1989).
11. T. Senthil and M. P. A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.292 86, 292 (2001);
12. T. Senthil and M. P. A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.63.134521 63, 134521 (2001).
13. L. B. Ioffe and M. V. Feigel'man, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.66.224503 66, 224503 (2002).
14. B. Douçot, M. V. Feigel'man, L. B. Ioffe, and A. S. Ioselevich, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.71.024505 71, 024505 (2005).
15. V. Elser and C. Zeng, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.48. 13647 48, 13647 (1993).
16. B. Douçot, M. V. Feigel'man, and L. B. Ioffe, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.107003 90, 107003 (2003).
17. See Sec. 3 of G. Misguich, D. Serban, and V. Pasquier, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.67.214413 67, 214413 (2003).
18. R. Moessner, S. L. Sondhi, and E. Fradkin, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.65.024504 65, 024504 (2002).
19. R. Moessner and S. L. Sondhi, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.68.054405 68, 054405 (2003).