9
$\begingroup$

Is it right, that non-integrable quantum spin models in one dimension become integrable at their critical points? Or do they stay nonintegrable at the critical point also? Are there any examples known? In the field of 2d classical models, the three-state Potts model is not in general integrable, but this model is integrable at the critical point.

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ This is a really nice question. I really see no reason why the model should become integrable at the critical point if it's described by a CFT; only after many renormalization-group transformations starting at the critical point would the model be described by the (integrable) CFT. $\endgroup$
    – user196574
    Commented Dec 9, 2021 at 22:49
  • $\begingroup$ Do you know of any non-integrable spin chains that are in e.g. the transverse Ising universality class? I'm happy to numerically check the level statistics after tinkering with symmetries or the ballistic-ness of energy transport or whatever to see if it remains nonintegrable or becomes integrable. My money is on that most models will remain nonintegrable (i.e. middle of their spectrum has eigenvalue repulsion), but that the low-energy excitations will look integrable. The latter is not surprising, even away from critical points. $\endgroup$
    – user196574
    Commented Dec 9, 2021 at 22:50
  • $\begingroup$ @user196574 This question was inspired by the model with three spin interaction $\hat{H} = -h\sum_j \sigma_j^z - J\sum_j \sigma_{j-1}^x \sigma_j^x \sigma_{j+1}^x$. This model is integrable at the critical point. I looked at the energy levels statistics and found that the model is not integrable out of the critical point. I was intrigued if this situation is general or not. $\endgroup$
    – Gec
    Commented Dec 10, 2021 at 6:23
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, is there a fast way to see the integrability at the critical point of your three-spin model? $\endgroup$
    – user196574
    Commented Dec 10, 2021 at 6:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @user196574 I investigated the energy levels statistics at the critical point. It looked for me like that of the integrable models. $\endgroup$
    – Gec
    Commented Dec 10, 2021 at 7:11

2 Answers 2

5
$\begingroup$

I have constructed a counterexample; that is, I have constructed a nonintegrable spin chain that remains nonintegrable at the critical point. Furthermore, my answer seemingly contradicts the one by Exhaustive, as my model is described by (i.e. flows under the renormalization group to) a conformal fixed point at the critical point, as also shown below. I haven't found any references on my model yet, but it's likely it has been studied before. I will show strong evidence for a phase transition, for the phase transition being in the Ising universality class, and that the critical point is nonintegrable below.

First, we are familiar with the integrable transverse Ising model: $$\sum_i \sigma^x_i \sigma^x_{i+1} + h \sigma^z_i $$ This model has a duality transformation to the model $\sum_i h \sigma^x_i \sigma^x_{i+1} + \sigma^z_i $ up to details about boundary conditions; assuming there is only one critical point, this predicts a critical point of $h=1$. The model is integrable because it can be mapped via a Jordan-Wigner transformation to a moderately simple quadratic fermionic Hamiltonian.

Let us use the insight of duality above to craft a nonintegrable model that undergoes an Ising transition at a known critical field $h$, but has more complicated interactions to break integrability.

$$\sum_i (\sigma^x_i \sigma^x_{i+1} + \Delta \sigma^x_i \sigma^x_{i+1}\sigma^x_{i+2}\sigma^x_{i+3}) + h (\sigma^z_i+\Delta \sigma^z_i \sigma^z_{i+2})$$

Though nonintegrable, the duality means the critical point will remain at $h=1$. I'll consider small $\Delta=1/4$ to be safe to avoid changing the type or existence of transitions. All my calculations below are for chains in periodic boundary conditions, though I vary the length of the chain according to my patience for numerics.

First, let's check that there's a transition between a ferromagnetic phase at $h<1$ and a paramagnetic phase at $h>1$ by checking the degeneracy of the ground state. Below, I plot the energy gap between the ground state and the first excited state for $L=14$:

Energy gap as function of h

Indeed, we see the gap opens up at $h=1$ as anticipated.

Next, let's verify that the point at $h=1$ is described by the Ising CFT with central charge $c=1/2$ by computing the entanglement entropy of a length $l$ portion of the ground state:

Entanglement entropy against subregion size

The orange curve is a fit to the function $$S(l) = \frac{c}{3} \ln(\frac{L}{\pi} \sin(\frac{l \pi}{L}))+A$$ where $c$ and $A$ are treated as unknowns. This function is a prediction of conformal field theory for a CFT with a central charge of $c$. The best fit yields $c=.53$, which, at this relatively small system size, is a good sign that the true $c=1/2$, corresponding to the Ising universality class. Thus the highly probable guesses that the model shares the same kind of phase transition as the transverse Ising model and that the critical point flows to a CFT with $c=1/2$ gain some considerable evidence.

Next, let us verify that the model is nonintegrable. To do so, I will look at the level statistics within symmetry sectors. For $h \neq 1$, I look at the symmetry sector $k=0, I=1, F=1$, by which I mean $0$ momentum, an eigenvalue of $1$ under spatial inversion of the chain about the center, and an eigenvalue of $1$ under Ising symmetry. For $h=1$ there is an additional discrete symmetry by virtue of the duality transformation within the symmetry sector above, so I look at the more fine-grained sector $k=0, I=1, F=1, D=1$, where $D=1$ refers to an eigenvalue of $1$ under the duality transformation.

More technically, at the critical point, I implemented an operator form for $D$ inspired by Gec's answer to one of my questions: in Gec's notation, I created an operator that maps a state $|s_1,\ldots,s_N\rangle$ to $|(s_N s_1) (s_1 s_2),(s_2 s_3)\ldots,(s_{N-1} s_{N})\rangle$. This is generically noninvertible, but it is invertible within a given Ising symmetry sector. In particular, using the projector $P$ to stand for the rectangular projector into the $k=0, I=1, F=1$ sector, and $R$ for a $\pi/2$ rotation of spins about the y-axis, I found that (the factor of 1/2 is just a vagary of my $D$)

$$1/2 (PRD) H (PRD)^\dagger = P H P^\dagger $$ and more critically that $$[PRDP^\dagger, PHP^\dagger]=0$$ which means $PRDP^\dagger$ and $PHP^\dagger$ can be simultaneously diagonalized, as they are both normal and in fact both Hermitian (obvious for $PHP^\dagger$, and I checked numerically for $PRDP^\dagger$, which might mean $RD$ has a simpler representation than I think). I explicitly diagonalized $PRDP^\dagger$ to construct the $k=0, I=1, F=1, D=1$ sector; there may be shortcuts, but those aren't so necessary for the problem at hand.

With these symmetry sectors in hand, I checked the level statistics of the cases of $h=1/2$, $h=1$, and $h=3$. I am plotting a histogram of the oft-used level ratio statistic discussed in Atas et al., with the red curve below corresponding to the GOE prediction and the orange curve the integrable model prediction. As seen below, the models at these points are all nonintegrable; the model is nonintegrable on either side of the transition, and it is also nonintegrable at the transition.

$h=1/2$, in the ferromagnetic phase:

Ferromagnetic phase level repulsion

$h=1$, at the critical point:

Critical point level repulsion

$h=3$, solidly in the paramagnetic phase:

Paramagnetic phase level repulsion

To summarize, I have created (it's probably been studied before, though, and I just don't know about it!) a nonintegrable model that has a transverse-Ising type phase transition at a known parameter value $h=1$, numerically confirmed and characterized the critical point, and checked that the model is nonintegrable in both phases as well as at the critical point itself. The critical point itself had an extra discrete symmetry stemming from the duality transformation, but once that was handled, the level statistics at the critical point showed repulsion and hence strongly point to nonintegrability.

$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ What a great job you've done! I am highly impressed by the speed with which you've accomplished it. Did you make use of special program packages like QuSpin? $\endgroup$
    – Gec
    Commented Dec 11, 2021 at 11:10
  • $\begingroup$ @Gec Thanks! I've been focusing on this problem (and this model in particular) since early yesterday and the last step needed was how to handle duality at the critical point which you and Meng largely supplied. I mostly use the sparse package in SciPy. I use a few functions I got from my advisor that I've modified - a function that makes sparse spin operators, a function that builds Hamiltonians from the spin operators, a function that calculates entanglement entropy of states, and a couple functions for implementing symmetries. The rest is just the sparse package's eigsh or linalg's eigh. $\endgroup$
    – user196574
    Commented Dec 11, 2021 at 11:25
  • $\begingroup$ This is great work. Another question to follow: we say that the transition is described by CFT "at low energy", and the CFT spectrum should be integrable. But as one moves to higher and higher energy, for a non-integrable model the spectrum is no longer CFT like. So there should be some sort of "cross over" from low energy to high energy (or low to high temperature?) where the spectrum becomes more and more non-integrable? Is it possible to see this "cross over" in numerics? $\endgroup$
    – Meng Cheng
    Commented Dec 11, 2021 at 20:24
  • $\begingroup$ @MengCheng Good questions! I think there are two obfuscating factors. Even in nonintegrable noncritical models, the edges of the spectrum can look "integrable", as seen in some papers on the transverse ising model with an integrability breaking longitudinal field (I think, I forget which ones). Even in integrable critical models, the CFT mapping I think is only good at low energies, (namely vanishing energy density in the TD limit). However, just today I realized that I'm wrong about limiting CFT applicability to vanishing energy density. Cont'd $\endgroup$
    – user196574
    Commented Dec 11, 2021 at 21:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @user196574 I have similar thoughts now. I knew about the self-duality of this model two years ago. And I even had devised transformation of subspace to take into account the duality symmetry. But now, I am not sure what was the result of my investigations. It might still be that it was the integrability at the critical point. $\endgroup$
    – Gec
    Commented Dec 12, 2021 at 8:13
3
$\begingroup$

If the non-integrable quantum spin chain at the critical points can be described as a conformal field theory (not always the case), we can say that the model is "integrable''. Because CFT can be seen as an "integrable'' theory since it can be solved exactly and Yang-Baxter relation is satisfied naturally. If the critical points cannot be described by CFT, there is no general guarantee whether the underlying field theory is integrable or not.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Is this a piece of common knowledge? Can you give references, please? Are there any examples of the non-integrable model becoming integrable at the critical point? $\endgroup$
    – Gec
    Commented Apr 23, 2019 at 17:26
  • $\begingroup$ For instance, extended Bose Hubbard model is non-integrable, however, in the phase diagram, there exists a $c=1/2$ CFT, i.e. "integrable" as a CFT, as explained explicitly in this article, arxiv.org/abs/1812.03489 $\endgroup$
    – Exhaustive
    Commented May 28, 2019 at 15:34

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.