2016
DOI: 10.1103/physrevb.93.184204
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantum nonergodicity and fermion localization in a system with a single-particle mobility edge

Abstract: We study the many-body localization aspects of single-particle mobility edges in fermionic systems. We investigate incommensurate lattices and random disorder Anderson models. Many-body localization and quantum nonergodic properties are studied by comparing entanglement and thermal entropy, and by calculating the scaling of subsystem particle number fluctuations, respectively. We establish a nonergodic extended phase as a generic intermediate phase (between purely ergodic extended and nonergodic localized phas… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

6
102
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 104 publications
(110 citation statements)
references
References 97 publications
6
102
2
Order By: Relevance
“…However, due to large finite size effects these studies are inconclusive with respect to localization [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. A related question, whether MBL can exist in a system where only some of the single-particle states are delocalized, namely in systems with a mobility edge in the singleparticle spectrum, has been affirmatively answered [21][22][23][24]. In our work, we go one step beyond, and completely abolish the assumption of localization of single-particle states.…”
mentioning
confidence: 81%
“…However, due to large finite size effects these studies are inconclusive with respect to localization [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. A related question, whether MBL can exist in a system where only some of the single-particle states are delocalized, namely in systems with a mobility edge in the singleparticle spectrum, has been affirmatively answered [21][22][23][24]. In our work, we go one step beyond, and completely abolish the assumption of localization of single-particle states.…”
mentioning
confidence: 81%
“…We call this phenomenon a 'many body localization proximity effect,' and it establishes that MBL is much more robust to coupling to an environment than was previously appreciated. It also suggests a possible explanation for the numerical results recently presented in [26,27], which counter-intuitively observed many body localization in an interacting model, when the non-interacting limit contained a single particle mobility edge.The system we consider consists of a D dimensional lattice which hosts two species of spinless fermions -c and d. The c fermions are present with density n c and have Hamiltonianwhere t c is the hopping, U is a nearest neighbor interaction, and ε is a random potential, drawn from a distribution of width W . The width of the distribution is sufficiently large that the c particles in isolation are in an MBL phase, with a localization length ξ c .…”
mentioning
confidence: 83%
“…We call this phenomenon a 'many body localization proximity effect,' and it establishes that MBL is much more robust to coupling to an environment than was previously appreciated. It also suggests a possible explanation for the numerical results recently presented in [26,27], which counter-intuitively observed many body localization in an interacting model, when the non-interacting limit contained a single particle mobility edge.…”
mentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Recent works have shown that the existence of integrals of motion (IOM) can be used as a diagnostic to quantify both noninteracting Anderson localization [26,27] and many-body localization [28][29][30]. In the context of dynamical localization for the model at hand, we work in the momentum basis and search for the existence of IOMs in this basis.…”
Section: Integrals Of Motionmentioning
confidence: 99%