Quick Navigation

Topics

Quantum Simulation

Scaling and Luescher Term in a non-Abelian (2+1)d SU(2) Quantum Link Model

arXiv
Authors: Paul Ludwig, Timo Jakobs, Carsten Urbach

Year

2026

Paper ID

15588

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

107

Citations

N/A

Abstract

We investigate a non-Abelian SU(2) quantum link model in 2+1 dimensions on a hexagonal lattice using tensor network methods. We determine the static quark potential for a wide range of bare coupling values and find that the theory is confining. We also probe the existence of a Luescher term and find a clear signal, however, the value of the dimensionless constant γ strongly deviates from the expected universal value -π/24 for almost all values of the coupling g2 we investigated. The width of the strings scales logarithmically with the string length again for all g2-values, providing evidence for a rough string, with no indication for a roughening transition.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • We investigate a non-Abelian SU(2) quantum link model in 2+1 dimensions on a hexagonal lattice using tensor network methods.

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #15588 #78846 Analog quantum simulation of Sh... #78810 Secure Quantum Handshakes: Quan... #78802 Quantum Co-Design of Inhomogene... #78801 Constructing Large and Structur...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.