Quick Navigation

Topics

Topological Quantum Computing

Extrinsic topology of Floquet anomalous boundary states in quantum walks

arXiv
Authors: Takumi Bessho, Ken Mochizuki, Hideaki Obuse, Masatoshi Sato

Year

2021

Paper ID

40933

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

112

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Bulk-boundary correspondence is a fundamental principle for topological phases where bulk topology determines gapless boundary states. On the other hand, it has been known that corner or hinge modes in higher order topological insulators may appear due to "extrinsic" topology of the boundaries even when the bulk topological numbers are trivial. In this paper, we find that Floquet anomalous boundary states in quantum walks have similar extrinsic topological natures. In contrast to higher order topological insulators, the extrinsic topology in quantum walks is manifest even for first-order topological phases. We present the topological table for extrinsic topology in quantum walks and illustrate extrinsic natures of Floquet anomalous boundary states in concrete examples.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Topological Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2021 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • Bulk-boundary correspondence is a fundamental principle for topological phases where bulk topology determines gapless boundary states.

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 #40933

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.