Symmetry-protected flatband conditions for Hamiltonians with local symmetry
Abstract
We derive symmetry-based conditions for tight-binding Hamiltonians with flatbands to have compact localized eigenstates occupying a single unit cell. The conditions are based on unitary operators commuting with the Hamiltonian and are associated with local symmetries that guarantee compact localized states and a flatband. We illustrate the conditions for compact localized states and flatbands with simple Hamiltonians with given symmetries. We also apply the results to general cases such as a Hamiltonian with long-range hopping and a higher-dimensional Hamiltonian.
I Introduction
Hamiltonians with discrete translational symmetry can have dispersionless bands known as flatbands, with energy spectra independent of momentum [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. The flatness of a band implies zero group velocity, infinite effective mass of electrons, and suppressed electron and wave transport. The origin of flatbands is destructive interference due to a fine-tuning of the hopping or lattice symmetry. An important property of flatbands in short-range Hamiltonians is compact localized states (CLSs)—flatband eigenstates that are perfectly localized on a finite number of lattice sites. This is in contrast to Anderson localization where eigenstates are localized exponentially over the entire lattice [6]. Since the first report of a flatband in a dice lattice [7], a variety of flatband models have been identified, e.g., Lieb [8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13], kagome [14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20], and honeycomb [21, 22, 23, 24] lattices. Despite their fine-tuned character and strong sensitivity to perturbations, flatbands have been realized in multiple experiments in different settings: superconducting networks [25, 26], photonic flatbands [27, 28, 29, 30, 31], optical lattices for cold atoms [32, 33, 34, 35, 36], and engineered atomic lattices [37, 38, 39].
Symmetry, one of the fundamental principles of physics, allows us to predict certain properties of a system without solving the often complicated underlying equations. In quantum mechanics, symmetry is associated with an operator that commutes with a Hamiltonian. A symmetry is global if the respective operator is independent of lattice sites, and a symmetry is local if the operator is dependent on lattice sites. It has been discovered that certain classes of local symmetries can indeed be systematically linked to CLSs and flatbands [3, 40, 41]. Although it is well known that flatbands and CLSs result from destructive interference caused by fine-tuning [42] or by specific symmetries [7, 8], a relation between fine-tuning and symmetry has not been fully established yet [43, 44]. In this work, we derive the exact conditions for CLSs occupying a single unit cell and the corresponding flatbands from the global and local symmetries of the system. We then propose a method to design lattice Hamiltonians with flatbands in terms of given symmetries and corresponding unitary operators. As a result, we demonstrate that if a Hamiltonian possesses a local symmetry for which the associated unitary operators are also operators of a global symmetry of the Hamiltonian, such Hamiltonian should have at least one compact localized state and corresponding flatband.
This paper is structured as follows. In Section II, we derive the conditions for CLSs and corresponding flatbands in a Hamiltonian with discrete translational symmetry in terms of both global and local symmetries. In Section III, we illustrate the method with several simple examples, including already-known flatband models. Section IV introduces generalizations of our method to longer-range hopping and higher dimensions. In Section V, we summarize and discuss our results.
II Flatbands generated by symmetries
Consider a one-dimensional (1D) tight-binding model with nearest-neighbor unit cell hopping. The Hamiltonian in the second quantized form is given by
(1) | |||||
where labels the basis in the unit cell, () is an annihilation (creation) operator at unit cell and basis site , and is the total number of cells. are on-site energies () and hopping constants () within the unit cell, and are inter-cell hoppings. The matrix notation with respect to the basis is introduced in the second equation. Since we are interested in single-particle models, the statistics of (fermionic or bosonic) is irrelevant.
Let us assume that a given matrix has a nontrivial finite symmetry group of order larger than one, e.g., with more than one element. Then all matrices of a representation of group commute with the intra-cell Hamiltonian
(2) |
Here the subscript indicates the lattice site. Our goal is to systematically find consistent with the symmetries , such that the full Hamiltonian, Eq. (1), has flatbands. This consistency condition has important implications when the group has more than one element. The symmetry operation on the total system can be represented as a product of these operators, . For a global symmetry, the operator acting on site is the same for all sites. Requesting that the Hamiltonian is invariant under global symmetry, one obtains the condition
(3) |
in addition to the condition in Eq. (2).

Now, consider two different symmetries of , and , both elements of . Requesting that the total Hamiltonian is invariant under and globally, we have the following commutation relations,
(4) |
where . However, the presence of two distinct elements allows to construct more complex symmetries. In particular, to impose a CLS, we consider a kink operation, namely a symmetry acting as for sites and for , as shown in Fig. 1. We now require that the total Hamiltonian is invariant under the kink operation. Then at the location of the kink, we have the condition
(5) |
To show that this condition implies the existence of a CLS, we rewrite the condition as
(6) |
Acting with this operator on eigenstates of , we find
(7) |
If for all , then or , due to the completeness of the eigenstates . This contradicts the assumption of two different symmetries and . There is therefore at least one nontrivial state that is a zero mode of and that is also an eigenstate of , since commute with [Eq. (4)]. Accordingly, the state is an eigenstate of the total Hamiltonian with , and so it is a CLS.
We note that the operator is determined up to phase; see Eq. (2). The number of allowed phases is finite for a finite symmetry group. Consider an element of order ,
(8) |
where is the identity element. Let be the operator corresponding to . Then the operator , also satisfies Eq. (2). However, the condition restricts the values of , , or , . Thus there can be operators
(9) |
corresponding to the element . Due to the unitarity and homeomorphic property of , the phase is the same as the eigenvalues of . Therefore, we can rewrite the flatband condition in Eq. (5) as
(10) |
where are eigenvalues of with . This is the condition that is mainly used in the following sections. From Eqs. (4) and (10), one can obtain the total Hamiltonian with flatbands.
III Obtaining from given
We illustrate the generic method outlined above by considering a given intra-cell hopping matrix . First, we determine the symmetry group of , e.g., the unitary operators commuting with . Then we identify inter-cell hopping matrices from the given and the associated unitary operators using the flatband condition derived in the previous section, Eq. (10). We note that setting (or equivalent) is also a solution; however, this corresponds to the trivial case of disconnected unit cells and we do not consider such cases in the derivations below.
III.1 Hamiltonian
We start with the simplest possible setting in which flatbands can appear: a Hamiltonian with two bands,
(11) |
with having parity symmetry
(12) |
Our purpose is to find that satisfies both the global and local symmetry constraints of the given , and therefore has at least one dispersionless energy band. First, we identify the symmetries of : there are two unitary operators,
(13) |
commuting with . We note that an identity matrix is always a unitary operator commuting with any Hamiltonian.
Given these symmetry generators, the flatband conditions for [Eqs. (4) and (10)] are given by
(14) |
These conditions can also be obtained considering three symmetry operators, , , and instead of the two symmetry operators with phases. Resolving the above flatband constraints with respect to , we find the following hopping matrix:
(15) |
This corresponds to the well-known case of a cross-stitch lattice with a single flatband [3] for and all elements of the same sign.
The other symmetry groups for the two-band case are studied systematically in Appendix B.
III.2 Hamiltonian
As the next example, consider a Hamiltonian with symmetric all-to-all hopping within the unit cell,
(16) |
where we choose
(17) |
The symmetry group of consists of three symmetry operators,
(18) |
The flatband condition from Eq. (10) in this case is more complicated compared to the case of the Hamiltonian because there are three distinct unitary operators in the symmetry group that commute with . Conditions can be formulated for four different combinations of unitary operators: (, ), (, ), (, ), and (, , ). Consequently, satisfies the following relations:
(19) | ||||
(20) | ||||
(21) | ||||
(22) |
The flatband conditions for are
(23) | ||||
(24) | ||||
(25) | ||||
(26) | ||||
(27) |
Resolving the above conditions with respect to the hopping matrix , parameterized as follows,
(28) |
we find the following solutions,
(29) | ||||
(30) |
for the remaining cases. For the choice of two unitary operators (, ), with the hopping (or ) and all other hoppings set to zero for the first in the above, the Hamiltonian corresponds to a diamond chain with a vertical link that has a tunable flatband [3]. If we consider special cases in which all matrix elements of are equal to each other in Eq. (30), there is always only one dispersive band (see Appendix A).
IV Generalizations
Similarly as in the previous section, one can extend the analysis to the case of an arbitrary number of bands. Our approach can be extended to longer-range hopping and higher dimensions, as we demonstrate below.
IV.1 Hamiltonian with long-range hopping
We consider a 1D Hamiltonian with long-range hopping,
(31) |
where is the longest hopping range. In the example case of three bands, the hopping matrices can be parameterized as
(32) |
We impose the following two symmetries on , expressed as unitary operators,
(33) |
Then satisfies the relation
(34) |
and the flatband conditions for read
(35) |
From these constraints, it follows that
(36) |
and
(37) |
There is one flatband with for the first choice of , or two flatbands with for the second choice of . An example of a 1D flatband Hamiltonian with next-nearest hopping terms derived using our method is presented in Appendix C.
IV.2 2D Hamiltonian
A two-dimensional (2D) generalization of the 1D Hamiltonian in Eq. (11) is given by
(38) |
In the example case of three bands, the hopping matrices can be parameterized as
(39) | |||
We impose the following two symmetries on , expressed as unitary operators,
(40) |
and coinciding with the same symmetries imposed in the previous example. Then satisfies the relation
(41) |
and the flatband conditions [Eq. (10)] for read
(42) | |||
(43) |
From these constraints, follows as
(44) |
There are two distinct solutions for . The first one gives
(45) |
having one flatband with . The second solution for reads
(46) |
having two flatbands with . We note that these flatbands are the same as those in the previous 1D long-range Hamiltonian case.
An example of a combined 2D Hamiltonian with a cross-stitch chain along the x-axis and a tunable diamond chain along the y-axis is presented in Appendix D.
V Summary
We derived the conditions for lattice Hamiltonians with flatbands to have compact localized eigenstates that localize perfectly in a single unit cell. The conditions are based on unitary operators commuting with the Hamiltonian and are associated with local symmetries that guarantee compact localized states and flatbands. Beyond flatbands in lattice models, we can also apply our results to perturbed Hamiltonians where some internal states are not affected by additional perturbations (see Appendix E). We expect that the conditions derived here can be extended to design extraordinary states robust against local perturbations or environmental changes in a variety of coupled systems.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Emil Yuzbashyan for helpful discussions. We acknowledge financial support from the Institute for Basic Science in the Republic of Korea through the project IBS-R024-D1.
Appendix A Uniform
The Hamiltonian for special cases with uniform is
(47) |
where is the Hamiltonian with zero on-site energies and where all connected intra-cell hopping strengths are the same, i.e.,
(48) |
The case is the cross-stitch lattice in Section III.1. Similar to the case, there is a trivial solution , which we dismiss. For the nontrivial case, the Hamiltonian has bands given by
(49) | ||||
(50) |
where and represent dispersive and flat band energies, respectively. The number of dispersive and flat bands is and , respectively. These special cases are also covered by our flatband conditions.
Appendix B Generic Hamiltonian: Deriving and from symmetries
In the Hamiltonian case above, we only considered parity symmetric cases with two unitary operators, and , commuting with . A generic Hermitian Hamiltonian can be written in terms of three Pauli matrices , , and the identity matrix . Accordingly, the possible combinations of symmetries are as follows: , , , , , , , , , , and . The case we obtained in Section III.1 corresponds to the first combination, . Below we consider all other possible combinations of symmetries. The three combinations , , and give similar conditions:
(51) | |||
(52) | |||
(53) |
from Eq. (4) and
(54) | |||
(55) | |||
(56) |
from Eq. (10). Parameterizing and as
(57) |
and imposing the flatband conditions Eqs. (51)–(56), we find the following solutions
(58) | ||||
(59) | ||||
(60) |
for the choices of symmetry operators , , and , respectively. The corresponding flatband energies are , , and (or ), respectively. Interestingly, the Hamiltonian of Eq. (60) can be obtained by unitary transformations of the Hamiltonian of Eq. (58), i.e., detangling flatbands [3].
Considering the three combinations of , , and and using the same methods as above to resolve the hopping matrices, we obtain and in all cases. These are trivial cases of flatbands with no inter-cell hopping. As a consequence, the remaining combinations with three Pauli operators also give rise to trivial flatbands because these combinations always contain at least two Pauli matrices, similar to the case just discussed. As a result, Eqs. (58)–(60) are Hermitian Hamiltonians with flatbands including trivial cases.

Appendix C Hamiltonian with further neighbor hopping
In Section IV.1 we considered an example of a 1D flatband Hamiltonian with next-nearest hopping terms,
(61) |
Imposing the symmetries and in Eq. (33) makes , , and take the forms as in Eqs. (36) and (37). An example is a tunable diamond lattice with additional next-nearest hopping terms, which are described by the matrices
(62) |
Figure 2 (a) and (b) show this 1D lattice with different nearest and next-nearest hoppings and energy bands, among which one band is flat.
Appendix D Combined 2D Hamiltonians
In Section IV.2 we considered an example of a 2D flatband Hamiltonian,
(63) |
Imposing symmetries and in Eq. (40), , , and take the forms in Eqs. (44), (45), and (46), respectively. As an example, a cross-stitch lattice with a tunable diamond lattice can be constructed from the same matrices as in Eq. (62). Figure 2 (c) and (d) show this 2D lattice model and energy bands, among which one band is flat.
Appendix E Hamiltonian with unperturbed internal states
Beyond flatbands in translationally lattice systems, our method can also be applied to a perturbed Hamiltonian,
(64) |
where describes the perturbation and is the perturbation strength. If we obtain satisfying our conditions from a given , some eigenstates of are not affected by the perturbation as increases. For example, we consider the perturbed Hamiltonian with
(65) |
The eigenvalues are and . One of the eigenvalues is irrespective of the perturbation strength since satisfies the condition of Eq. (10).
References
- Bergholtz and Liu [2013] E. J. Bergholtz and Z. Liu, International Journal of Modern Physics B 27, 1330017 (2013).
- Parameswaran et al. [2013] S. A. Parameswaran, R. Roy, and S. L. Sondhi, Comptes Rendus Physique 14, 816 (2013).
- Flach et al. [2014] S. Flach, D. Leykam, J. D. Bodyfelt, P. Matthies, and A. S. Desyatnikov, Europhysics Letters 105, 30001 (2014).
- Derzhko et al. [2015] O. Derzhko, J. Richter, and M. Maksymenko, International Journal of Modern Physics B 29, 1530007 (2015).
- Leykam et al. [2018] D. Leykam, A. Andreanov, and S. Flach, Advances in Physics: X 3, 1473052 (2018).
- Anderson [1958] P. W. Anderson, Phys. Rev. 109, 1492 (1958).
- Sutherland [1986] B. Sutherland, Phys. Rev. B 34, 5208 (1986).
- Lieb [1989] E. H. Lieb, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 1201 (1989).
- Shen et al. [2010] R. Shen, L. B. Shao, B. Wang, and D. Y. Xing, Phys. Rev. B 81, 041410 (2010).
- Weeks and Franz [2010] C. Weeks and M. Franz, Phys. Rev. B 82, 085310 (2010).
- Apaja et al. [2010] V. Apaja, M. Hyrkäs, and M. Manninen, Phys. Rev. A 82, 041402 (2010).
- Goldman et al. [2011] N. Goldman, D. F. Urban, and D. Bercioux, Phys. Rev. A 83, 063601 (2011).
- Asano and Hotta [2011] K. Asano and C. Hotta, Phys. Rev. B 83, 245125 (2011).
- Thouless et al. [1982] D. J. Thouless, M. Kohmoto, M. P. Nightingale, and M. den Nijs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 405 (1982).
- Haldane [1988] F. D. M. Haldane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2015 (1988).
- Kane and Mele [2005] C. L. Kane and E. J. Mele, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 226801 (2005).
- Guo and Franz [2009] H.-M. Guo and M. Franz, Phys. Rev. B 80, 113102 (2009).
- Xu et al. [2015] G. Xu, B. Lian, and S.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 186802 (2015).
- Ye et al. [2018] L. Ye, M. Kang, J. Liu, F. von Cube, C. R. Wicker, T. Suzuki, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, D. C. Bell, L. Fu, R. Comin, and J. G. Checkelsky, Nature 555, 638 (2018).
- Ye et al. [2019] L. Ye, M. K. Chan, R. D. McDonald, D. Graf, M. Kang, J. Liu, T. Suzuki, R. Comin, L. Fu, and J. G. Checkelsky, Nature Communications 10, 4870 (2019).
- Wu et al. [2007] C. Wu, D. Bergman, L. Balents, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 070401 (2007).
- Castro Neto et al. [2009] A. H. Castro Neto, F. Guinea, N. M. R. Peres, K. S. Novoselov, and A. K. Geim, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 109 (2009).
- Kalesaki et al. [2014] E. Kalesaki, C. Delerue, C. Morais Smith, W. Beugeling, G. Allan, and D. Vanmaekelbergh, Phys. Rev. X 4, 011010 (2014).
- Jacqmin et al. [2014] T. Jacqmin, I. Carusotto, I. Sagnes, M. Abbarchi, D. D. Solnyshkov, G. Malpuech, E. Galopin, A. Lemaître, J. Bloch, and A. Amo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 116402 (2014).
- Vidal et al. [1998] J. Vidal, R. Mosseri, and B. Douçot, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5888 (1998).
- Abilio et al. [1999] C. C. Abilio, P. Butaud, T. Fournier, B. Pannetier, J. Vidal, S. Tedesco, and B. Dalzotto, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 5102 (1999).
- Szameit et al. [2006] A. Szameit, J. Burghoff, T. Pertsch, S. Nolte, A. Tünnermann, and F. Lederer, Opt. Express 14, 6055 (2006).
- Guzmán-Silva et al. [2014] D. Guzmán-Silva, C. Mejía-Cortés, M. A. Bandres, M. C. Rechtsman, S. Weimann, S. Nolte, M. Segev, A. Szameit, and R. A. Vicencio, New Journal of Physics 16, 063061 (2014).
- Vicencio et al. [2015] R. A. Vicencio, C. Cantillano, L. Morales-Inostroza, B. Real, C. Mejía-Cortés, S. Weimann, A. Szameit, and M. I. Molina, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 245503 (2015).
- Mukherjee et al. [2015] S. Mukherjee, A. Spracklen, D. Choudhury, N. Goldman, P. Öhberg, E. Andersson, and R. R. Thomson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 245504 (2015).
- Leykam and Flach [2018] D. Leykam and S. Flach, APL Photonics 3, 070901 (2018).
- Taie et al. [2015] S. Taie, H. Ozawa, T. Ichinose, T. Nishio, S. Nakajima, and Y. Takahashi, Science Advances 1, e1500854 (2015).
- Ozawa et al. [2017] H. Ozawa, S. Taie, T. Ichinose, and Y. Takahashi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 175301 (2017).
- Taie et al. [2020] S. Taie, T. Ichinose, H. Ozawa, and Y. Takahashi, Nature Communications 11, 257 (2020).
- Leung et al. [2020] T.-H. Leung, M. N. Schwarz, S.-W. Chang, C. D. Brown, G. Unnikrishnan, and D. Stamper-Kurn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 133001 (2020).
- Kang et al. [2020] J. H. Kang, J. H. Han, and Y. Shin, New Journal of Physics 22, 013023 (2020).
- Drost et al. [2017] R. Drost, T. Ojanen, A. Harju, and P. Liljeroth, Nature Physics 13, 668 (2017).
- Slot et al. [2017] M. R. Slot, T. S. Gardenier, P. H. Jacobse, G. C. P. van Miert, S. N. Kempkes, S. J. M. Zevenhuizen, C. M. Smith, D. Vanmaekelbergh, and I. Swart, Nature Physics 13, 672 (2017).
- Huda et al. [2020] M. N. Huda, S. Kezilebieke, and P. Liljeroth, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043426 (2020).
- Ramachandran et al. [2017] A. Ramachandran, A. Andreanov, and S. Flach, Phys. Rev. B 96, 161104 (2017).
- Röntgen et al. [2018] M. Röntgen, C. V. Morfonios, and P. Schmelcher, Phys. Rev. B 97, 035161 (2018).
- Thorpe and Weaire [1971] M. F. Thorpe and D. Weaire, Phys. Rev. B 4, 3518 (1971).
- Călugăru et al. [2022] D. Călugăru, A. Chew, L. Elcoro, Y. Xu, N. Regnault, Z.-D. Song, and B. A. Bernevig, Nature Physics 18, 185 (2022).
- Bae et al. [2023] J.-H. Bae, T. Sedrakyan, and S. Maiti, Isolated flat bands in 2d lattices based on a novel path-exchange symmetry (2023), arXiv:2212.03210 [cond-mat.str-el] .