This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

The anomalous Floquet Anderson insulator in a continuously driven optical lattice

Arijit Dutta Goethe-Universität, Institut für Theoretische Physik, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany    Efe Sen Goethe-Universität, Institut für Theoretische Physik, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany    Jun-Hui Zheng Shaanxi Key Laboratory for Theoretical Physics Frontiers, Institute of Modern Physics, Northwest University, Xi’an, 710127, China Peng Huanwu Center for Fundamental Theory, Xi’an 710127, China    Monika Aidelsburger Max-Planck-Institut für Quantenoptik, Hans-Kopfermann-Strasse 1, 85748 Garching, Germany Fakultät für Physik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Schellingstrasse 4, 80799 München, Germany Munich Center for Quantum Science and Technology (MCQST), Schellingstraße 4, 80799 München, Germany    Walter Hofstetter Goethe-Universität, Institut für Theoretische Physik, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Abstract

The anomalous Floquet Anderson insulator (AFAI) has been theoretically predicted in step-wise periodically driven models, but its stability under more general driving protocols hasn’t been determined. We show that adding disorder to the anomalous Floquet topological insulator realized with a continuous driving protocol in the experiment by K. Wintersperger et. al., Nat. Phys. 16, 1058 (2020), supports an AFAI phase, where, for a range of disorder strengths, all the time averaged bulk states become localized, while the pumped charge in a Laughlin pump setup remains quantized.

Periodically-driven quantum systems have led to interesting phenomena in different experimental platforms [2, 1, 5, 4, 3, 6] and are particularly useful in the realization of nontrivial effective equilibrium states [9, 7, 8, 6, 10]. The realization of topological models such as the Hofstadter [12, 11, 13], the Haldane [14, 15, 16, 17, 18] and the interacting Rice-Mele model [19, 20, 21] have been reported in ultracold atom and photonic systems [22, 23, 24, 25, 26]. Most of these employ the high driving-frequency limit, where multi-photon absorption processes are suppressed [2]. However, when the driving frequency becomes comparable to the other energy scales of the driven system, novel types of steady-state phases appear, which have no counterpart in equilibrium systems [27, 28, 1]. New features in the band structure show up due to multiple-photon processes between neighboring bands which can survive even with weak two-body interactions [29]. The anomalous Floquet topological insulator (AFTI), with a novel bulk-boundary correspondence was first theoretically predicted [27, 28] with a step-driving protocol, and realized in photonic systems [25, 26]. The crucial aspect for stabilizing the AFTI phase is the breaking of time-reversal symmetry by circular driving, and hence, the discrete nature of the drive does not play a major role. The AFTI system was realized in an ultracold atomic hexagonal lattice, with a continuous circular driving protocol, by modulating the amplitudes of three laser beams out of phase [16, 17, 18].

Adding disorder to the AFTI phase can lead to a remarkable new phase — the anomalous Floquet Anderson insulator (AFAI), at an intermediate disorder strength which is comparable to the driving frequency. The phase is characterized by the complete localization of all bulk states together with the existence of robust edge states at all energies. This leads to quantized pumping of charge, even when all the bulk states are localized, which is impossible in equilibrium systems. In spite of theoretical predictions in idealized models [30, 31], it has not been experimentally realized, yet. A significant achievement would be to realize this phase in ultracold atoms which will, additionally, allow us to study the interplay with two-body interactions in a controlled way.

Our work provides numerical evidence that it is indeed possible to stabilize the AFAI phase in the experimentally accessible parameter regimes. However, its indicators are strongly system size dependent. This is because complete localization of bulk states for 2d systems can only be realized for very large system sizes. By considering a Laughlin pump setup we show that the pumped charge over one period of the threaded flux remains quantized even when all bulk states become localized. We work with the continuous driving protocol implemented on a honeycomb lattice as realized in Refs. [16, 17], and add onsite disorder to it. The honeycomb lattice has a 2-sublattice structure which we denote by labels AA and BB [Fig. 1(a)]. The real-space Hamiltonian is (=1\hbar=1)

H(t)\displaystyle H(t) =𝒊γ=13(Jγ(t)c𝒊c𝒊+𝜷𝒊γ+h.c.)+𝒊V𝒊c𝒊c𝒊\displaystyle=\sum_{\bm{i}}\sum_{\gamma=1}^{3}\left(J_{\gamma}(t)c^{\dagger}_{\bm{i}}c^{\vphantom{\dagger}}_{\bm{i}+\bm{\beta}_{\bm{i}\gamma}}+h.c.\right)+\sum_{\bm{i}}V_{\bm{i}}c^{\dagger}_{\bm{i}}c^{\vphantom{\dagger}}_{\bm{i}} (1)

where c𝒊(c𝒊)c_{\bm{i}}^{\dagger}(c^{\vphantom{\dagger}}_{\bm{i}}) creates (annihilates) a spinless fermion at site 𝒊\bm{i}, Jγ(t)=Jexp[Fcos(Ωt+ϕγ)]J_{\gamma}(t)=J\exp[F\cos(\Omega t+\phi_{\gamma})], with ϕγ=2π3(γ1)\phi_{\gamma}=\frac{2\pi}{3}(\gamma-1), are the hoppings across three nearest-neighbour bonds 𝜷𝒊γ\bm{\beta}_{\bm{i}\gamma} at each site 𝒊\bm{i}. If the vector 𝒊\bm{i} points to a site in the A(B)A\,(B)-sublattice then 𝜷𝒊γ=+()𝜹γ\bm{\beta}_{\bm{i}\gamma}=+(-)\bm{\delta}_{\gamma} (for γ=1,2,3\gamma=1,2,3), where 𝜹1(0,a)\bm{\delta}_{1}\equiv\quantity(0,a), 𝜹2(3a/2,a/2)\bm{\delta}_{2}\equiv\quantity(-\sqrt{3}a/2,-a/2), 𝜹3(3a/2,a/2)\bm{\delta}_{3}\equiv\quantity(\sqrt{3}a/2,-a/2) [Fig. 1(a)(a)], aa is the lattice constant, JJ is the bare hopping amplitude, Ω\Omega is the driving frequency and FF is a dimensionless parameter which controls the width of the bulk bands. Henceforth, we set a=1a=1, J=1J=1 and F=2F=2. V𝒊V_{\bm{i}} is an onsite disorder potential which is sampled from a uniform distribution of width WW and zero mean.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 1: (a)(a) The driving protocol on the honeycomb lattice, where the hopping amplitudes at each step are represented by false colour. Quasienergy spectrum at characterisic Ω/J\Omega/J values, (b1)20(b1)~{}20, (b2)13.7(b2)~{}13.7 and (b3)8.7(b3)~{}8.7 for a zigzag semi-infinite strip with 4848 unit cells and F=2F=2. (b1)(b1) denotes a CI regime where edge states corresponding to nonvanishing bulk Chern number appear in the 0-gap. As the driving frequency is lowered the π\pi-gap closes (b2)(b2) and reopens, leading to an AFTI regime (b3)(b3) having edge states in all gaps but vanishing Chern number of the bulk bands.

According to Floquet’s theorem, such a time-periodic Hamiltonian admits stationary solutions, called Floquet states, of the form |ψα(t)=exp(iεαt)|uα(t)\ket{\psi_{\alpha}(t)}=\exp\quantity(-i\varepsilon_{\alpha}t)\ket{u_{\alpha}(t)}, where εα\varepsilon_{\alpha} is the time-independent quasienergy and |uα(t)=|uα(t+τ)\ket{u_{\alpha}(t)}=\ket{u_{\alpha}(t+\tau)} is periodic with the time-period τ=2π/Ω\tau=2\pi/\Omega of the drive. Hence, |uα(t)\ket{u_{\alpha}(t)} can be expanded in its harmonics |uα(n)=0τ(dt/τ)exp(inΩt)|uα(t)|u^{(n)}_{\alpha}\rangle=\int_{0}^{\tau}\quantity(\mathrm{d}t/\tau)\exp(in\Omega t)\ket{u_{\alpha}(t)}, where nn is an integer. The Hamiltonian in Eq. (1) can be diagonalized by Fourier transformation [32] to obtain a time-independent eigenvalue problem for the Floquet harmonics 𝒋,mH~𝒊𝒋(n,m)u𝒋α(m)=εαu𝒊α(n)\sum_{\bm{j},m}\tilde{H}^{(n,m)}_{\bm{ij}}u_{\bm{j}\alpha}^{(m)}=\varepsilon_{\alpha}u_{\bm{i}\alpha}^{(n)}, where H~𝒊𝒋(n,m)=1τ0τdtei(nm)ΩtH𝒊𝒋(t)mΩδnmδ𝒊𝒋\tilde{H}^{(n,m)}_{\bm{ij}}=\frac{1}{\tau}\int\limits_{0}^{\tau}\mathrm{d}t\,e^{i\quantity(n-m)\Omega t}H_{\bm{ij}}(t)-m\Omega\delta_{nm}\delta_{\bm{ij}} is the “Floquet Hamiltonian” [28], H𝒊𝒋(t)H_{\bm{ij}}(t) is the representation of H(t)H(t) in a site-localized basis {|𝒊}\{\ket{\bm{i}}\}, and u𝒊α(m)𝒊|uα(m)u^{(m)}_{\bm{i}\alpha}\equiv\langle\bm{i}|u^{(m)}_{\alpha}\rangle is the wavefunction of the mm-th harmonic of |uα(t)\ket{u_{\alpha}(t)} (mm is an integer). Henceforth, the index α\alpha shall be restricted to the quasienergies in the first Floquet Brillouin zone (FBZ) Ω/2εα<Ω/2-\Omega/2\leq\varepsilon_{\alpha}<\Omega/2 [33].

Anomalous Floquet topological insulator (AFTI).-We first consider a clean system. In Fig. 1, we plot the dispersion of a semi-infinite strip with zigzag edges for Ω/J=20, 13.7, 8.7\Omega/J=20,\,13.7,\,8.7, and |m|,|n|N=9|m|,|n|\leq N=9. We define two gaps, the 0(π)0(\pi)-gap having magnitude Δ0(π)\Delta_{0(\pi)}, respectively, at the center and the edge of the Floquet Brillouin zone for bulk states. For Ω/J=20\Omega/J=20, the system is a Chern insulator (CI). On decreasing Ω/J\Omega/J, Δπ\Delta_{\pi} vanishes at Ω/J13.7\Omega/J\approx 13.7 and the system undergoes a transition from a CI phase to an AFTI phase, akin to that realised in the experiments [16, 17]. The dispersion for a zigzag strip when Ω/J\Omega/J is tuned across the transition is shown in Fig. 1. In each FBZ, the Chern number of the upper (lower) band (C±)(C^{\pm}) is given by C±=(𝒲0𝒲π)C^{\pm}=\mp(\mathcal{W}_{0}-\mathcal{W}_{\pi}), where 𝒲0(π)\mathcal{W}_{0(\pi)} is an integer topological invariant for the periodically-driven bulk system, called the winding number, which counts the number of chiral edge modes within the gap at quasienergy 0(Ω/2)0(\Omega/2) when the system is defined on a semi-infinite strip. This justifies how the Chern number for all the bulk bands in the anomalous phase can be zero while it hosts robust chiral edge states [27, 28].

Refer to caption
Figure 2: (a)(a) Variation of the average LSR (r¯\bar{r}) with W/ΩW/\Omega at Ω/J=8.7\Omega/J=8.7. Level statistics in the delocalized regime for W/Ω0.01W/\Omega\leq 0.01 is characterized by r¯r¯GUE0.6\bar{r}\approx\bar{r}_{\mbox{\scriptsize GUE}}\approx 0.6, and for the Anderson localized regime for W/Ω3W/\Omega\geq 3 by r¯r¯Poisson0.39\bar{r}\approx\bar{r}_{\mbox{\scriptsize Poisson}}\approx 0.39. r¯\bar{r} has a dip at W/Ω0.5W/\Omega\approx 0.5, where r¯\bar{r} approaches r¯Poisson\bar{r}_{\mbox{\scriptsize Poisson}} with increasing system size, and a peak at W/Ω1.2W/\Omega\approx 1.2. At the largest accessible size (80×80)(80\times 80), the region marked in red has localized states at all quasienergies (Fig. 3) in the first FBZ, while the regions shown in orange and turquoise show intermediate behaviour. The red region is expected to grow while the light red and turquiose regions are expected to shrink with increasing size, and ultimately vanish in the limit of infinite system size, leading to sharp localization-delocalization-localization transitions. (b)(b) Behaviour of r¯\bar{r} at W/Ω=0.5W/\Omega=0.5 (r¯0.5\bar{r}_{0.5}) with increasing linear dimension LL of the system. The best fit (green) line indicates that r¯0.5\bar{r}_{0.5} should approach r¯Poisson\bar{r}_{\mbox{\scriptsize Poisson}} for L103L\gtrsim 10^{3}. (c)(c) r¯\bar{r} variation with W/ΩW/\Omega at Ω/J=20\Omega/J=20. The system goes from the delocalized Chern insulator phase for W/Ω<0.1W/\Omega<0.1 to a localized Anderson insulator phase for W/Ω2W/\Omega\geq 2 with an intermediate (blue) region which shrinks with increasing size.

Effect of disorder on the bulk.-We focus on two characteristic driving frequencies, Ω/J=20\Omega/J=20 in the CI phase and Ω/J=8.7\Omega/J=8.7 in the AFTI phase, and study the effect of on-site disorder in the bulk. The degree of localisation in a disordered system can be characterised by the level spacing ratio (LSR) rαr_{\alpha} given by rα=min{sα,sα1}/max{sα,sα1}r_{\alpha}=\min\{s_{\alpha},s_{\alpha-1}\}/\max\{s_{\alpha},s_{\alpha-1}\}, where α\alpha labels the quasienergies within the first FBZ and sα=εα+1εαs_{\alpha}=\varepsilon_{\alpha+1}-\varepsilon_{\alpha} is the spacing between consecutive quasienergy levels. The disorder-averaged LSR distribution is given by p(r)=αδ(rrα)p(r)=\langle\sum_{\alpha}\delta(r-r_{\alpha})\rangle, where ..\langle..\rangle denotes disorder averaging. Results from random matrix theory (RMT) suggest that p(r)p(r) has a Poissonian form, characterized by the mean LSR (r¯\bar{r}) approaching r¯Poisson=2ln210.39\bar{r}_{\mbox{\scriptsize Poisson}}=2\ln 2-1\approx 0.39, if all the states in the system are localized. On the other hand, p(r)p(r) in a system without time-reversal invariance, in the thermodynamic limit, for extended states is given by a Wigner-Dyson form corresponding to the Gaussian unitary ensemble (GUE), which is characterized by r¯GUE=23/π1/20.60\bar{r}_{\mbox{\scriptsize GUE}}=2{\sqrt{3}}/{\pi}-{1}/{2}\approx 0.60 [34, 35, 30, 36]. Fig. 2(a)(a) and (c)(c) show the behaviour of r¯\bar{r} as a function of disorder strength W/ΩW/\Omega for Ω/J=8.7\Omega/J=8.7 and 2020, respectively. The two-peak structure for Ω/J=8.7\Omega/J=8.7, along with its size dependence, indicates the presence of a localized bulk phase around W/Ω0.5W/\Omega\approx 0.5, which is different from the Anderson insulator (AI) phase realized for W/Ω3W/\Omega\geq 3. Moreover, the transition from this novel localized phase, which we call the anomalous localized phase, to the AI phase involves a “critical” point [30], at W/Ω1.2W/\Omega\approx 1.2, where r¯\bar{r} attains a maximum value. In the thermodynamic limit, we expect the transition from the anomalous localized phase to the AI phase to be “infinitely sharp” which is supported by the finite size scaling shown in Fig. 2(b).

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 3: (a)(a) IPRϵ\langle\mbox{IPR}_{\epsilon}\rangle for different disorder strengths W/ΩW/\Omega for L=80L=80 at Ω/J=8.7\Omega/J=8.7. The vertical cuts at center (I)(\mbox{I}), three-quarters (II)(\mbox{II}) and edge (III)(\mbox{III}) of the FBZ are selected and their size-dependence is shown in the bottom panel. (b)(b) Behaviour of IPR¯\langle\overline{\mbox{IPR}}\rangle, the ϵ\epsilon-average of IPRϵ\langle\mbox{IPR}_{\epsilon}\rangle, with varying W/ΩW/\Omega. Errorbars indicate the standard deviation. For W/Ω=0.2W/\Omega=0.2 only one-sided error is shown since the lower bound does not fit the plot range. The horizontal dashed black lines in both (a)(a) and (b)(b) correspond to 80280^{-2}, which sets the reference level for L2L^{-2} scaling of IPRϵ\langle\mbox{IPR}_{\epsilon}\rangle. Bottom: Log-log plots of IPRϵ\langle\mbox{IPR}_{\epsilon}\rangle as a function of LL for states at the selected values of ε/Ω\varepsilon/\Omega indicated by the red triangles in (a)(a). For 0.4W/Ω0.70.4\lesssim W/\Omega\lesssim 0.7 the system shows complete localization marked by a size independent IPR for large LL at all quasienergies ϵ\epsilon. For W/Ω1.2W/\Omega\approx 1.2 the system becomes delocalised for large LL, as inferred from the slope of the corresponding trace. It should be compared with the black dashed line which corresponds to L2L^{-2} scaling and represents the ideal delocalization limit in 22d. The insets track the behaviour of IPRε\langle\mbox{IPR}_{\varepsilon}\rangle versus W/ΩW/\Omega for L=80L=80. The dip occurs around W/Ω=1.2W/\Omega=1.2 for the three energy slices.

To investigate the localization properties of the anomalous localized phase in more detail, we consider the inverse participation ratio (IPR) for the time-averaged state |uα(0)|u_{\alpha}^{(0)}\rangle, defined, for each disorder realization, as IPRϵ𝒊,α|𝒊|uα(0)|4δ(ϵεα)\mbox{IPR}_{\epsilon}\equiv\sum_{\bm{i},\alpha}|\langle\bm{i}|u^{(0)}_{\alpha}\rangle|^{4}\delta(\epsilon-\varepsilon_{\alpha}), where |𝒊\ket{\bm{i}} is the site basis state. IPRϵ\mbox{IPR}_{\epsilon} scales as L2L^{-2} for extended states in 22-dimensions, where LL is the linear dimension. For localized states it becomes independent of system size, for sufficiently large LL. Fig. 3 (a) shows the disorder averaged IPR, IPRϵ\langle\mbox{IPR}_{\epsilon}\rangle for ϵ\epsilon in the first FBZ, for different disorder strengths W/ΩW/\Omega. For W/Ω<0.3W/\Omega<0.3, the spectrum has a gap at ϵ/Ω=0\epsilon/\Omega=0 and ±0.5\pm 0.5, even for the largest system size which could be accessed (80×8080\times 80). For W/Ω0.3W/\Omega\approx 0.3, the spectrum becomes gapless for large LL, but has a gap at lower LL values, while for W0.4W\geq 0.4 the spectrum remains gapless for all the accessed LL values. In order to understand the overall behaviour of IPRϵ\langle\mbox{IPR}_{\epsilon}\rangle with changing WW, we show its mean over ϵ\epsilon, IPR¯\langle\overline{\mbox{IPR}}\rangle, along with the corresponding standard deviation in Fig. 3 (b). As W/ΩW/\Omega increases, IPR¯\langle\overline{\mbox{IPR}}\rangle attains its maximum value near W/Ω=0.5W/\Omega=0.5, indicating a maximally localized state on average, and minimum value near W/Ω=1.2W/\Omega=1.2, indicating that on average, a maximum number of states are delocalized.

To further support these observations, we show the size dependence of IPRϵ\langle\mbox{IPR}_{\epsilon}\rangle at three characteristic quasienergies chosen at the center (I)(\mbox{I}), three-quarters (II)(\mbox{II}) and edge (III)(\mbox{III}) of the first FBZ in the bottom panel of Fig. 3. These points are indicated by red triangles in Fig. 3 (a). We find that for 0.4W/Ω0.70.4\leq W/\Omega\leq 0.7, IPRϵ\langle\mbox{IPR}_{\epsilon}\rangle remains LL independent for L60L\geq 60, across all the three ϵ\epsilon slices. Hence, we expect the bulk states at all quasienergies to be localized for this range of WW values. Even for lower LL values IPRϵ\langle\mbox{IPR}_{\epsilon}\rangle shows almost no scaling at the center and edge of the first FBZ for these values of W/ΩW/\Omega, but shows scaling behaviour for a quasienergy in between them [slice (II)(\mbox{II})]. Furthermore, at W/Ω1.2W/\Omega\approx 1.2 we find the emergence of L2L^{-2} scaling for large LL, at all the three ϵ\epsilon-slices, even though the disorder strength is even larger than the bandwidth of the clean system. This confirms the presence of an additional localized phase around W/Ω=0.5W/\Omega=0.5 and a localization-delocalization transition around W/Ω=1.2W/\Omega=1.2, as indicated by the LSR.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 4: (a) The Laughlin pump setup where a flux θ\theta is threaded through a cylindrical system. (bb) The gauge choice in which additional phases eiθe^{i\theta} are acquired by the hopping amplitudes across the bonds which intersect the x=0x=0 (dotted) line. Bottom: Variation of the disorder normalized average pumped charge P/P0\langle P\rangle/P_{0}, with disorder strength W/ΩW/\Omega for Ω/J=8.7\Omega/J=8.7 (c1c1) and 2020 (c2c2). For 0.1W/Ω1.20.1\leq W/\Omega\lesssim 1.2, in the anomalous phase (c1c1) P/P0\langle P\rangle/P_{0} remains quantized to the value 11 (within errorbars), and decays to zero with increasing disorder strength. In the CI phase (c2c2), P/P0\langle P\rangle/P_{0} is reduced below 11 even for the lowest disorder strength considered, and decays to zero with increasing disorder. The transitions become sharper with increasing linear dimension LL.

Charge pumping.- The topological properties of the phases can by evaluated by setting up a Laughlin charge pump, where a flux θ\theta is threaded through the system in a cylindrical geometry [38, 37], as shown in Fig. 4(a). Assuming that the zigzag edge of the cylinder is oriented along the xx-direction, we choose a gauge such that the nearest-neighbour hopping elements across the bonds which intersect the line x=0x=0 acquire an additional phase exp(±iθ)\exp(\pm i\theta) [30] for hopping to the right (left) [Fig. 4(b)]. The total occupancies in the upper (𝒰\mathcal{U}) and lower (\mathcal{L}) halves of the cylinder are given by Q𝒰()(θ)=𝒊𝒰()Q𝒊Q_{\mathcal{U}(\mathcal{L})}(\theta)=\sum_{\bm{i}\in\mathcal{U}(\mathcal{L})}Q_{\bm{i}}, where Q𝒊Q_{\bm{i}} is the occupancy of the site at position 𝒊\bm{i}. The difference between the total particle numbers accumulated in the upper and lower halves of the cylinder is δQ(θ)=Q𝒰(θ)Q(θ)\delta Q(\theta)=Q_{\mathcal{U}}(\theta)-Q_{\mathcal{L}}(\theta) and P(max{δQ(θ)}min{δQ(θ)})/2P\equiv(\max\{\delta Q(\theta)\}-\min\{\delta Q(\theta)\})/2 is the pumped charge in one period of the threaded flux θ\theta. In a topologically nontrivial phase, the flux threading is accompanied by a discontinuity of δQ\delta Q as θ\theta is varied between [0,2π][0,2\pi] [37].

The site occupancies Q𝒊Q_{\bm{i}} can be expressed in terms of the lesser Floquet Green’s function G<G^{<} [37, 32, 39]

Q𝒊=n=N2N2Ω/2Ω/2dω2πlimΓ0+Im[G𝒊,n;𝒊,n<(ω;θ)]\displaystyle Q_{\bm{i}}=\sum\limits_{n=\frac{-N}{2}}^{\frac{N}{2}}\int\limits_{-\Omega/2}^{\Omega/2}\frac{\mathrm{d}\omega}{2\pi}\,\lim_{\Gamma\rightarrow 0^{+}}\mbox{Im}\quantity[G^{<}_{\bm{i},n;\bm{i},n}(\omega;\theta)]
=α(n|u𝒊α(n)|2)(𝒍,pf(εα+pΩ)|u𝒍α(p)|2)\displaystyle=\sum\limits_{\alpha}\quantity(\sum\limits_{n}\absolutevalue{u^{(n)}_{\bm{i}\alpha}}^{2})\quantity(\sum\limits_{\bm{l},p}f(\varepsilon_{\alpha}+p\Omega)\absolutevalue{u^{(p)}_{\bm{l}\alpha}}^{2}) (2)

where f(ω)(1+exp(ω/T))1f(\omega)\equiv\quantity(1+\exp\quantity(\omega/T))^{-1}, and nn and pp are integers. In order to specify an initial state we have introduce a bath at temperature TT which is quadratically coupled to the system with a coupling strength Γ\Gamma [32, 40]. However, the experimentally prepared ultracold atomic systems are essentially isolated, so we take the limit Γ0\Gamma\rightarrow 0 and set T=0.01T=0.01 in Eq. (The anomalous Floquet Anderson insulator in a continuously driven optical lattice). We use Q𝒊Q_{\bm{i}} to calculate the disorder-averaged steady-state pumped charge P\langle P\rangle, normalized by its reference value P0P_{0} in the clean system, by tracking the θ\theta dependence of δQ\delta Q for every disorder realisation. P/P0\langle P\rangle/P_{0} has been plotted in Fig. 4 (c1)(c1) for Ω/J=8.7\Omega/J=8.7 in the anomalous localized phase and in Fig. 4 (c2)(c2) for Ω/J=20\Omega/J=20 in the CI phase. We find that P/P0\langle P\rangle/P_{0} remains quantized in the anomalous phase for W/Ω<1.2W/\Omega<1.2, while it decreases rapidly with increasing W/ΩW/\Omega in the CI phase [41]. This means the phase at Ω/J=8.7\Omega/J=8.7 supports quantized charge pumping through the edge states while its time-averaged bulk states remain completely localized for 0.4W/Ω0.70.4\leq W/\Omega\leq 0.7. This is the signature of the AFAI phase, as discussed in Ref. [30], which supports one chiral edge mode at each edge of the cylinder, and the two edge modes have opposite chiralities.

Discussion.-When all the bulk states are localized then the Chern number at any quasienergy must be zero. However we find that two chiral edge states, each localized at one of edges of the system defined on a cylinder coexist with the localized bulk states [32]. The quasienergies of chiral edge states have a nontrivial flow under flux threading, which gives rise to a quantized pumped charge, as was previously observed in Ref. [30]. The localized bulk states do not flow under threading of flux and hence do not contribute to the charge pumping. It was also shown in Ref. [30] that if one of the edge modes is fully occupied, while the other remains unoccupied, then the net charge flowing across any bond on the occupied edge, per unit time remains quantized, and is equal to the winding number in the bulk when the system has been driven over many cycles. Here we show that the net charge pumped from the bulk to the edges when one quantum of flux is threaded through the cylinder also remains quantized.

Tuning FF away from F=2F=2, for Ω/J=8.7\Omega/J=8.7, increases the dispersion of the bulk bands which has a destabilizing effect on the AFAI phase. We find that the AFAI is stable between 1.9F2.11.9\leq F\leq 2.1 [32]. Topological edge states have been observed in ultracold atoms by creating a programmable repulsive potential and releasing a localized Bose Einstein condensate near the edge using an optical tweezer. Subsequently, in the clean system, the wave packet propagates along the potential boundary, following its curvature, which is a characteristic for chiral edge states [17]. Such chiral motion at the potential boundary should also be observable in the AFAI, while, in contrast, once the repulsive potential is switched off the initial wave packet should remain localized. For weak disorder, when the system is not in the AFAI phase, sufficiently high energy wave packets, within the first FBZ, will not remain localized, while for strong disorder when the system is in the AI phase, there should be no chiral motion at the edge.

Conclusion.-We have studied localization properties and charge pumping in a disordered, circularly driven honeycomb lattice with a continuous driving protocol realized in the experiments [16, 17]. Within the scope of finite size numerics, we found that a new phase emerges at intermediate disorder strength, in which the time-averaged bulk states are fully localized while the system supports quantized charge pumping via edge states, when the system has been evolved over many driving cycles. This is the AFAI phase which was previously predicted in a simplified model [30], which is difficult to realize with ultracold atoms. We also show that the quantized charge pumping in the AFAI phase remains robust at intermediate disorder strength, in contrast to the CI phase. Our approach will also allow us in the future to study the interplay of on-site interactions and strong disorder in the periodically driven system, which can lead to discovery of new phases in hitherto unexplored parameter regimes using Floquet-DMFT [29, 37].

Acknowledgements.-This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Project No. 277974659 via Research Unit FOR 2414. J.-H. Z. acknowledges support from the NSFC under Grant No.12247103 and No.12175180, Shaanxi Fundamental Science Research Project for Mathematics and Physics under Grant No. 22JSQ041 and No. 22JSZ005, and the Youth Innovation Team of Shannxi Universities. M.A. also acknowledges support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) under Germany’s Excellence Strategy – EXC-2111 – 390814868. A.D. thanks Y. Xu for helpful discussions. The authors gratefully acknowledge the Gauss Centre for Supercomputing e.V. (www.gauss-centre.eu) for funding this project by providing computing time through the John von Neumann Institute for Computing (NIC) on the GCS Supercomputer JUWELS at Jülich Supercomputing Centre (JSC). Calculations for this research were also performed on the Goethe-NHR high performance computing cluster. The cluster is managed by the Center for Scientific Computing (CSC) of the Goethe University Frankfurt.

References

  • [1] M. S. Rudner and N. H. Lindner, Nat. Rev. Phys. 2, 229 (2020); M. S. Rudner and N. H. Lindner, arXiv:2003.08252.
  • [2] A. Eckardt and E. Anisimovas, New J. Phys. 17, 093039 (2015).
  • [3] M. Holthaus, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 49, 013001 (2016).
  • [4] A. Eckardt, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 011004 (2017).
  • [5] C. Weitenberg and J. Simonet, Nat. Phys. 17, 1342 (2021).
  • [6] W. Hofstetter and T. Qin, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 51, 082001 (2018).
  • [7] M. Aidelsburger, S. Nascimbene, N. Goldman, Compt. Rend. Phys. 19, 394 (2018).
  • [8] R. Citro and M. Aidelsburger, Nat. Rev. Phys. 5, 87 (2023).
  • [9] N. R. Cooper, J. Dalibard, and I. B. Spielman, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 015005 (2019).
  • [10] T. Ozawa, H. M. Price, A. Amo, N. Goldman, M. Hafezi, L. Lu, M. C. Rechtsman, D. Schuster, J. Simon, O. Zilberberg, and I. Carusotto, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 015006 (2019).
  • [11] M. Aidelsburger, M. Atala, M. Lohse, J. T. Barreiro, B. Paredes, and I. Bloch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 185301 (2013).
  • [12] H. Miyake, G. A. Siviloglou, C. J. Kennedy, W. C. Burton, and W. Ketterle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 185302 (2013).
  • [13] M. Aidelsburger, M. Lohse, C. Schweizer, et al., Nat. Phys. 11, 162 (2015).
  • [14] G. Jotzu, M. Messer, R. Desbuquois, et al., Nature 515, 237 (2014).
  • [15] N. Fläschner, B. S. Rem, M. Tarnowski, D. Vogel, D. S. Lühmann, K. Sengstock, and C. Weitenberg, Science 352, 1091 (2016).
  • [16] K. Wintersperger, C. Braun, F. N. Ünal, et al., Nat. Phys. 16, 1058–1063 (2020).
  • [17] C. Braun, R. Saint-Jalm, A. Hesse, J. Arceri, I. Bloch and M. Aidelsburger, arXiv:2304.01980.
  • [18] J.-H. Zheng, A. Dutta, M. Aidelsburger, and W. Hofstetter, arXiv:2309.07035.
  • [19] M. Lohse, C. Schweizer, O. Zilberberg, et al., Nature Phys 12, 350 (2016).
  • [20] S. Nakajima, T. Tomita, S. Taie, et al., Nature Phys 12, 296 (2016).
  • [21] A. S. Walter, Z. Zhu, M. Gächter, et al., Nat. Phys. (2023).
  • [22] M. Rechtsman, J. Zeuner, Y. Plotnik, et al., Nature 496, 196 (2013).
  • [23] M. Hafezi, S. Mittal, J. Fan, et al., Nat. Phot. 7, 1001 (2013).
  • [24] S. Mittal, V. V. Orre, D. Leykam, Y. D. Chong, and M. Hafezi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 043201 (2019).
  • [25] L. Maczewsky, J. Zeuner, S. Nolte, et al., Nat Commun. 8, 13756 (2017).
  • [26] S. Mukherjee, A. Spracklen, M. Valiente, et al., Nat. Commun. 8, 13918 (2017).
  • [27] T. Kitagawa, E. Berg, M. Rudner, and E. Demler, Phys. Rev. B 82, 235114 (2010).
  • [28] M. S. Rudner, N. H. Lindner, E. Berg, and M. Levin, Phys. Rev. X 3, 031005 (2013).
  • [29] T. Qin and W. Hofstetter, Phys. Rev. B 96, 075134 (2017).
  • [30] P. Titum, E. Berg, M. S. Rudner, G. Refael, and N. H. Lindner, Phys. Rev. X 6, 021013 (2016).
  • [31] A. Kundu, M. Rudner, E. Berg, and N. H. Lindner Phys. Rev. B 101, 041403(R) (2020).
  • [32] Supplementary material.
  • [33] It can be easily verified that for two integers nn and pp, if u𝒊α(n)u^{(n)}_{\bm{i}\alpha} satisfies 𝒋,mH~𝒊𝒋(n,m)u𝒋α(m)=εαu𝒊α(n)\sum_{\bm{j},m}\tilde{H}^{(n,m)}_{\bm{ij}}u_{\bm{j}\alpha}^{(m)}=\varepsilon_{\alpha}u_{\bm{i}\alpha}^{(n)} with the quasienergy εα\varepsilon_{\alpha}, then u𝒊α(n+p)u^{(n+p)}_{\bm{i}\alpha} also satisfies the same eigenvalue problem with quasienergy εα+pΩ\varepsilon_{\alpha}+p\Omega
  • [34] Y. Y. Atas, E. Bogomolny, O. Giraud, and G. Roux, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 084101 (2013).
  • [35] V. Oganesyan and D. A. Huse, Phys. Rev. B 75, 155111 (2007).
  • [36] T. Guhr, A. Müller–Groeling, H. A. Weidenmüller, Phys. Rep. 299, 189 (1999).
  • [37] T. Qin, A. Schnell, K. Sengstock, C. Weitenberg, A. Eckardt, and W. Hofstetter Phys. Rev. A 98, 033601 (2018).
  • [38] R. B. Laughlin, Phys. Rev. B 23, 5632(R) (1981).
  • [39] H. Aoki, N. Tsuji, M. Eckstein, M. Kollar, T. Oka, and P. Werner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 779 (2014).
  • [40] T. Qin and W. Hofstetter, Phys. Rev. B 97, 125115 (2018).
  • [41] For different disorder realizations, the discontinuities appear at different θ\theta values. In the numerical implementation, working with a fixed θ\theta grid makes it impossible to capture the discontinuity for all disorder realizations. This further smears out the transition from the AFAI to the AI phase, and from the CI to AI phase.