Optical Conductivity in Symmetric Mass Generation Insulators

Meng Zeng Department of Physics, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA    Fu Xu Department of Physics, Nan**g University, Nan**g, Jiangsu 210093, China    Da-Chuan Lu Department of Physics, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA    Yi-Zhuang You [email protected] Department of Physics, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA
(May 8, 2024)
Abstract

Symmetric mass generation (SMG) insulators are interaction-driven, featureless Mott insulating states in quantum many-body fermionic systems. Recent advancements suggest that zeros in the fermion Green’s function could lead to non-vanishing negative optical conductivity in SMG insulators, even below the charge excitation gap. This study explores the origin of this unusual behavior through the lens of pole-zero duality, highlighting a critical issue where the current operator becomes unbounded, rendering the response function unphysical. By employing a lattice model, we derive a well-behaved lattice regularization of the current operator, enabling a detailed study of optical conductivity in SMG insulators. Utilizing both analytical and numerical methods, including strong-coupling expansions, we confirm that SMG insulators exhibit no optical conductivity at low energies below the charge gap, effectively resolving the paradox. This work not only deepens our understanding of quantum many-body phenomena but also lays a robust theoretical groundwork for future experimental explorations of SMG materials.

Introduction. — Symmetric mass generation (SMG) insulators [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] represent a novel class of interaction-driven featureless Mott insulating states in quantum many-body systems of fermions. These systems feature the cancellation of all quantum anomalies [31, 32, 33], such that a symmetric gapped state without spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSB) or topological order is allowed, which we refer to as “featureless”. SMG insulators are characterized by a full energy gap to all fermionic and bosonic excitations, including collective charge and current excitations. The excitation gap arises from non-perturbative interaction effects and eludes mean-field theoretical explanations.

Central to the theoretical understanding of SMG insulators is the behavior of the fermion Green’s function, defined as: G(k):=ψkψkassign𝐺𝑘delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝜓𝑘superscriptsubscript𝜓𝑘G(k):=-\langle\psi_{k}\psi_{k}^{\dagger}\rangleitalic_G ( italic_k ) := - ⟨ italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟩, where ψksubscript𝜓𝑘\psi_{k}italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the fermion operator at the energy-momentum k=(ω,𝒌)𝑘𝜔𝒌k=(\omega,{\bm{k}})italic_k = ( italic_ω , bold_italic_k ). A key aspect of the SMG insulator is that its fermion Green’s function determinant approaches zero as energy-momentum tends to zero [34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49], i.e.

detG(k)=0 as kμkμ0.𝐺𝑘0 as subscript𝑘𝜇superscript𝑘𝜇0\det G(k)=0\text{ as }k_{\mu}k^{\mu}\to 0.roman_det italic_G ( italic_k ) = 0 as italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → 0 . (1)

This property, the zero of the Green’s function, raises an intriguing question regarding its experimental implications [46, 29, 50, 45, 47, 48]. Recently, Golterman and Shamir [49] proposed that these zeros might significantly influence the electromagnetic response of the SMG insulator when the fermions are coupled to a background U(1)U1\mathrm{U}(1)roman_U ( 1 ) gauge field, particularly suggesting a scenario where the SMG insulator exhibits non-vanishing charge conductivity at low energy, even below the energy gap of all excitations.

This apparent puzzle of how an insulator might exhibit conductive behavior without charge excitations below the insulating gap presents a fascinating paradox. This research aims to postulate a potential resolution of this paradox, offering new insights into the behavior of the optical conductivity in SMG insulators and expanding our understanding of quantum many-body phenomena.

Pole-Zero Duality. — Let us first revisit the Golterman-Shamir construction [49], and reproduce their results through the broader lens of pole-zero duality in the fermion Green’s function.

The analysis starts with the fermion two-point correlation function G(k)=ψkψk𝐺𝑘delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝜓𝑘superscriptsubscript𝜓𝑘G(k)=-\langle\psi_{k}\psi_{k}^{\dagger}\rangleitalic_G ( italic_k ) = - ⟨ italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟩ in the energy-momentum space. At this point, Golterman and Shamir introduced a pivotal assumption that the fermion system can be approximated by a free effective action,

S[ψ]=kψkG(k)1ψk=ddxψG(i)1ψ,𝑆delimited-[]𝜓subscript𝑘superscriptsubscript𝜓𝑘𝐺superscript𝑘1subscript𝜓𝑘superscriptd𝑑𝑥superscript𝜓𝐺superscripti1𝜓S[\psi]=-\sum_{k}\psi_{k}^{\dagger}G(k)^{-1}\psi_{k}=-\int\mathrm{d}^{d}x\;% \psi^{\dagger}G(\mathrm{i}\partial)^{-1}\psi,italic_S [ italic_ψ ] = - ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_G ( italic_k ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - ∫ roman_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x italic_ψ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_G ( roman_i ∂ ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ψ , (2)

such that the Green’s function will be consistently reproduced by the fermion path integral:

G(k)=1Z𝒟[ψ](ψkψk)eS[ψ],𝐺𝑘1𝑍𝒟delimited-[]𝜓subscript𝜓𝑘superscriptsubscript𝜓𝑘superscript𝑒𝑆delimited-[]𝜓G(k)=\frac{1}{Z}\int\mathcal{D}[\psi]\,(-\psi_{k}\psi_{k}^{\dagger})e^{-S[\psi% ]},italic_G ( italic_k ) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_Z end_ARG ∫ caligraphic_D [ italic_ψ ] ( - italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_S [ italic_ψ ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (3)

with Z=𝒟[ψ]eS[ψ]𝑍𝒟delimited-[]𝜓superscript𝑒𝑆delimited-[]𝜓Z=\int\mathcal{D}[\psi]e^{-S[\psi]}italic_Z = ∫ caligraphic_D [ italic_ψ ] italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_S [ italic_ψ ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT being the partition function. It is crucial to acknowledge that this approach to reconstructing the effective action from the two-point correlation is only valid under the premise that the fermions behave as free or generalized free fields [51, 52, 53, 54, 55]. In such cases, higher-point correlations decompose into two-point correlations via Wick’s theorem. Should the fermions deviate from generalized free field behavior, it becomes necessary to incorporate higher-order terms in the effective action to model higher-point correlation functions.

If we accept the effective action S[ψ]𝑆delimited-[]𝜓S[\psi]italic_S [ italic_ψ ] in Eq. (2), we can proceed to gauge the U(1)U1\mathrm{U}(1)roman_U ( 1 ) symmetry of the fermion field ψ𝜓\psiitalic_ψ, under which ψeiθψ𝜓superscriptei𝜃𝜓\psi\to\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\theta}\psiitalic_ψ → roman_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_i italic_θ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ψ. By introducing the U(1)U1\mathrm{U}(1)roman_U ( 1 ) gauge field A𝐴Aitalic_A through minimal coupling, the effective action becomes:

S[ψ,A]=ddxψG(iA)1ψ.𝑆𝜓𝐴superscriptd𝑑𝑥superscript𝜓𝐺superscripti𝐴1𝜓S[\psi,A]=-\int\mathrm{d}^{d}x\;\psi^{\dagger}G(\mathrm{i}\partial-A)^{-1}\psi.italic_S [ italic_ψ , italic_A ] = - ∫ roman_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x italic_ψ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_G ( roman_i ∂ - italic_A ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ψ . (4)

Integrating out the fermion field ψ𝜓\psiitalic_ψ, the fermion path integral eS[A]=𝒟[ψ]eS[ψ,A]superscripte𝑆delimited-[]𝐴𝒟delimited-[]𝜓superscripte𝑆𝜓𝐴\mathrm{e}^{-S[A]}=\int\mathcal{D}[\psi]\mathrm{e}^{-S[\psi,A]}roman_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_S [ italic_A ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ∫ caligraphic_D [ italic_ψ ] roman_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_S [ italic_ψ , italic_A ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT defines an effective action S[A]𝑆delimited-[]𝐴S[A]italic_S [ italic_A ] for the gauge field A𝐴Aitalic_A:

S[A]=TrlogG(iA)=n=01n!Πnμ1μ2μnAμ1Aμ2Aμn,𝑆delimited-[]𝐴Tr𝐺i𝐴superscriptsubscript𝑛01𝑛superscriptsubscriptΠ𝑛subscript𝜇1subscript𝜇2subscript𝜇𝑛subscript𝐴subscript𝜇1subscript𝐴subscript𝜇2subscript𝐴subscript𝜇𝑛\begin{split}S[A]&=\operatorname{Tr}\log G(\mathrm{i}\partial-A)\\ &=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n!}\Pi_{n}^{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}}A_{\mu_{% 1}}A_{\mu_{2}}\cdots A_{\mu_{n}},\end{split}start_ROW start_CELL italic_S [ italic_A ] end_CELL start_CELL = roman_Tr roman_log italic_G ( roman_i ∂ - italic_A ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL end_CELL start_CELL = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋯ italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋯ italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , end_CELL end_ROW (5)

where Πnμ1μ2μn:=δAμ1δAμ2δAμnS[A]assignsuperscriptsubscriptΠ𝑛subscript𝜇1subscript𝜇2subscript𝜇𝑛subscript𝛿subscript𝐴subscript𝜇1subscript𝛿subscript𝐴subscript𝜇2subscript𝛿subscript𝐴subscript𝜇𝑛𝑆delimited-[]𝐴\Pi_{n}^{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots\mu_{n}}:=\delta_{A_{\mu_{1}}}\delta_{A_{\mu_{2}}% }\cdots\delta_{A_{\mu_{n}}}S[A]roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋯ italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋯ italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S [ italic_A ] corresponds to the n𝑛nitalic_nth order current correlation, or loosely denoted as Πn=δAnS[A]subscriptΠ𝑛superscriptsubscript𝛿𝐴𝑛𝑆delimited-[]𝐴\Pi_{n}=\delta_{A}^{n}S[A]roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_S [ italic_A ]. These correlations ΠnsubscriptΠ𝑛\Pi_{n}roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT encode the responses of the fermion system to the external electromagnetic field at different orders. The goal is to understand their behaviors across the SMG transition.

The SMG transition refers to the fermion gap-opening transition driven by the fermion interaction [33]. On the weakly interacting side, the fermion system is metallic, characterized by gapless single-particle excitations at low energy, manifested as poles in the fermion Green’s function. In contrast, on the strongly interacting side, the system transitions into the SMG insulating phase, where the original poles in the Green’s function are replaced by zeros. For instance, in the case of the relativistic fermions discussed in Ref. 49, the propagator poles and zeros are respectively modeled by GDiracsubscript𝐺DiracG_{\text{Dirac}}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Dirac end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and GSMGsubscript𝐺SMGG_{\text{SMG}}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as

GDirac(k)=1γ0γμkμ,GSMG(k)=γ0γμkμm2.formulae-sequencesubscript𝐺Dirac𝑘1superscript𝛾0superscript𝛾𝜇subscript𝑘𝜇subscript𝐺SMG𝑘superscript𝛾0superscript𝛾𝜇subscript𝑘𝜇superscript𝑚2G_{\text{Dirac}}(k)=\frac{1}{\gamma^{0}\gamma^{\mu}k_{\mu}},\quad G_{\text{SMG% }}(k)=-\frac{\gamma^{0}\gamma^{\mu}k_{\mu}}{m^{2}}.italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Dirac end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k ) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG , italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k ) = - divide start_ARG italic_γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG . (6)

The concept of pole-zero duality [35, 42, 43, 46] offers a compelling framework for relating the low-energy behaviors of Green’s functions across the SMG transition. This duality is articulated through a transformation of the fermion Green’s function,

G(k)G~(k)G(k)1,𝐺𝑘~𝐺𝑘proportional-to𝐺superscript𝑘1G(k)\to\tilde{G}(k)\propto G(-k)^{-1},italic_G ( italic_k ) → over~ start_ARG italic_G end_ARG ( italic_k ) ∝ italic_G ( - italic_k ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (7)

under which poles and zeros replace each other. For example, GDiracsubscript𝐺DiracG_{\text{Dirac}}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Dirac end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and GSMGsubscript𝐺SMGG_{\text{SMG}}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in Eq. (6) are related by the pole-zero duality.

Under the pole-zero duality defined in Eq. (7), the effective gauge action S[A]=TrlogG(iA)𝑆delimited-[]𝐴Tr𝐺i𝐴S[A]=\operatorname{Tr}\log G(\mathrm{i}\partial-A)italic_S [ italic_A ] = roman_Tr roman_log italic_G ( roman_i ∂ - italic_A ) in Eq. (5) transforms as

S[A]TrlogG(i+A)1=S[A],𝑆delimited-[]𝐴Tr𝐺superscripti𝐴1𝑆delimited-[]𝐴S[A]\to\operatorname{Tr}\log G(-\mathrm{i}\partial+A)^{-1}=-S[-A],italic_S [ italic_A ] → roman_Tr roman_log italic_G ( - roman_i ∂ + italic_A ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = - italic_S [ - italic_A ] , (8)

then the n𝑛nitalic_nth order current correlation Πn=δAnS[A]subscriptΠ𝑛superscriptsubscript𝛿𝐴𝑛𝑆delimited-[]𝐴\Pi_{n}=\delta_{A}^{n}S[A]roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_S [ italic_A ] transforms as

ΠnδAnS[A]=(1)nΠn.subscriptΠ𝑛superscriptsubscript𝛿𝐴𝑛𝑆delimited-[]𝐴superscript1𝑛subscriptΠ𝑛\Pi_{n}\to-\delta_{A}^{n}S[-A]=-(-1)^{n}\Pi_{n}.roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_S [ - italic_A ] = - ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (9)

This implies that if the fermion Green’s functions across the SMG transition are related by pole-zero duality, as exemplified by GDiracsubscript𝐺DiracG_{\text{Dirac}}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Dirac end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and GSMGsubscript𝐺SMGG_{\text{SMG}}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in Eq. (6), then their corresponding electromagnetic response functions will also be related by (for n=2,3𝑛23n=2,3italic_n = 2 , 3)

Π2,SMG=Π2,Dirac,Π3,SMG=Π3,Dirac,formulae-sequencesubscriptΠ2SMGsubscriptΠ2DiracsubscriptΠ3SMGsubscriptΠ3Dirac\Pi_{2,\text{SMG}}=-\Pi_{2,\text{Dirac}},\quad\Pi_{3,\text{SMG}}=\Pi_{3,\text{% Dirac}},roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 , SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 , Dirac end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 , SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 , Dirac end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (10)

which reproduce the main conclusions in Ref. 49 that, compared to free Dirac fermions, the vacuum polarization Π2subscriptΠ2\Pi_{2}roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT changes sign in the SMG insulator while the triangle diagram Π3subscriptΠ3\Pi_{3}roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT remains the same.

These results are remarkably general and do not depend on the specific form of the Green’s function G(k)𝐺𝑘G(k)italic_G ( italic_k ). Provided we accept the effective action S[ψ,A]𝑆𝜓𝐴S[\psi,A]italic_S [ italic_ψ , italic_A ] in Eq. (4) as our starting point, the conclusions outlined above are inevitable under the principle of pole-zero duality.

The implications of these results are significant. Since vacuum polarization is connected to optical conductivity by Reσ(ω,𝒌)=1ωImΠ2(ω,𝒌)Re𝜎𝜔𝒌1𝜔ImsubscriptΠ2𝜔𝒌\operatorname{Re}\sigma(\omega,{\bm{k}})=-\frac{1}{\omega}\operatorname{Im}\Pi% _{2}(\omega,{\bm{k}})roman_Re italic_σ ( italic_ω , bold_italic_k ) = - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_ω end_ARG roman_Im roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ω , bold_italic_k ) [56], the relationship Π2,SMG=Π2,DiracsubscriptΠ2SMGsubscriptΠ2Dirac\Pi_{2,\text{SMG}}=-\Pi_{2,\text{Dirac}}roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 , SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 , Dirac end_POSTSUBSCRIPT would imply that σSMG=σDiracsubscript𝜎SMGsubscript𝜎Dirac\sigma_{\text{SMG}}=-\sigma_{\text{Dirac}}italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Dirac end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, indicating that the gapped SMG insulator would exhibit a conductivity that is finite and opposite to that of the gapless Dirac semimetal. However, we should not anticipate finite conductivity in an insulator below the charge excitation gap. Additionally, the notion of negative conductivity raises concerns about the potential violation of the fluctuation-dissipation theorem and the loss of unitarity in the theory.

Unbounded Current Operator — Given the perplexing behavior of conductivity, we are motivated to examine the foundational assumptions of the Golterman-Shamir construction. Specifically, it is presumed that the effective action S[ψ,A]𝑆𝜓𝐴S[\psi,A]italic_S [ italic_ψ , italic_A ] described in Eq. (4) models the physics of the SMG insulator in a background electromagnetic field. Starting from this premise, the current operator in the system should be given by

Jμ=δAμS[ψ,A0]=kψkkμG(k)1ψk.superscript𝐽𝜇subscript𝛿subscript𝐴𝜇𝑆delimited-[]𝜓𝐴0subscript𝑘superscriptsubscript𝜓𝑘subscriptsubscript𝑘𝜇𝐺superscript𝑘1subscript𝜓𝑘J^{\mu}=-\delta_{A_{\mu}}S[\psi,A\to 0]=\sum_{k}\psi_{k}^{\dagger}\partial_{k_% {\mu}}G(k)^{-1}\psi_{k}.italic_J start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S [ italic_ψ , italic_A → 0 ] = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_G ( italic_k ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (11)

For Dirac fermions described by GDirac(k)subscript𝐺Dirac𝑘G_{\text{Dirac}}(k)italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Dirac end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k ) in Eq. (6), Eq. (11) gives the current operator in the conventional form Jμ=kψ¯kγμψksuperscript𝐽𝜇subscript𝑘subscript¯𝜓𝑘superscript𝛾𝜇subscript𝜓𝑘J^{\mu}=\sum_{k}\bar{\psi}_{k}\gamma^{\mu}\psi_{k}italic_J start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over¯ start_ARG italic_ψ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (where ψ¯:=ψγ0assign¯𝜓superscript𝜓superscript𝛾0\bar{\psi}:=\psi^{\dagger}\gamma^{0}over¯ start_ARG italic_ψ end_ARG := italic_ψ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT), which has a bounded spectrum. However, for the SMG insulator, if we naively substitute the Green’s function GSMG(k)subscript𝐺SMG𝑘G_{\text{SMG}}(k)italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k ) from Eq. (6) into Eq. (11),

Jμ=km2k4(2kμkνk2δμν)ψ¯kγνψk,superscript𝐽𝜇subscript𝑘superscript𝑚2superscript𝑘42subscript𝑘𝜇subscript𝑘𝜈superscript𝑘2subscript𝛿𝜇𝜈subscript¯𝜓𝑘superscript𝛾𝜈subscript𝜓𝑘J^{\mu}=\sum_{k}\frac{m^{2}}{k^{4}}(2k_{\mu}k_{\nu}-k^{2}\delta_{\mu\nu})\bar{% \psi}_{k}\gamma^{\nu}\psi_{k},italic_J start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ( 2 italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ν end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ italic_ν end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) over¯ start_ARG italic_ψ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ν end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (12)

we find that the resulting current operator Jμsuperscript𝐽𝜇J^{\mu}italic_J start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT would diverge as k2:=kμkμ0assignsuperscript𝑘2subscript𝑘𝜇superscript𝑘𝜇0k^{2}:=k_{\mu}k^{\mu}\rightarrow 0italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → 0. This divergence is a direct consequence of the Green’s function zeros along the light cone (k2=0superscript𝑘20k^{2}=0italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 0) below the SMG insulating gap. Such a current operator has an unbounded spectrum, which is unphysical because this would imply the existence of quantum states in which the velocity of charge movement could potentially exceed the speed of light.

Starting from such an unbounded current operator to define the current-current correlation Π2μν=JμJνsuperscriptsubscriptΠ2𝜇𝜈delimited-⟨⟩superscript𝐽𝜇superscript𝐽𝜈\Pi_{2}^{\mu\nu}=-\langle J^{\mu}J^{\nu}\rangleroman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ italic_ν end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = - ⟨ italic_J start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_J start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ν end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟩ could potentially lead to unphysical results. This perspective makes the unusual behavior of Π2subscriptΠ2\Pi_{2}roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT less surprising. It implies that S[ψ,A]𝑆𝜓𝐴S[\psi,A]italic_S [ italic_ψ , italic_A ] in Eq. (4) might not be a complete theory for describing the SMG insulator. Given that the SMG insulator is intrinsically a strongly interacting system, it is reasonable to suspect that the action should include various higher-order terms to cancle the divergence of the current operator, thereby ensuring a well-defined bounded current operator.

Lattice Modeling — Having recognized the critical issue with the unbounded current operator, our goal is to move beyond the effective action S[ψ,A]𝑆𝜓𝐴S[\psi,A]italic_S [ italic_ψ , italic_A ] and explore the electromagnetic response of the SMG insulator from a more fundamental perspective.

To address this challenge, we turn to a concrete lattice model for the SMG insulator. Consider a system comprising four flavors of fermions ciasubscript𝑐𝑖𝑎c_{ia}italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (where a=1,2,3,4𝑎1234a=1,2,3,4italic_a = 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) on each lattice site i𝑖iitalic_i, governed by the following Hamiltonian

H=ijtijeiAijciacjagici1ci2ci3ci4+h.c.,𝐻subscript𝑖𝑗subscript𝑡𝑖𝑗superscripteisubscript𝐴𝑖𝑗superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖𝑎subscript𝑐𝑗𝑎𝑔subscript𝑖superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖1superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖2subscript𝑐𝑖3subscript𝑐𝑖4h.c.H=-\sum_{ij}t_{ij}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}A_{ij}}c_{ia}^{\dagger}c_{ja}-g\sum_{i% }c_{i1}^{\dagger}c_{i2}^{\dagger}c_{i3}c_{i4}+\text{h.c.},italic_H = - ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_i italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_g ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i 4 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + h.c. , (13)

where the repeated flavor index a𝑎aitalic_a in ciacjasuperscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖𝑎subscript𝑐𝑗𝑎c_{ia}^{\dagger}c_{ja}italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT will be implicitly summed over, and “h.c.” represents the Hermitian conjugate terms. In this model, a background U(1)U1\mathrm{U}(1)roman_U ( 1 ) gauge connection Aijsubscript𝐴𝑖𝑗A_{ij}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is introduced between every pair of sites to gauge the global U(1)U1\mathrm{U}(1)roman_U ( 1 ) symmetry of the fermions (acting as ciaeiθciasubscript𝑐𝑖𝑎superscriptei𝜃subscript𝑐𝑖𝑎c_{ia}\to\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\theta}c_{ia}italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → roman_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_i italic_θ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT).

We further specify that the fermions in the system are half-filled, a crucial condition for cancelling the Fermi-surface anomaly [57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73] and enabling an SMG insulating state [26, 27]. To enforce the half-filling condition without fine-tuning the chemical potential, a simple approach is to first assume a bipartite lattice structure (e.g., a square or honeycomb lattice that can be partitioned into A𝐴Aitalic_A and B𝐵Bitalic_B sublattices), and then impose an anti-unitary sublattice particle-hole symmetry 2𝒮superscriptsubscript2𝒮\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{\mathcal{S}}blackboard_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT caligraphic_S end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (also known as the chiral symmetry [74, 75]), under which cia𝒦()iciasubscript𝑐𝑖𝑎𝒦superscript𝑖superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖𝑎c_{ia}\to\mathcal{K}(-)^{i}c_{ia}^{\dagger}italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → caligraphic_K ( - ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, with an alternating sign ()i=±1superscript𝑖plus-or-minus1(-)^{i}=\pm 1( - ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ± 1 for the site i𝑖iitalic_i in A𝐴Aitalic_A and B𝐵Bitalic_B sublattices respectively. Here 𝒦𝒦\mathcal{K}caligraphic_K represents the complex conjugation operator that 𝒦2=1superscript𝒦21\mathcal{K}^{2}=1caligraphic_K start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 1 and 𝒦i𝒦=i𝒦i𝒦i\mathcal{K}\mathrm{i}\mathcal{K}=-\mathrm{i}caligraphic_K roman_i caligraphic_K = - roman_i.

Let us first turn off the background gauge field by setting Aij=0subscript𝐴𝑖𝑗0A_{ij}=0italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0. In the free fermion limit (g=0𝑔0g=0italic_g = 0), the Hamiltonian H𝐻Hitalic_H describes a fermion hop** model on a bipartite lattice with a chiral symmetry 2𝒮superscriptsubscript2𝒮\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{\mathcal{S}}blackboard_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT caligraphic_S end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. In the momentum space, the 2𝒮superscriptsubscript2𝒮\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{\mathcal{S}}blackboard_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT caligraphic_S end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT symmetry transforms the fermions as c𝒌a𝒦σ3c𝒌asubscript𝑐𝒌𝑎𝒦superscript𝜎3superscriptsubscript𝑐𝒌𝑎c_{{\bm{k}}a}\to\mathcal{K}\sigma^{3}c_{{\bm{k}}a}^{\dagger}italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → caligraphic_K italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, enforcing the Hamiltonian to take the form H=𝒌c𝒌aξ𝒌σ1c𝒌a𝐻subscript𝒌superscriptsubscript𝑐𝒌𝑎subscript𝜉𝒌superscript𝜎1subscript𝑐𝒌𝑎H=\sum_{{\bm{k}}}c_{{\bm{k}}a}^{\dagger}\xi_{{\bm{k}}}\sigma^{1}c_{{\bm{k}}a}italic_H = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, where σαsuperscript𝜎𝛼\sigma^{\alpha}italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (α=0,1,2,3𝛼0123\alpha=0,1,2,3italic_α = 0 , 1 , 2 , 3) denote the Pauli matrices acting within the sublattice Hilbert space. The specific details of the band dispersion ξ𝒌subscript𝜉𝒌\xi_{{\bm{k}}}italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are not crucial to our discussion. Without fine-tuning the band structure, ξ𝒌subscript𝜉𝒌\xi_{\bm{k}}italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT typically exhibits a Fermi surface, rendering the fermion system as a gapless Fermi liquid in general.

Conversely, in the strong interaction limit (g𝑔g\to\inftyitalic_g → ∞), the hop** term tijsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗t_{ij}italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can be omitted relative to g𝑔gitalic_g, and the model is decoupled to individual sites, permitting an independent solution for each site. In this limit, the exact many-body ground state of H𝐻Hitalic_H is a product state:

|ΨSMG=i12(ci1ci2ci3ci4)|0,ketsubscriptΨSMGsubscriptproduct𝑖12superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖1superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖2superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖3superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖4ket0|\Psi_{\text{SMG}}\rangle=\prod_{i}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(c_{i1}^{\dagger}c_{i2}^{% \dagger}-c_{i3}^{\dagger}c_{i4}^{\dagger})|0\rangle,| roman_Ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ = ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 2 end_ARG end_ARG ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i 4 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) | 0 ⟩ , (14)

where |0ket0|0\rangle| 0 ⟩ represents the vacuum state of the fermions. This solution arises because the four-fermion interaction g𝑔gitalic_g directly hybridizes the two-fermion states ci1ci2|0superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖1superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖2ket0c_{i1}^{\dagger}c_{i2}^{\dagger}|0\rangleitalic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | 0 ⟩ and ci3ci4|0superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖3superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖4ket0c_{i3}^{\dagger}c_{i4}^{\dagger}|0\rangleitalic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i 4 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | 0 ⟩ on each site, thereby lowering the energy of the particular superposition state of them in Eq. (14). The resulting product state |ΨSMGketsubscriptΨSMG|\Psi_{\text{SMG}}\rangle| roman_Ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ maintains the full symmetry of the Hamiltonian H𝐻Hitalic_H and exhibits a gap of order g𝑔gitalic_g to all excitations, therefore realizing an SMG insulator (in its ideal limit). It is noteworthy that the fermions are automatically half-filled on every site, which is precisely why we emphasize the half-filling condition from the outset. Otherwise, we would have to violate the fermion number conservation when driving the system into the SMG insulating state as we increase the interaction strength g𝑔gitalic_g.

Ideal SMG Limit. — As long as at half-filling, regardless of the band structure of ξ𝒌subscript𝜉𝒌\xi_{{\bm{k}}}italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, strong enough interaction g𝑔gitalic_g in this model will always drive the fermion system into the SMG insulating phase. Understanding how the SMG transition happens, as a metal-insulator transition, is a fascinating yet challenging problem. However, this inquiry is beyond the scope of our current analysis. Instead, our focus will be on the strongly interacting regime where gtijmuch-greater-than𝑔subscript𝑡𝑖𝑗g\gg t_{ij}italic_g ≫ italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and we aim to study the current correlation in the SMG insulating phase.

First, to properly define the current operator in the lattice model Eq. (13), we start by introducing the background gauge field Aijsubscript𝐴𝑖𝑗A_{ij}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, differentiating H𝐻Hitalic_H with respect to Aijsubscript𝐴𝑖𝑗A_{ij}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and subsequently taking the limit of Aij0subscript𝐴𝑖𝑗0A_{ij}\to 0italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → 0,

Jij=δHδAij=(itijciacja+h.c.).subscript𝐽𝑖𝑗𝛿𝐻𝛿subscript𝐴𝑖𝑗isubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖𝑎subscript𝑐𝑗𝑎h.c.J_{ij}=\frac{\delta H}{\delta A_{ij}}=-(\mathrm{i}t_{ij}c_{ia}^{\dagger}c_{ja}% +\text{h.c.}).italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_δ italic_H end_ARG start_ARG italic_δ italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG = - ( roman_i italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + h.c. ) . (15)

This current operator Jijsubscript𝐽𝑖𝑗J_{ij}italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, well-defined on the lattice, has a bounded spectrum and does not suffer from the previous problem of unbounded current in the effective action approach. We can observe that the on-site interaction g𝑔gitalic_g has no influence on the definition of the current operator in Eq. (15), as the interaction term was not modified by the U(1)U1\mathrm{U}(1)roman_U ( 1 ) background field Aijsubscript𝐴𝑖𝑗A_{ij}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the Hamiltonian Eq. (13) to begin with. The lattice current operator Jijsubscript𝐽𝑖𝑗J_{ij}italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is entirely determined by the hop** term. Therefore, in momentum space, the current operator 𝑱=𝒌c𝒌a𝒌ξ𝒌σ1c𝒌a𝑱subscript𝒌superscriptsubscript𝑐𝒌𝑎subscript𝒌subscript𝜉𝒌superscript𝜎1subscript𝑐𝒌𝑎{\bm{J}}=\sum_{\bm{k}}c_{{\bm{k}}a}^{\dagger}\partial_{\bm{k}}\xi_{\bm{k}}% \sigma^{1}c_{{\bm{k}}a}bold_italic_J = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can also be expressed as solely dependent on the band dispersion ξ𝒌subscript𝜉𝒌\xi_{\bm{k}}italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, the same as in the free fermion limit.

Then, we can compute the current-current correlation on the lattice as Π(t)=i[Jij(t),Jkl(0)]Θ(t)Π𝑡idelimited-⟨⟩subscript𝐽𝑖𝑗𝑡subscript𝐽𝑘𝑙0Θ𝑡\Pi(t)=-\mathrm{i}\langle[J_{ij}(t),J_{kl}(0)]\rangle\Theta(t)roman_Π ( italic_t ) = - roman_i ⟨ [ italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) ] ⟩ roman_Θ ( italic_t ), where Jij(t)=eiHtJijeiHtsubscript𝐽𝑖𝑗𝑡superscriptei𝐻𝑡subscript𝐽𝑖𝑗superscriptei𝐻𝑡J_{ij}(t)=\mathrm{e}^{-\mathrm{i}Ht}J_{ij}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}Ht}italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = roman_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - roman_i italic_H italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_i italic_H italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Evaluating the operator expectation values on the ideal ground state |ΨSMGketsubscriptΨSMG|\Psi_{\text{SMG}}\rangle| roman_Ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ in Eq. (14) of SMG insulator in the gtijmuch-greater-than𝑔subscript𝑡𝑖𝑗g\gg t_{ij}italic_g ≫ italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT limit, we find Π(t)=4|tij|2sin(2gt)Θ(t)δilδjkΠ𝑡4superscriptsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗22𝑔𝑡Θ𝑡subscript𝛿𝑖𝑙subscript𝛿𝑗𝑘\Pi(t)=4|t_{ij}|^{2}\sin(2gt)\Theta(t)\delta_{il}\delta_{jk}roman_Π ( italic_t ) = 4 | italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_sin ( 2 italic_g italic_t ) roman_Θ ( italic_t ) italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Fourier transform to the frequency domain and averaging over all sites, the optical conductivity Reσ(ω)=1ωImΠ(ω)Re𝜎𝜔1𝜔ImΠ𝜔\operatorname{Re}\sigma(\omega)=-\frac{1}{\omega}\operatorname{Im}\Pi(\omega)roman_Re italic_σ ( italic_ω ) = - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_ω end_ARG roman_Im roman_Π ( italic_ω ) reads

Reσ(ω)=2π|t|22g(δ(ω2g)+δ(ω+2g)),Re𝜎𝜔2𝜋superscript𝑡22𝑔𝛿𝜔2𝑔𝛿𝜔2𝑔\operatorname{Re}\sigma(\omega)=\frac{2\pi|t|^{2}}{2g}\big{(}\delta(\omega-2g)% +\delta(\omega+2g)\big{)},roman_Re italic_σ ( italic_ω ) = divide start_ARG 2 italic_π | italic_t | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_g end_ARG ( italic_δ ( italic_ω - 2 italic_g ) + italic_δ ( italic_ω + 2 italic_g ) ) , (16)

where |t|2:=j|tij|2assignsuperscript𝑡2subscript𝑗superscriptsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗2|t|^{2}:=\sum_{j}|t_{ij}|^{2}| italic_t | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT characterizes the overall hop** strength. This result illustrates the expected reasonable behavior of the conductivity in an ideal SMG insulator: Reσ(ω)Re𝜎𝜔\operatorname{Re}\sigma(\omega)roman_Re italic_σ ( italic_ω ) should vanish at low frequencies |ω|<2g𝜔2𝑔|\omega|<2g| italic_ω | < 2 italic_g within the charge gap 2g2𝑔2g2 italic_g. The presence of sharp peaks at ω=±2g𝜔plus-or-minus2𝑔\omega=\pm 2gitalic_ω = ± 2 italic_g is attributed to the fact that all excitations exhibit flat dispersion in the ideal SMG state, as the system decouples among independent sites. Deviating from this ideal limit, for a finite tij/gsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑔t_{ij}/gitalic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_g, we should anticipate the peaks to broaden into continua above the charge gap.

Beyond Ideal Limit. — To elucidate the general behavior of optical conductivity in the SMG insulator beyond the strong interaction limit, we engage a perturbative expansion in tij/gsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑔t_{ij}/gitalic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_g around the ideal state |ΨSMGketsubscriptΨSMG|\Psi_{\text{SMG}}\rangle| roman_Ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ and calculate the correlation functions in the perturbed state. The perturbation theory has been thoroughly analyzed in Ref. 46. The results indicate that the fermion Green’s function in the SMG insulator of a 2𝒮superscriptsubscript2𝒮\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{\mathcal{S}}blackboard_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT caligraphic_S end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT-symmetric two-band system can be approximated by:

GSMG(k)=ωσ0+ξ𝒌σ1ω2ξ𝒌2Δ2,subscript𝐺SMG𝑘𝜔superscript𝜎0subscript𝜉𝒌superscript𝜎1superscript𝜔2superscriptsubscript𝜉𝒌2superscriptΔ2G_{\text{SMG}}(k)=\frac{\omega\sigma^{0}+\xi_{\bm{k}}\sigma^{1}}{\omega^{2}-% \xi_{\bm{k}}^{2}-\Delta^{2}},italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k ) = divide start_ARG italic_ω italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_ω start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - roman_Δ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (17)

where Δgsimilar-toΔ𝑔\Delta\sim groman_Δ ∼ italic_g represents the single-particle gap (i.e., the fermion mass) renormalized from its bare value g𝑔gitalic_g set by the interaction strength. It is worth emphasizing that the gap ΔΔ\Deltaroman_Δ here is not a symmetry-breaking order parameter and has no mean-field interpretation. Notably, GSMG(k)subscript𝐺SMG𝑘G_{\text{SMG}}(k)italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k ) exhibits zeros along ω=±ξ𝒌𝜔plus-or-minussubscript𝜉𝒌\omega=\pm\xi_{{\bm{k}}}italic_ω = ± italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, a distinguishing feature of SMG insulators. By contrast, in systems where the gap opens due to spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSB), the fermion Green’s function would take the following form:

GSSB(k)=ωσ0+ξ𝒌σ1+Δσ3ω2ξ𝒌2Δ2,subscript𝐺SSB𝑘𝜔superscript𝜎0subscript𝜉𝒌superscript𝜎1Δsuperscript𝜎3superscript𝜔2superscriptsubscript𝜉𝒌2superscriptΔ2G_{\text{SSB}}(k)=\frac{\omega\sigma^{0}+\xi_{\bm{k}}\sigma^{1}+\Delta\sigma^{% 3}}{\omega^{2}-\xi_{\bm{k}}^{2}-\Delta^{2}},italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SSB end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k ) = divide start_ARG italic_ω italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + roman_Δ italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_ω start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - roman_Δ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (18)

where the extra term Δσ3Δsuperscript𝜎3\Delta\sigma^{3}roman_Δ italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT on the numerator breaks the 2𝒮superscriptsubscript2𝒮\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{\mathcal{S}}blackboard_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT caligraphic_S end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT symmetry, which is particularly absent in GSMGsubscript𝐺SMGG_{\text{SMG}}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

In any scenario, the charge Π00superscriptΠ00\Pi^{00}roman_Π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 00 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and current ΠijsuperscriptΠ𝑖𝑗\Pi^{ij}roman_Π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT correlation functions can be characterized by the following equations:

Π00(q)=Tr(G(k+q)G(k)),Πij(q)=Tr(viG(k+q)vjG(k)).formulae-sequencesuperscriptΠ00𝑞Tr𝐺𝑘𝑞𝐺𝑘superscriptΠ𝑖𝑗𝑞Trsubscript𝑣𝑖𝐺𝑘𝑞subscript𝑣𝑗𝐺𝑘\begin{split}\Pi^{00}(q)&=\operatorname{Tr}(G(k+q)G(k)),\\ \Pi^{ij}(q)&=\operatorname{Tr}(v_{i}G(k+q)v_{j}G(k)).\end{split}start_ROW start_CELL roman_Π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 00 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_q ) end_CELL start_CELL = roman_Tr ( italic_G ( italic_k + italic_q ) italic_G ( italic_k ) ) , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL roman_Π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_q ) end_CELL start_CELL = roman_Tr ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_G ( italic_k + italic_q ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_G ( italic_k ) ) . end_CELL end_ROW (19)

In these expressions, the charge vertex operator is always σ0superscript𝜎0\sigma^{0}italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and the current vertex operator is 𝒗=𝒌ξ𝒌σ1𝒗subscript𝒌subscript𝜉𝒌superscript𝜎1{\bm{v}}=\partial_{{\bm{k}}}\xi_{{\bm{k}}}\sigma^{1}bold_italic_v = ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. These vertex operators align with the lattice current operators derived in Eq. (15), ensuring a bounded operator spectrum.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: The dynamic charge susceptibility χ′′(ν,𝒒)superscript𝜒′′𝜈𝒒\chi^{\prime\prime}(\nu,{\bm{q}})italic_χ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ν , bold_italic_q ) (imaginary part) and optical conductivity σ(ν,𝒒)𝜎𝜈𝒒\sigma(\nu,{\bm{q}})italic_σ ( italic_ν , bold_italic_q ) as a function of frequency ν𝜈\nuitalic_ν along a cut through Γ(0,0)Γ00\Gamma(0,0)roman_Γ ( 0 , 0 ), X(π,0)𝜋0(\pi,0)( italic_π , 0 ), M(π,π)𝜋𝜋(\pi,\pi)( italic_π , italic_π ) points in the momentum space, for 2D square lattice fermions in the Fermi liquid (FL), spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSB), and symmetric mass generation (SMG) phases respectively.

For example, consider a square lattice fermion model characterized by the dispersion relation ξ𝒌=2t(coskx+cosky)subscript𝜉𝒌2𝑡subscript𝑘𝑥subscript𝑘𝑦\xi_{\bm{k}}=-2t(\cos k_{x}+\cos k_{y})italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 2 italic_t ( roman_cos italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + roman_cos italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) given the hop** parameter t𝑡titalic_t (set as the energy unit). We can numerically evaluate the spectral weight of the dynamic charge susceptibility χ′′(ν,𝒒)=2ImΠ00(ν+i0+,𝒒)superscript𝜒′′𝜈𝒒2ImsuperscriptΠ00𝜈subscripti0𝒒\chi^{\prime\prime}(\nu,{\bm{q}})=-2\operatorname{Im}\Pi^{00}(\nu+\mathrm{i}0_% {+},{\bm{q}})italic_χ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ν , bold_italic_q ) = - 2 roman_Im roman_Π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 00 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ν + i0 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , bold_italic_q ) and the optical conductivity σ(ν,𝒒)=1νImΠii(ν+i0+,𝒒)𝜎𝜈𝒒1𝜈ImsuperscriptΠ𝑖𝑖𝜈subscripti0𝒒\sigma(\nu,{\bm{q}})=-\frac{1}{\nu}\operatorname{Im}\Pi^{ii}(\nu+\mathrm{i}0_{% +},{\bm{q}})italic_σ ( italic_ν , bold_italic_q ) = - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_ν end_ARG roman_Im roman_Π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ν + i0 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , bold_italic_q ) as outlined in Eq. (19). Plugging in the fermion Green’s function in different phases: GFL(k)=(ωσ0ξ𝒌σ1)1subscript𝐺FL𝑘superscript𝜔superscript𝜎0subscript𝜉𝒌superscript𝜎11G_{\text{FL}}(k)=(\omega\sigma^{0}-\xi_{\bm{k}}\sigma^{1})^{-1}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT FL end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k ) = ( italic_ω italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, GSSB(k)subscript𝐺SSB𝑘G_{\text{SSB}}(k)italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SSB end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k ) in Eq. (18), and GSMG(k)subscript𝐺SMG𝑘G_{\text{SMG}}(k)italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT SMG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k ) in Eq. (17) (assuming Δ=tΔ𝑡\Delta=troman_Δ = italic_t in the SSB and SMG cases), their resulting electromagnetic response functions are compared in Fig. 1. Much like that in the SSB insulator, the SMG insulator’s electromagnetic response is gapped, displaying only subtle differences in detail. Contrarily, it does not resemble the gapless response typical of a Fermi liquid.

This analysis can be extended to SMG in non-chiral Dirac/Weyl fermions, where on-site local gap** interactions generally exist, ensuring that the current operator remains unaffected by interactions. This is a crucial element for our argument concerning the lattice regularization of the current operator. However, for chiral fermions, such as in the 3-4-5-0 model [76, 19, 24, 77], where the SMG interaction is not on-site, regularizing the current operator is an open problem for future research. Thus, while the paradox regarding how the SMG insulator can exhibit finite optical conductivity despite its gap is effectively resolved for non-chiral fermions, further work is needed for chiral systems. This resolution hinges on a nuanced understanding of the current operator in the SMG phase using lattice regularization. These insights reinforce the SMG state’s insulating nature while clarifying its distinctive low-energy electromagnetic properties, laying a theoretical foundation for future experimental exploration of featureless Mott insulators.

Acknowledgements.
We acknowledge the discussions with Simon Catterall, Cenke Xu, Srimoyee Sen, David Tong, Yigal Shamir, Maarten Golterman, and Lei Su. We thank Lei Su for sharing their related upcoming work [78] with us. MZ, DCL, and YZY are supported by a startup fund by UCSD and the National Science Foundation (NSF) Grant No. DMR-2238360. FX is supported by the Zhenggang Scholarship Program at Nan**g University. This research was supported in part by grant NSF PHY-2309135 to the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics (KITP), through the KITP Program “Correlated Gapless Quantum Matter” (2024). We acknowledge the OpenAI GPT4 for providing language and editing suggestions throughout the process of writing this paper.

References