Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Commuting stabilizers and topological degeneracy

Physical scope

Pure finite-dimensional mathematics for the stated unperturbed Hamiltonian; no empirical realization or perturbation stability claim.

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let K be a finite cellulation of a closed, connected, orientable surface of genus g≥0, with the incidence and Hamiltonian conventions of the toric-code definition. For positive couplings Jv,Kf, the Hamiltonian is positive and frustration free, meaning its positive penalty terms have a common nonzero vector in their kernels. Its ground-space dimension is 22g. Define its spectral gap as the least positive eigenvalue of HK, or +∞ if there is no positive eigenvalue. This gap is at least 2m, where m=min⁡({Jv:v∈V}∪{Kf:f∈F})>0, and in particular is at least m. On a uniform L×L square torus with L≥3 and couplings Jv=J>0, Kf=K>0, the exact gap is 2min⁡(J,K).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite edge-qubit cellulation K of a closed, connected, orientable genus-g surface, positive couplings, and the adopted Axiom of Choice.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: every family of nonempty sets has a choice function (The Axiom of Choice). It is used here only through the surface Euler-characteristic corollary [F2].

[F1]

Toric-code edge spins on closed-surface cellulations: Av=X(∂1Tv) and Bf=Z(∂2f) are self-adjoint involutions, ∂1∂2=0, the primal and dual graphs are connected, and the Hamiltonian is the sum of the corresponding positive penalty terms.

[F2]

Euler characteristic of an orientable compact surface: under [A1], the finite cell count satisfies ∣V∣−∣E∣+∣F∣=2−2g.

Proof

1.1givenF1algebra

Since ∂1∂2=0, the supports of Av and Bf overlap in even parity, so they commute. Each is a self-adjoint involution; hence (I−Av)/2 and (I−Bf)/2 are commuting orthogonal projections. Multiplication by the positive coefficients makes each summand positive semidefinite.

1.2F1algebra

The product of all vertex operators is I, because each edge has two endpoint incidences counted modulo two. The product of all face operators is I, because the closed surface has two incident face sides at each edge. Therefore any simultaneous joint eigenvalue assignment has an even number of violated vertex constraints and an even number of violated face constraints.

1.3F1algebra

The image of ∂1 is the even-parity subspace of F2V: every edge boundary has even parity, while for a fixed vertex v0, a path to each v≠v0 has boundary v+v0, and these vectors span that subspace. Thus rank⁡∂1=∣V∣−1. A vertex coefficient vector lies in ker⁡∂1T exactly when it is orthogonal to this even-parity subspace; this orthogonal complement consists of the constant vectors and has dimension one. Rank-nullity gives rank⁡∂1T=∣V∣−1, the number of independent vertex stabilizers. A face 2-chain is in ker⁡∂2 exactly when its coefficients agree across adjacent faces; dual-graph connectedness makes this kernel the one-dimensional constant subspace, so rank⁡∂2=∣F∣−1, the number of independent face stabilizers. Hence the combined stabilizer group has rank r=∣V∣+∣F∣−2.

2.1F1step 1.1step 1.3algebra

Choose independent generators S1,…,Sr from those commuting involutions and set Π=2−r∏j=1r(I+Sj). This is an orthogonal projection. Independence of the vertex and face support vectors implies that its 2r Pauli terms are distinct and only the all-identity term is the identity matrix. Every other Pauli term has trace zero because at least one tensor factor is X, Z, or XZ, each of which has trace zero. Thus Tr⁡Π=2−r2∣E∣>0, so the common +1 eigenspace is nonzero and has dimension 2∣E∣−r. Each penalty is an orthogonal projection by step 1.1, and for every ψ the quadratic form is ⟨ψ,HKψ⟩=∑v∈VJv∥I−Av2ψ∥2+∑f∈FKf∥I−Bf2ψ∥2. Positivity of every coupling makes this quantity zero exactly when every penalty annihilates ψ, equivalently when every stabilizer has eigenvalue +1. Thus ker⁡HK is the common +1 eigenspace, the Hamiltonian is frustration free, and its ground space has dimension 2∣E∣−r.

2.2givenstep 1.2algebra

Put m=min⁡({Jv}∪{Kf}). The commuting self-adjoint penalty projections have a common orthonormal eigenbasis: diagonalize one projection and restrict the remaining commuting projections to each invariant eigenspace, iterating over the finite family. Thus every eigenvalue of HK occurs on a joint eigenvector. Outside the ground space, such a vector violates at least one constraint; by the two product identities of step 1.2, at least two constraints of that same type are violated. Each contributes at least m, so every excited eigenvalue is at least 2m above the ground energy zero. If the orthogonal complement of the ground space is zero, the stated +∞ convention applies.

3.1A1F2step 2.1algebra

The dimension found in step 2.1 is 2∣E∣−∣V∣−∣F∣+2. By [F2], under [A1], ∣V∣−∣E∣+∣F∣=2−2g, so ∣E∣−∣V∣−∣F∣+2=2g. Therefore the ground-space dimension is 22g.

4.1F1step 2.2construct∎

On the uniform square torus, applying Z on one edge to any ground vector flips exactly the two distinct endpoint vertex eigenvalues and no face eigenvalue, giving an excited vector of energy 2J. Applying X on one edge flips exactly the two adjacent face eigenvalues and no vertex eigenvalue, giving an excited vector of energy 2K. The lower bound of step 2.2 is 2min⁡(J,K), and one of these two constructions attains it. Thus the exact first-excitation cost is 2min⁡(J,K).

Remarks

The gap statement concerns the exact finite commuting-projector Hamiltonian. No perturbation-stability, thermodynamic-limit, or empirical claim is asserted.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources