# How many kinds of topological degeneracy are there?

+ 3 like - 0 dislike
791 views

Here I want to summarize the various kinds of topological ground-state degeneracy in condensed matter physics and want to know whether there exists any other kind of topological degeneracy. For convenience, let's consider a 2D lattice system with $N$ lattice sites, and we may consider the finite system with open boundary condition(OBC) or periodic boundary condition(PBC). Now there are two kinds of topological degeneracy:

(1)The topological degeneracy is approximate for finite $N$ no matter with OBC or PBC, and it becomes exact degenerate only under the thermodynamic limit($N\rightarrow \infty$). Example: FQHE.

(2)The topological degeneracy(>1) is exact for any finite $N$ with PBC(on a torus), and it's nondegenerate for any finite $N$ with OBC. Example: Kitaev's toric code model.

Is there any other kind(in the above sense) of topological degeneracy?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 08:40 (UCT), posted by SE-user K-boy
asked Nov 19, 2013

+ 6 like - 0 dislike

Topological degeneracy is only defined in the thermodynamic limit on a closed manifold. The ground state degeneracy of a finite-sized system or on an open manifold is not "topological", and can not be called topological degeneracy.

Considering your examples. (1) The ground state degeneracy is ill-defined with open boundary condition. Because there might be gapless edge modes on the boundary (which is indeed the case for FQHE), such that low-energy states form a continuum and the "ground state" can not be separate out. (2) The exact degeneracy for toric code model on a finite-sized system is not robust against local perturbation, and therefore not topological. Adding an $h \sigma_x$ term to the toric code Hamiltonian is enough to lift the degeneracy for finite-sized system. It is only because that the toric code model is fine-tuned to an ideal point that the degeneracy happens to be exact. In reality, finite-sized system is not topologically robust, so it makes no sense to classify the degeneracy for a finite-sized system.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 08:40 (UCT), posted by SE-user Everett You
answered Nov 20, 2013 by (785 points)
@ Everett You Thank you for clarifying my misunderstanding of topological degeneracy.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 08:40 (UCT), posted by SE-user K-boy

 Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead. To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL. Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post. This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button. Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview Your name to display (optional): Email me at this address if my answer is selected or commented on: Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications. Anti-spam verification: If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:p$\hbar$ysicsOve$\varnothing$flowThen drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds). To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.