Reply to Comment on Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 176601 (2021) by Lee and Yang

Peng-Lu Zhao,Xiao-Bin Qiang,Hai-Zhou Lu,X. C. Xie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.219702

2023-05-25

Abstract:In this Reply, we respond to the comments in Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 219702 (2023) on our Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 176601 (2021) ''Coulomb instabilities of a three-Dimensional higher-order topological insulator". We show the surface gap given in Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 219701 (2023) is different from the expression derived by using the well-accepted approach and becomes divergent and singular at lower energies, thus is not suitable for depicting the phase transition from the 2nd-order to 1st-order topological insulator. We further show that a correct surface gap can describe the phase transition if the RG scheme treats the bulk gap as starting point. We justify our criteria in Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 176601 (2021) for both the transitions from 2nd-order topological insulator to 1st-order topological insulator and normal insulator.

Mesoscale and Nanoscale Physics,Strongly Correlated Electrons

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The paper primarily responds to the comments made by Lee and Yang in "Physical Review Letters" (Phys. Rev. Lett.) on the author's previously published article "Coulomb instabilities of a three-dimensional higher-order topological insulator." The core of the paper is to verify and refute the new criteria proposed in the comments and further demonstrate that the surface gap is insufficient to describe the phase transition from a second-order topological insulator to a first-order topological insulator.

Specifically, the paper addresses the following issues:
1. **Correct expression of the surface gap**: The surface gap formula \( m_{\text{surf}} = \frac{mD}{B} \) proposed in the comments becomes divergent and singular at low energy scales, making it unsuitable for describing the phase transition. The authors recalculated and obtained the correct surface gap formula \( m'_{\text{surf}} = \frac{mD}{\sqrt{D^2 + B^2}} \), pointing out that the latter is more suitable for describing the phase transition.
2. **Criteria for phase transition**: The paper further demonstrates that using the Renormalization Group (RG) scheme to treat the bulk gap as a starting point can better describe the phase transition process. In the low-energy limit, the surface gap vanishes rather than changes sign, thus validating the criteria they previously proposed.
3. **Changes in topological properties**: Even if \( B \) flows to zero, it does not affect the topological properties of a first-order topological insulator. This is because the topological properties are jointly determined by the different behaviors of \( m \) and \( B \), and the change in \( B \) does not alter the topological characteristics.

In summary, the paper aims to verify and clarify the expression of the surface gap and its applicability in previous research, and through detailed theoretical analysis, it proves that the criteria they previously proposed are more reasonable.