Floquet non-Abelian topological insulator and multifold bulk-edge correspondence

Topological phases characterized by non-Abelian charges are beyond the scope of the paradigmatic tenfold way and have gained increasing attention recently. Here we investigate topological insulators with multiple tangled gaps in Floquet settings and identify uncharted Floquet non-Abelian topological insulators without any static or Abelian analog. We demonstrate that the bulk-edge correspondence is multifold and follows the multiplication rule of the quaternion group Q8. The same quaternion charge corresponds to several distinct edge-state configurations that are fully determined by phase-band singularities of the time evolution. In the anomalous non-Abelian phase, edge states appear in all bandgaps despite trivial quaternion charge. Furthermore, we uncover an exotic swap effect—the emergence of interface modes with swapped driving, which is a signature of the non-Abelian dynamics and absent in Floquet Abelian systems. Our work, for the first time, presents Floquet topological insulators characterized by non-Abelian charges and opens up exciting possibilities for exploring the rich and uncharted territory of non-equilibrium topological phases.

Floquet engineering provides a powerful knob in manipulating band structures [32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41], offering unprecedented control over the topological properties of materials and the exploration of non-equilibrium phenomena.With a time-periodic Hamiltonian H(t) = H(t + T ) (T is the driving period), the stroboscopic dynamics is dictated by an effective Floquet Hamiltonian.Notably, Floquet systems exhibit intriguing topological features with no static analog arising from the replicas of quasienergy bands, such as the emergence of anomalous chiral edge modes [42][43][44][45] despite the triviality of all bulk bands.Incorporating the multi-gap scenario, this paper aims to address three fundamental questions regarding Floquet multi-gap topology.(i ) Does a Floquet topological insulating phase characterized by non-Abelian charge exist, and if so, how can it be implemented through periodic * hhu@iphy.ac.cn driving?(ii ) What novel bulk-edge correspondence does such a non-Abelian phase possess, and how can it be described?(iii ) Are there any unique topological or dynamical phenomena associated with this phase?
Here we answer these questions affirmatively.Firstly, we propose the realization of the simplest Floquet non-Abelian topological insulator (FNATI) in a 1D threeband system with PT symmetry.Secondly, the FNATI is characterized by a quaternion charge, which, on its own, cannot predict the existence or the number of edge states.Moreover, each quaternion charge corresponds to multiple edge-state configurations, demonstrating a multifold bulk-edge correspondence that obeys the multiplication rule of the quaternion group.The full topology or edgestate configuration is completely captured by the phaseband singularities of the time-evolution operator over one driving period.Intriguingly, we identify an anomalous FNATI hosting edge modes inside all bandgaps with a trivial bulk quaternion charge.Thirdly, we reveal the emergence of interface modes with swapped driving sequences as a genuine non-Abelian effect.It indicates the non-commutative nature of the FNATI.This is in sharp contrast to Floquet Abelian topological insulators, where such interface modes are absent due to the same spectral structures regardless of the choice of time frame.We emphasize that the intriguing properties of FNATI stem from the presence of multiple tangled bandgaps.Our findings expand the scope of Floquet topological insulators into the non-Abelian regime and open up new avenues for investigating the vast and unexplored territory of non-equilibrium topological phases.

Results
Multi-gap topology and driving protocol.Let us recap the static three-band topological insulator characterized by the quaternion charge Q 8 [8].In the presence of PT symmetry, the Hamiltonian becomes real-valued in momentum space H(k) = H * (k) when expressed on a suitable basis.Consequently, the eigenstates represent three real vectors that are orthonormal to each other and arXiv:2310.08819v1[cond-mat.mes-hall]13 Oct 2023 span a coordinate frame, as sketched in Fig. 1a.When simultaneously considering both bandgaps, the configuration space of the Hamiltonian is O(1) 3 , where O(N ) denotes the orthogonal group of N dimension.The O(1) = Z 2 factor comes from the gauge freedom (±1) for each real eigenstate.With the variation of momentum k from −π to π, the eigenstate frame rotates on the unit sphere.The mapping from the 1D Brillouin zone k ∈ [−π, π] = S 1 to M 3 is governed by the fundamental group of M 3 , which describes the frame rotation.This fundamental group is given by the quaternion group π 1 (M 3 ) = Q 8 [8].As a non-Abelian group, Q 8 has eight elements and five conjugacy classes {1, ±i, ±j, ±k, −1} with multiplication rule The quaternion charge captures the multi-gap band topology and governs the number of edge states in both bandgaps [16].The trivial phase with charge q = 1 has no edge states under open boundaries.
We consider a 1D lattice with three sites, denoted as A, B, C per unit cell.Our Floquet driving is based on two ingredients, namely H 1 and H 2 as depicted in Fig. 1b.H 1 (H 2 ) contains only intracell (intercell) couplings and respects PT symmetry, Here c † X,n and c X,n represent the creation and annihilation operators at site X (X = A, B, C) of the n-th unit cell, respectively.The lattice length is L. The coupling parameters s XY and v XY used in this paper are listed in the Methods.Without loss of generality, the driving period is set as T = 1.We adopt a symmetric driving protocol: The dynamics of the system is governed by the time evolution operator U (t) = T e −i t 0 H(τ )dτ , where T means time ordering.The stroboscopic evolution of the system is described by the Floquet operator, ( The effective Floquet Hamiltonian H F is defined through Unlike the static three-band model with two bandgaps, the Floquet system exhibits an additional bandgap that spans across the FBZ boundary at ±π/T [See Fig. 1c], which arises from the replica of Floquet spectra.As a consequence, the multi-gap topology is greatly enriched in Floquet settings.The closing and reopening of this bandgap lead to the emergence of extra edge modes under open boundary conditions.For ease of reference, we denote the band from bottom to top as the first, second, and third bands, respectively, while bearing in mind their replicated nature.The gap between them is then labeled as the first, second, and third bandgap.In Figs.1d, e, we present the quasienergy spectra and their spatial profiles (of their associated eigenstates) with open boundaries.In both cases, the bulk Floquet Hamiltonian carries a quaternion charge of q = j.In Fig. 1d, we observe one edge mode (for each end of the lattice) at the first and second bandgaps, respectively, which is similar to the static case [16].While in Fig. 1e, there is only a single edge mode within the third bandgap.Similar scenarios apply to other cases as well.For instance, for charge i, edge states can exist in both the first and third bandgaps or solely in the second gap.Likewise, for charge k, the edge state may exist in both the second and third bandgaps or only in the first gap.Anomalous FNATI.Owning to the additional bandgap at the FBZ edge, the periodically driven system can exhibit an intriguing phase with protected edge modes even when the bulk quaternion invariant is trivial.This is in stark contrast with the static systems [16], wherein the charge q = 1 system does not possess any nontrivial edge states.Note that a similar anomaly also happens on 2D driven lattice with protected chiral edge states despite the triviality of bulk Chern bands [42].We thus dub this phase anomalous FNATI.In Fig. 2a, we plot the quasienergies and the spatial profiles of their associated eigenstates for this anomalous phase.We can clearly observe the existence of edge states (one for each end of the lattice) in all three bandgaps.
In the anomalous phase, the bulk invariant of the Floquet Hamiltonian, regardless of whether it is the quaternion charge or Berry phase of Abelian type introduced for static systems [16], is unable to view the edge-state landscape.In fact, the emergence of edge state has dynamical origin and the complete information of the dynamical topology is encoded in the full-time evolution operator.A unified analysis of the bulk-edge correspondence can be achieved through the introduction of phase band and its associated momentum-time singularities [41,[46][47][48].It should be noted that the time-evolution operator U (t) is not always PT symmetric.To this end, we adopt a PT symmetric operator Ũ (k, t) via a smooth deformation of U (t) [49].Ũ (k, t) preserves the phase-band structure (including its singularities) and satisfies Ũ (k, t) = U (k, t) at t = 0, T .Formally, the operator Ũ (k, t) can be expressed in terms of the spectral decomposition, where e −iϕn(k,t) denotes the eigenvalues of Ũ (k, t) and ϕ n (k, t) ∈ (−π/T, π/T ] forms the phase bands in the 2D momentum-time space.The phase band may touch and reopen with the variation of time, leaving degenerate Dirac points in the bandgaps in the 2D momentum-time space.At t = T , the phase bands become the quasienergy bands.As shown in Fig. 2b, the phase bands touch once in each gap for the anomalous phase.The presence of Dirac singularities in the phase band leads to the emergence of edge states in the corresponding gap.As the three gaps are tangled, each Dirac point can be assigned a quaternion charge through the Wilson loop along an enclosing path nearby [49].The quaternion charge q of the Floquet Hamiltonian H F is related to the quaternion charge of the phase-band singularities via Here m labels the Dirac point, and the multiplication is ordered such that the concatenation of the small enclosing paths coincide with the orientation of momentum integral −π → π.As a distinction, the charge of the Dirac singularity is marked with a tilde.In the anomalous FNATI depicted in Fig. 2b, the three singularities from right to left possess quaternion charge q1 = k, q2 = − ĩ, and q3 = j, respectively Multifold bulk-edge correspondence.The phaseband singularities and their non-Abelian nature offer a straightforward interpretation of the bulk-edge correspondence in FNATI.As indicated by Eq. ( 4), various patterns of edge states may corresponds to the same quaternion charge of the Floquet Hamiltonian.Such multifold bulk-edge correspondence follows the multiplication rule of the quaternion group Q 8 .For example, in Figs.1d,e, the two phases with the same quaternion charge q = j have distinct edge-state patterns.In their phase bands, there are two Dirac singularities with charge k and ĩ for the former, while there is a single singularity with charge j for the latter.They satisfy the multiplication rule k • ĩ = j.Similar discussions can be applied to other cases.The multifold bulk-edge correspondence can be deduced from two key observations.Firstly, the edge state within each bandgap is determined by the phase-band closings that occur within that bandgap during time evolution.Each gap closing results in a change of the mass term and the emergence of an in-gap mode by Jackiw-Rebbi's argument [50].With multiple bandgaps present, the edge-state patterns are determined by considering the phase-band singularities within each bandgap.Secondly, the phase-band singularities relate to the bulk quaternion charge via Eq.( 4).It then becomes evident that the edge-state pattern is linked to the quaternion charge, and the bulk-edge correspondence showcases a multifold nature that adheres to the multiplication rule.
In Fig. 3, we present a comprehensive list of bandgap closings and their corresponding edge-state patterns (per edge) for all quaternion charges.Notably, we observe similar bandgap closings and edge-state configurations for quaternion charges that belong to the same conjugacy class, such as ±i.This is due to the anti-commutating relations of quaternion charge.For example, the existence of a type j and type k singularity in the phase band (regardless of their ordering) results in two edge states (located at the first and third bandgap).Switching them yields conjugate quaternion charges: In addition to the patterns that appeared in the static case (the fourth column) [16], Floquet systems can exhibit unique edge-state patterns (the fifth column) because of the additional phase-band touchings at the FBZ edge.It should be noted that for a particular gap, multiple touchings can exist [49], such as i = k • ( −k) • ĩ, which has two Dirac points in the first bandgap.However, such cases can be reduced to the simpler cases listed in Fig. 3 by eliminating two Dirac points of the same gap pairwise, resulting in a factor ±1. Furthermore, in the case of charge q = −1, two fickle edge states [16] (with an unspecified bandgap) may appear according to −1 = ĩ2 = j2 = k2 , or three separate edge states may appear according to −1 = ĩ • j • k.We note that the multifold bulk-edge correspondence can be extended directly to the domain-wall problem.For two Floquet systems with charge q L and q R , the patterns of topological domain-wall states between them are dictated by the quotient q L /q R .Different from the static case, the bandgap closings across the domain wall are fully captured by the phase-band singularities, yielding a multifold bulk-domain-wall correspondence [49].Last, our numerical analysis indicates that the edge/domainwall states are robust against small disorders.In the presence of domain-wall decorations, it is possible for additional trivial bound states to emerge.However, the non-trivial domain states, governed by the non-Abelian topology, remain unaffected [49].
Interface modes induced by swapped driving.Besides the multifold bulk-edge correspondence, here we uncover a counter-intuitive phenomenon of FNATI as a manifestation of the Floquet non-Abelian topology.As illustrated in Fig. 4a, we consider a system with two sides featuring swapped (mismatched) driving sequences.Within one full period, the Hamiltonians on the left and right sides are given by H 1 → H 2 → H 1 and H 2 → H 1 → H 2 , respectively.The bulk Floquet operators for these two sides, denoted as U L and U R , are related via a similarity transformation U L = V −1 U R V where V = e −iH2T /4 e −iH1T /4 accounts for the time shift.This shift does not alter the quasienergy spectra irrespective of the boundary conditions.In Floquet Abelian topological phases [39,40], the bulk topological invariant is defined for each individual quasienergy bandgap (or branch-cut).The two subsystems should have the same topological invariant for each bandgap to match with the edge states, and no stable interface modes are expected to exist [49].However, in our non-Abelian system with multiple intertwined gaps, this is not always true.In Fig. 4b, we plot the quasienergy spectra in the presence of an interface of swapped driving using the same parameters as Fig. 2. We can clearly observe a pair of domain-wall states (located near ± π T ) in the third gap.The emergence of the interface modes signifies the noncommutativity of the two driving sequences and it is a genuine non-Abelian effect of the Floquet dynamics.We have also verified the appearance of domain-wall states for other cases with different quaternion charges.
To understand this fascinating effect, we define the bulk eigenstates of U L and U R on two sides as With PT symmetry, they are related by an SO(3) transformation S L = OS R , with O = S L S T R (T denotes transposition).It is important to note that O may alter the quaternion charge.In particular, when O corresponds to the non-identity element in the fundamental group π 1 (SO(3)) = Z 2 , the bulk quaternion charge for the two sides satisfy q L = −q R .In fact, according to the exact sequence of homotopy groups [51]: the kernel of ∂ 1 -mapping is {1, −1} in π 1 ( SO(3) D2 ) = Q 8 .Thus j 1 maps the non-identity element of Z 2 to −1 in Q 8 .For our case, O traces a nontrivial path in SO(3) as the momentum k varies from −π to π [See Fig. 4c].U L has a quaternion charge of q L = 1, while U R has q R = −1, indicating the emergence of domain-wall states.Alternatively, one can scrutinize this effect through the phase-band singularities [49].With time variation, the phase band undergoes crossings with charge k, − ĩ, j and − k, ĩ, − j for U L and U R , respectively.They satisfy Eq. ( 4), Discussion.In summary, our exploration of the FNATI represents a significant advancement in the field of out-of-equilibrium topological phases.We have demonstrated the implementation of FNATI through step-like driving and fully characterized its topological properties via phase-band singularities.Our analysis revealed a multifold bulk-edge correspondence, governed by the multiplication rule of the quaternion group Q 8 .We have identified an anomalous phase that possesses edge modes within all bandgaps despite a trivial bulk, which lacks a static analog.Furthermore, we have uncovered a novel interface effect resulting from swapped driving that serves as a key signature of the non-Abelian topology.
Our findings offer novel insights into Floquet topological phases with multiple intertwined bandgaps.Our results can be extended to higher-band cases, such as a four-band topological insulator characterized by the non-Abelian group Q 16 [17].In higher dimensions, the phase-band singularities may extend to nodal lines, and it would be intriguing to explore their interwinding in momentum-time space and the associated non-Abelian effects.From a wider perspective, the multi-gap topology belongs to the fragile topology and relies on the partition of energy bands [10].A different partition (2 + 1) yields a different flag manifold RP 2 and is relevant for the Floquet Euler phase [14].Other tantalizing extensions include the 3D nodal-line metals [8] characterized by non-Abelian frame charges and non-Hermitian phases with non-Abelian band braidings [52][53][54] by relaxing the PT symmetry to allow for a complex flag manifold.A natural issue is how these non-Abelian features interplay with Floquet driving.Besides the step-like driving utilized for illustration purposes, smooth Floquet driving should also be suitable for implementing FNATI.With the high feasibility of Floquet engineering [32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] and the ability to manipulate tight-binding models in various platforms, such as ultracold atoms [45,[55][56][57][58], photonic or acoustic materials [43,44,59,60], we anticipate that the uncharted FNATI and non-Abelian effect will be observed in near-future experiments.

Methods
Calculation of quaternion charge.The quaternion charge q ∈ Q 8 characterizes the rotations of the eigenstate frame as the momentum k varies from −π to π.In the case of the Dirac singularity in the phase band, the quaternion charge describes the frame rotation along the enclosing path.According to Ref. [8], the generalized Wilson operator can be used to obtain the quaternion charge.Formally, the Wilson loop along a closed path Γ is defined as follows: where (L i ) jk = −ϵ ijk and ϵ ijk is the anti-symmetric tensor.We then lift A all to the spin(3)-valued 1-form [8] by replacing L i with t i , where t i = − i 2 σ i and σ i represents the Pauli matrix.This gives us: Finally, the non-Abelian charge is defined by: The elements of the quaternion group are represented by 1 → σ 0 , i → −iσ x , j → −iσ y , and k → −iσ z .
Coefficients of the tight binding model.The coefficients used in the paper are listed in Table I.In all the cases, we take where r, s, t, u, v and w are all real numbers.

Tables TABLE I.
Coefficients used in the paper.q r s t u v w vAA vBB vCC j [Fig.1d] Furthermore, we have plotted the corresponding quasienergy spectra and spatial distributions of eigenstates under open boundary conditions in Figs.S2c and d.
For the former, we observe the existence of a single edge state in the second gap.For the latter, we observe a pair of edge states for the first and second gap, respectively.Appendix C: Interface effect from the phase-band picture Our numerical analysis shows that there are three Dirac singularities with charges k, − ĩ, and j for Ũ (1) (k, t) and three Dirac singularities with charges − k, ĩ, and − j for Ũ (2) (k, t).According to Eq. (A1), the quaternion charge of the bulk Floquet Hamiltonian is q L = k • (− ĩ) • j = 1, and q R = − k • ĩ • (− j) = −1.Therefore, domain-wall states are expected to emerge at the interface.In this section, we address the domain-wall problem for Floquet non-Abelian topological insulators (FNATIs).As depicted in Fig. S3a, let us denote q L and q R as the bulk quaternion charge of the Floquet Hamiltonian on the left and right side, respectively.In the static case, the appearance of domain-wall states between two topologically distinct phases is governed by the quotient relation ∆q = q L /q R .We demonstrate that in the Floquet setting, the quotient relation still holds.However, due to the additional bandgap across the Floquet Brillouin zone edge, the quotient relation implies a multifold bulk-domain-wall correspondence.For specific values of q L and q R , their quotient ∆q is definite, but the domain-wall states may exhibit different configurations, as summarized in Fig. 3 of the main text.In fact, the edge-state patterns listed in Fig. 3 can be seen as a special case of the domain-wall problem, where the system interfaces with the vacuum.Considering its multifold nature, determining the domain-wall states requires additional information about the phase-band singularities.These singularities are related to the bulk quaternion charge through q L = qL1 qL2 ... and q R = qR1 qR2 ..., respectively.We proceed to demonstrate the quotient relation using three steps.Firstly, between two distinct topological phases, there are bandgap closings at the domain wall, corresponding to the topological phase transition.This holds true for both static and Floquet cases.Importantly, in Floquet systems, two systems being topologically distinct implies different phase-band singularities or edge-state patterns.In Fig. 3 of the main text, for the same quaternion charge, there may be multiple distinct phases due to their different phase-band singularities.
Secondly, the details of the bandgap closings, such as their position and times, are encoded in the quotient relation ∆q = q −1 R q L .(Here q L /q R is treated as q −1 R q L ; the other choice q L q −1 R is also fine as they are conjugate).To visualize this, we remind that the quaternion charge is the first homotopy invariant of the configuration space M 3 = O (3)  O(1) 3 of PT-symmetric Hamiltonians.Geometrically, the quaternion charge can be represented as a closed path in M 3 space, as depicted in Fig. S3b.At the domain wall, the quaternion charge undergoes a change from q R to q L through gap closings.This change is described by an intermediate path (the dotted black loop) denoted as ∆q.In homotopy language, concatenating the two paths q R ∆q, first following q R and then ∆q, yields the path q L : q L = q R ∆q.Thus, we have ∆q = q −1 R q L .In Floquet systems, the quaternion charge on each side is further related to the phase-band singularities through Eq. ( 4) in the main text, as sketched in Fig. S3c.Consequently, we have ∆q = q −1 R q L = (q R1 qR2 ...) −1 (q L1 qL2 ...).Thirdly, the gap closings recorded in the ∆q above give rise to domain-wall states through the Jackiw-Rebbi argument [50]: the number and locations of the gap closings determine the number of edge states in that gap.In other words, whenever there is a gap closing, a domain-wall state appears.By accounting for all gap closings inside ∆q represented by the phase-band singularities, we can determine the patterns of domain-wall states.

a b
FIG. S4.Quasienergy spectra and spatial distributions of the eigenstates in the presence of a domain wall.The bulk quaternion charge for both sides is qL = qR = j.a A domain wall between qL = j (with singularity j) and qR = j (with singularity kĩ ) possesses three domain-wall states (one in each gap), as per ∆q = 1 = ( ĩk ) j. b A domain wall between qL = j (with singularity j) and qR = j (with singularity j) does not possess any domain-wall state.
To compare with the static case and demonstrate the multifold nature of Floquet systems, let us consider a domain wall between two Floquet Hamiltonians of the same charge, q L = q R = j, as shown in Fig. S4.The quotient is ∆q = 1.The domain wall between q L = j (with singularity j) and q R = j (with singularity kĩ ) possesses three domain-wall states as ∆q = ( ĩk ) j [See Fig. S4a].On the other hand, the domain wall between q L = j (with singularity j) and q R = j (with singularity j) possesses no domain-wall state [See Fig. S4b].The two different configurations are consistent with the charge 1 class listed in Fig. 3 of the main text.

Appendix E: Zak phase of the quasienergy band
Besides the quaternion charge, the Zak phase is another topological invariant that is assigned to each quasienergy band.The Zak phase can take two values, 0 or π.To calculate the Zak phase, we diagonalize the Floquet Hamiltonian H F (k) = S(k)diag(ϵ 1 , ϵ 2 , ϵ 3 )S T (k).Here, the eigenvectors are organized in the SO(3) transformation S(k) = (|u 1 ⟩, |u 2 ⟩, |u 3 ⟩).The Zak phase can be extracted from the evolution of these eigenvectors with respect to the lattice momentum k.As k ranges from −π to π, the eigenvector |u j ⟩ (j = 1, 2, 3) may acquire an additional sign in a continuous manner, |u j (k = π)⟩ = −|u j (k = −π)⟩.This corresponds to the Zak phase taking π for the j-th band.Otherwise, the Zak phase takes 0. Formally, one can consider the matrix S(π) T S(−π), which takes the form of diag(λ 1 , λ 2 , λ 3 ).λ j (j = 1, 2, 3) = ±1.The Zak phase of the j-th band is 0 (π) if λ j = 1 (λ j = −1) [17].It should be noted that in the static case [16], the Zak phase also takes other values, such as −π and 2π.They are introduced solely to distinguish between two conjugate elements in the same class.±π are associated with different gauge choices of the eigenstates, and treated as the same here.We list the obtained Zak phases for all quaternion charges below: In the same conjugacy class (e.g., i and −i), the Zak phase pattern is the same.The constraint that the summation of Zak phases for all three bands equals 0 (mod 2π) leads to four possible Zak phase patterns.Since there are five conjugacy classes in the quaternion group Q, the class −1 falls outside the scope of the Zak-phase description.Furthermore, the Zak phase is defined for the Floquet Hamiltonian, while the topology of the system is fully encoded in the time-evolution operator or phase-band singularities.As discussed in the main text, the bulk-edge (or domain-wall) correspondence is multifold.Different patterns of edge states (domain-wall states) can have the same quaternion charge and Zak phase configuration.Therefore, the quaternion charge or the Zak phase is insufficient to predict the edge states, and descriptions based on phase-band singularities are necessary.1.
couplings are set to zero for the interface unit cell, except for the additional next-nearest-neighbor couplings (with strength v = 0.5) in the latter case.We set the left/right side to possess quaternion charges i (with phase-band singularity ĩ) and k (with phase-band singularity k) as an example.For all four types of domain wall, we observe the emergence of domain-wall states in the first and second gaps, as shown in Fig. S6e-h.This is consistent with the quotient relation, ∆q = q −1 R q L = − kĩ .Furthermore, we test the robustness of these domain-wall states against onsite disorder in Fig. S6i-l.Similar to the edge states at the boundary, the domain-wall states survive weak disorder.
It is worth mentioning that the decorations of the domain wall may induce some additional bound states, as illustrated in Fig. S7.We consider a tunable onsite potential with strength p at the interface unit cell: s AA = s BB = s CC = p.In Fig. S7a to d, we take four values of p = 3, 9, 50, 1000 and plot the quasienergy spectra and spatial distributions of the eigenstates.The domain-wall states located in the first and second gaps always exist.However, there also appear some trivial bound states.These bound states have no topological origin.Their quasienergies depend on the added potential and may merge into the bulk bands by adjusting the potential.In contrast, the domain-wall states are robust.They originate from the non-Abelian topology and are described by the quotient relation.1.

FIG. 1 .
FIG. 1. Multi-gap topology in Floquet systems.a Sketch of the frame rotation of eigenstates for topological insulator characterized by quaternion charge.The loci of eigenstate on the unit sphere with varying momentum k from −π to π are marked in red/green/blue for the first/second/third band, respectively.b Building blocks for our Floquet driving.H1 (H2) contains only intracell (intercell) coupling terms.c Labeling of the quasienergy bandgaps.The third gap straddles the FBZ edge at ± π T .d,e Quasienergy spectra and spatial distributions (represented by color shades) of their eigenstates for quaternion charge q = j with open boundaries.In d, the edge states emerge at both the first and second gaps.In e the edge states emerge at the third gap.The lattice length is L = 50.The parameters are listed in Methods.
F T .Due to the symmetric driving, the Floquet Hamiltonian respects PT symmetry, i.e., H F (k) = H * F (k).After the diagonalization: H F |u n ⟩ = ϵ n |u n ⟩ (n is the band index), we obtain the quasienergy ϵ n and eigenstates |u n ⟩.The quasienergies are well-defined modulo 2π/T , and form the quasienergy bands.In the following, we set ϵ n to be in the first Brillouin zone (FBZ) of quasienergy ϵ n ∈ (−π/T, π/T ].

FIG. 2 .
FIG. 2. FNATI with anomalous edge states.a Quasienergy spectra and the spatial distributions of their eigenstates with open boundaries.The bulk quaternion charge is q = 1.The lattice length is L = 50.b Phase bands of Ũ (k, t) in the 2D momentum-time space.The Dirac-point singularities are marked with red dots.The inset: locations of the Dirac points with quaternion charges j, − ĩ, and k in the (k, t)-space.P is the base point for the encircling paths.The quaternion charge of the bulk Floquet Hamiltonian and Dirac points are related via 1 = k • (− ĩ) • j.The parameters are listed in Methods.

1 FIG. 3 .
FIG. 3. Multifold bulk-edge correspondence for FNATI.The first column lists the quaternion charge for the Floquet Hamiltonian, and the five conjugacy classes of Q8 correspond to different rows.The second and third columns sketch the phase band structure with singularities depicted by red dots.The cases with band crossing at the FBZ edge are listed in the third column.The fourth/fifth columns sketches the edgestate patterns corresponding to the phase bands in the second/third column.The black dots represent edge states.Empty circles mark the fickle edge states.The configurations unique to Floquet systems are listed in fifth column.The list applies equally to the domain-wall problem.

FIG. 4 .
FIG. 4. Interface modes with swapped driving as a manifestation of the non-Abelian topology.a The Floquet setting: two subsystems connected by an interface have swapped driving sequences.b Quasienergy spectra and spatial profiles of their eigenstates with open boundaries at the two ends.A pair of domain-wall states emerge at the third bandgap.The lattice length is L = 51, and the interface is located at n = 26.Other parameters are the same as Fig. 2. c Trajectory of the transformation O (blue curve) in the parameter space of SO(3) (represented by a solid ball).As k varies from −π to π, O follows a closed nontrivial loop that connects a pair of antipodal points in SO(3).For comparison, the black curve represents a trivial loop in SO(3).
)Here, [A all (k)] mn = ⟨u m (k)|∂ k |u n (k)⟩ represents the Berry-Wilczek-Zee connection.The band indices m and n take values from 1 to 3, and |u n (k)⟩ is the eigenstate of the Floquet Hamiltonian H F .For the Dirac-point case, we use the phase band instead.A all (k) is anti-symmetric and can be decomposed into the so(3) Lie-algebra basis: FIG. S2.Phase bands with multiple touchings in the same gap.a Phase bands with bulk quaternion charge q = i for the Floquet Hamiltonian.It is related to the charges of the Dirac points through i = − k • k • ĩ. b Phase bands with bulk quaternion charge q = −1 for the Floquet Hamiltonian.It is related to the charges of the Dirac points through −1 = (− ĩ) • k • (− ĩ) • k. c, d Quasienergy spectra and the spatial distributions of eigenstates with open boundaries corresponding to the phase bands in a, b, respectively.The lattice length is L = 50.The parameters are listed in Methods.
Appendix D: Quotient relation in the domain-wall problem

a
Domain-wall states

3 FIG
FIG. S3.Quotient relation of Floquet non-Abelian topological insulators (FNATIs).a Sketch of the domain wall, where the left and right sides correspond to bulk Hamiltonians with quaternion charges qL and qR, respectively.The domain wall is described by the quotient relation ∆q = q −1 R qL. b Geometric visualization of the quaternion charge as a closed path (loop) in the configuration space M3.The black dot is the base point.The change in quaternion charge from qR (blue) to qL (orange) is given by ∆q (dotted black loop), and the concatenated path qR∆q is equivalent to qL. c Relationship between the quaternion charge and the phase-band singularities.
FIG. S5.Stability of edge states in the presence of disorder.a, b Quasienergy spectra for quaternion charges i and k as a function of the boundary coupling strength α.The intercell coupling across the boundary is vXY,N = (1 − α)vXY , where α = 0 and α = 1 correspond to periodic and open boundary conditions, respectively.The in-gap edge modes (red lines) emerge from the neighboring bulk bands.c, d Quasienergy spectra under open boundary condition as a function of the disorder strength W .The edge states are encircled by red ellipses.The parameters used are listed in Table1.
FIG. S6.Stability of domain-wall states against different domain-wall settings and disorder.a-d Domain-wall configurations.The left (right) side has bulk quaternion charge i (k).The black arrows in d indicate the next-nearest-neighbor couplings.e-h Quasienergy spectra and spatial distributions of eigenstates for the four domain-wall settings.i-l Quasienergy spectra as a function of the disorder strength W .The domain-wall states are encircled by red ellipses.The parameters used are listed in Table1.