Configurational-space separation and structure selection in three hard squares

Movie S1: An MCMC transition trajectory connecting the two configuration classes at $\phi=0.59$. Representative frames from this trajectory are shown in Fig. 3(a)–(d) of the main text.

Movie S2: A transition trajectory constructed using the Monte Carlo chain-of-states method at $\phi=0.599$. Representative frames are shown in Fig. 3(f)–(i) of the main text.

Movie S3: A second transition trajectory constructed using the Monte Carlo chain-of-states method at $\phi=0.599$. Representative frames are shown in Fig. 3(k)–(n) of the main text.

Movie S4: An MCMC trajectory at $\phi=0.74$, illustrating the stronger preference for an approximately L-shaped arrangement of the particle centers over the staggered arrangement.

We perform hard-particle simulations and pressure calculations using the hard-particle Monte Carlo module of HOOMD-blue [17, 3]. The system consists of three hard squares of side length $a$ confined in a square box with periodic boundary conditions. For MCMC sampling, one MC step consists of attempting a random translational and rotational move for each particle. At each packing fraction, the translational and rotational step sizes are adjusted to maintain an acceptance rate of approximately 0.3. For the calculation of the radial distribution function $g(r)$ in Fig. 1(b) of the main text, the system is initialized from the class-I configuration shown in Fig. 2(a) of the main text and is uniformly rescaled with the box size to the target packing fraction. We perform $10^{10}$ MC steps and record one configuration every $10^{4}$ steps, yielding $10^{6}$ samples. For uniform insertion sampling, three particles are placed sequentially at random positions and orientations [36, 38]. If a trial particle overlaps with any previously placed particle or its periodic images, the entire configuration is rejected and the procedure is restarted. A configuration is accepted only when all three particles have been placed without overlap. For each packing fraction, this procedure is repeated until $10^{6}$ valid configurations are obtained. Thus, the two sampling protocols generate the same number of configurations at each packing fraction.

We use the HPMC module in HOOMD-blue to calculate the pressure of the hard-particle system [4]. The pressure is evaluated using the volume-perturbation technique [11, 8]. Further details of the pressure calculation can be found in Ref. [41]. For the pressure calculations shown in Fig. 2 of the main text, each MCMC simulation consisted of $5\times 10^{9}$ MC steps, with one configuration sampled every five steps, yielding $10^{9}$ sampled configurations for each pressure data point. The values $\beta P_{1}a^{2}$ and $\beta P_{2}a^{2}$ quoted below were obtained from MCMC simulations initialized from classes I and II, respectively. For uniform insertion sampling, $10^{7}$ statistically independent non-overlapping configurations were generated at each packing fraction and used to evaluate $P_{\mathrm{tot}}$.

For $\phi\gtrsim 0.6$, the MCMC trajectories initialized from classes I and II remain confined to two distinct configurational regions, giving rise to the two pressure branches observed in Fig. 2(c) of the main text. For a hard-particle system, the potential energy is zero for all allowed configurations and infinite for forbidden configurations. The Boltzmann factor is therefore unity within the allowed region of configuration space and zero otherwise. Consequently, the configurational partition function is proportional to the volume of the allowed configuration space. The relative volumes of the two disconnected regions can thus be inferred from the pressures of the two regions and the pressure of the full configuration space.

The pressures of the two disconnected regions associated with classes I and II are

and

The pressure of the full configuration space is

Here $F_{1,2}$ and $Q_{1,2}$ are the free energies and configurational partition functions of the two disconnected regions, respectively, while $F_{\mathrm{tot}}$ and $Q_{\mathrm{tot}}$ are those of the full configuration space. Substituting Eqs. (S1) and (S2) into Eq. (S3), we obtain

Using $Q_{\mathrm{tot}}=Q_{1}+Q_{2}$, the relative weight of region II in the full configuration space is

At $\phi=0.6$, the dimensionless pressures of the two regions are $\beta P_{1}a^{2}=5.936$ and $\beta P_{2}a^{2}=9.577$, while the pressure calculated from the uniform insertion method is $\beta P_{\mathrm{tot}}a^{2}=6.121$. Let $V_{1}$, $V_{2}$, and $V_{\mathrm{tot}}$ denote the corresponding configurational-space volumes. We then obtain

Thus, at this packing fraction, the configuration-space region associated with class II accounts for approximately $5.1\%$ of the total configuration-space volume.

To construct explicit transition paths between the two configuration classes, we introduced an auxiliary chain of configurations in the full configurational space. Each element of the chain, hereafter referred to as an image, represents a complete three-particle configuration,

where $m$ labels the position of the image along the chain and $i$ labels one of the three hard squares within that image. The images are auxiliary variables and do not represent additional particles or interacting physical replicas. Rather, the chain provides a discrete representation of a candidate path in configurational space connecting the two configuration classes.

The endpoint images, $X_{0}$ and $X_{M-1}$, were fixed to representative maximally packed configurations of classes I and II, respectively, and were uniformly rescaled to the packing fraction at which the path was constructed. The initial chain contained $M=400$ images. Because direct interpolation between the endpoints generally produces overlapping intermediate configurations, the internal images were initialized by duplicating the two valid endpoint configurations. Specifically, each endpoint configuration was copied 199 additional times, so that the initial chain contained 200 identical images in each endpoint state, separated by a single interface. All images in the initial chain were therefore overlap-free.

Neighboring images were coupled through the auxiliary harmonic potential

where $d(X_{m},X_{m+1})$ is the distance between two complete configurations, $k_{\rm spr}$ is the spring constant, and $\ell_{0}$ is the target spacing between neighboring images. These springs are purely numerical restraints used to regularize the discretized path and do not represent physical interactions between the hard squares.

The configuration-space metric was defined after removing the trivial symmetries associated with periodic wrapping, global translation, particle relabeling, and the fourfold rotational symmetry of a square. Consider two configurations

in a square periodic box of side length L. For a given particle permutation $\pi\in S_{3}$, we enumerated the periodic unwrapping branches

and defined the corresponding unwrapped displacement of each matched particle pair as

For a fixed permutation and a fixed set of unwrapping branches, the common translation that minimizes the total squared positional mismatch is

The positional contribution to the configuration distance was therefore defined as

where the minimum is taken over all combinations of the periodic unwrapping branches. Equation (S12) removes the global translational degree of freedom, leaving only differences in the relative particle positions.

The orientational mismatch between two matched squares was reduced modulo $\pi/2$,

The total squared distance between configurations $A$ and $B$ was then defined as

This metric is invariant under periodic wrapping, global translation, particle relabeling, and rotations of an individual square by integer multiples of $\pi/2$.

The parameter $w_{\theta}$ sets the relative weighting of positional and orientational differences. We used $w_{\theta}=0.01$ throughout. The orientational term promotes smooth variations of the particle orientations along the chain. Increasing $w_{\theta}$ made the angular increments between neighboring images more uniform at the expense of less uniform positional increments, but did not alter the topology or qualitative geometry of the connecting path in our tests. Thus, although the numerical arclength of the discretized chain depends on the metric convention, the resulting overlap-free transition channel was robust to moderate variations of $w_{\theta}$.

The internal images were relaxed by Metropolis Monte Carlo. In each trial move, an internal image $X_{m}$, with $1\leq m\leq M-2$, and one of its three squares were selected at random. The selected square was translated and rotated according to

while all other particles and images remained unchanged. The two Cartesian components of $\delta\mathbf{r}$ and the angular displacement $\delta\theta$ were drawn independently from symmetric uniform distributions. Their proposal amplitudes were adjusted together to maintain an acceptance rate of approximately $0.3$.

A trial move that produced a hard-particle overlap under periodic boundary conditions was rejected. If the updated image remained overlap-free, only the two spring terms involving $X_{m}$ had to be recalculated. The move was then accepted with probability

where $\Delta U_{\rm spr}$ is the change in the auxiliary spring energy. We used reduced units in which $\beta=(k_{\rm B}T)^{-1}=1$. During a single relaxation schedule, the spring constant was increased monotonically from $10^{4}$ to $10^{13}$ in multiplicative increments of $10^{0.5}$. At each fixed value of $k_{\rm spr}$, we performed $10^{5}$ Monte Carlo sweeps before proceeding to the next value. One sweep consisted of $3(M-2)$ randomly selected single-particle trial moves, where $M$ denotes the current number of images in the chain. Thus, each particle in each internal image was selected once on average per sweep. At small $k_{\rm spr}$, the weak spring bias allowed the internal images to explore the overlap-free configurational space. As $k_{\rm spr}$ was increased, the Metropolis acceptance criterion progressively favored moves that reduced large separations between neighboring images, thereby tightening and smoothing the chain. We initially set $\ell_{0}=0$, so that the spring potential penalized large neighboring-image separations without imposing a finite target spacing. The value of $\ell_{0}$ was kept at zero for $k_{\rm spr}<10^{10}$. For $k_{\rm spr}\geq 10^{10}$, it was gradually increased from $3.0\times 10^{-4}$ to $5.6\times 10^{-4}$ and, at each stage, was chosen to be slightly smaller than the minimum distance between neighboring images. The finite target spacing reduced clustering and fluctuations in the image distribution while preserving the resolution of the discretized path. Moderate variations of $\ell_{0}$ within this range affected the neighboring-image spacings but produced no discernible change in the resulting transition path. The relaxation was terminated after completion of the $k_{\rm spr}=10^{13}$ stage.

During the relaxation, we monitored the neighboring-image distances

Because the two sides of the bottleneck generally have different configurational arclengths, assigning equal numbers of images to the two endpoint basins can produce different mean spacings on the two portions of the chain. To obtain comparable resolution along the full path, images were inserted into the portion with the larger mean spacing and removed from the portion with the smaller mean spacing. A new image was introduced by duplicating a neighboring valid configuration, thereby preserving the hard-particle constraint, whereas redundant internal images were removed from oversampled portions of the path. After each insertion or deletion, the affected neighboring distances and spring-energy terms were recomputed, and the chain was relaxed again. This procedure was repeated until the two sides of the bottleneck had comparable mean image spacings. The endpoint images remained fixed throughout. Using this Monte Carlo chain-of-states procedure, we obtained two distinct, densely discretized, overlap-free paths connecting the two configuration classes through the bottleneck, as shown in Fig. 3(f)–(i) and (k)–(n) of the main text.

Here we provide a geometric interpretation of the configurational-space separation density $\phi_{\rm sep}=0.6$. The argument is motivated by the transition pathways shown in Fig. 3 of the main text. Along all three pathways, the system passes through a narrow bottleneck in which the three squares are nearly parallel and nearly collinear. Near this bottleneck, their rotations are strongly constrained, and the remaining configurational freedom is dominated by sliding along their common edge directions.

Let $a$ be the side length of each square and $L$ the side length of the square periodic box. The packing fraction is

To identify the characteristic box size associated with the bottleneck, we approximate the limiting configuration by three parallel squares that just fit in the periodic box without overlap. The corresponding geometric construction is illustrated in Fig. S1. Let $\mathbf{u}$ and $\mathbf{v}$ be two orthonormal directions parallel to the square edges. For a square periodic box, the two box vectors must have equal length and be orthogonal. If they are constructed from integer steps along $\mathbf{u}$ and $\mathbf{v}$, they can be written as

where $m$ and $n$ are non-negative integers. These vectors satisfy $|\mathbf{p}|=|\mathbf{q}|=a\sqrt{m^{2}+n^{2}}$ and $\mathbf{p}\cdot\mathbf{q}=0$. Hence,

The smallest integer constructions are listed in Table S1. Cases with $n=0$ correspond to axial arrangements in which the square edges are aligned with the box directions. The smaller tilted construction $(m,n)=(1,1)$ cannot accommodate three squares. The smallest physically allowed tilted construction is therefore $(m,n)=(2,1)$, which gives

For the $(m,n)=(2,1)$ geometry, one may choose

The corresponding orientation of the squares relative to the box is

which is the angle indicated in Fig. 3 of the main text.

This construction provides a geometric picture of the connecting channel near the separation density. As $\phi$ approaches $\phi_{\rm sep}$ from below, the channel becomes increasingly narrow, making direct transitions between the two configurational regions progressively more difficult to observe by MCMC. At $\phi=\phi_{\rm sep}$, the tilted bottleneck becomes a marginal, just-fitting configuration: the three squares retain only translational degrees of freedom, corresponding to sliding along their common edge directions, whereas any rotation away from this limiting configuration would produce overlap. This explains why direct transitions between the two configurational regions are unlikely to be observed in MCMC simulations at this density. For $\phi>\phi_{\rm sep}$, or equivalently $L<\sqrt{5}a$, the corresponding nearly parallel tilted arrangement cannot fit in the periodic box without overlap.

We emphasize that this construction does not constitute a rigorous proof that all possible transition pathways are forbidden for $\phi>\phi_{\rm sep}$, which would require exhausting all possible relative orientations, contact geometries, and periodic-image relations. Rather, it provides a geometric explanation of the bottleneck identified in the simulations and is consistent with both the pressure-branch separation and the transition pathways.

At the configurational-space separation density $\phi_{\rm sep}=0.6$, the connecting channel between the two configurational regions narrows to a marginal bottleneck, as discussed in Sec. V. In the MCMC trajectories used here, the two sides of this bottleneck remain dynamically separated and correspond to the two pressure branches identified in the main text. We therefore denote the configurations sampled on the two sides as classes I and II and use them to construct labeled data. Specifically, we performed MCMC simulations initialized in representative configurations of the two classes at $\phi=0.6$, using the same MCMC protocol as described in Sec. II. We collected $10^{7}$ configurations for each class, yielding a total of $2\times 10^{7}$ labeled configurations.

Because a square has fourfold rotational symmetry, orientations differing by integer multiples of $\pi/2$ are physically equivalent. In configurations generated by uniform insertion sampling, the particle orientations span the full interval $[0,2\pi)$, whereas within a finite MCMC trajectory the particles may not explore all symmetry-equivalent orientations because their rotations are constrained by excluded-volume interactions with the other particles. We therefore reduced the orientation of each square modulo $\pi/2$ and mapped it onto $[0,\pi/2)$. In addition, each training configuration was subjected to a random global translation, applied identically to all three particles, and to a random permutation of the particle labels. These operations reduce the dependence of the classifier on the arbitrary choice of coordinate origin and particle labeling.

We used a multilayer perceptron (MLP) to distinguish the two configurational classes. The raw particle data $(x,y,z,q_{w},q_{x},q_{y},q_{z})$ were converted into a nine-dimensional input vector $(x_{i},y_{i},\theta_{i})_{i=1}^{3}$, where $\theta_{i}$ is the in-plane orientation obtained from the quaternion and reduced modulo $\pi/2$. The particle coordinates were normalized by the box half-length and wrapped into $[-1,1)$ according to the periodic boundary conditions. The fully connected network contained three hidden layers with 200, 40, and 5 neurons, respectively, each using a ReLU activation function, followed by a single sigmoid output unit representing the predicted probability $p_{\mathrm{II}}$ of belonging to class II. The network was trained for 200 epochs using the Adam optimizer and binary cross-entropy loss, with a batch size of 65536 and an 80%/20% training/test split. No misclassifications were observed among the $4.0\times 10^{6}$ configurations in the held-out test set. Configurations with $p_{\mathrm{II}}\geq 0.5$ were assigned to class II, and the remaining configurations were assigned to class I.

For packing fractions $\phi^{\prime}>0.6$, the allowed configurational space expressed in fractional coordinates satisfies

because increasing the packing fraction can only remove configurations that develop particle overlaps. For any allowed configuration at $\phi^{\prime}>0.6$, the same wrapped fractional coordinates therefore define an allowed configuration at $\phi=0.6$. Since the box is larger at $\phi=0.6$, this corresponds physically to a dilated representation of the higher-density configuration, in which the interparticle separations are increased while the fractional coordinates and particle orientations remain unchanged. We assign the class of a higher-density configuration according to which side of the $\phi=0.6$ bottleneck contains its dilated representation. These two sides are operationally defined by the class-I and class-II MCMC ensembles used to train the classifier. Because increasing the packing fraction can only remove allowed configurations, it cannot create a new connecting channel between the two sides. The class-I/class-II labeling at $\phi=0.6$ therefore provides a consistent continuation to higher packing fractions. Moreover, a higher-density configuration and its dilated representation have identical fractional coordinates and particle orientations, and hence correspond to the same input representation used by the classifier. We therefore apply the classifier trained at $\phi=0.6$ directly to higher-density configurations using the same coordinate and orientation preprocessing.

As a consistency check, we applied the trained classifier to the $10^{7}$ configurations generated by uniform insertion sampling at $\phi=0.6$ and evaluated the pressure separately for configurations assigned to classes I and II. Using the resulting class-resolved pressures, together with the ensemble-averaged pressure $P_{\mathrm{tot}}$, in the relation derived above, we obtain

in close agreement with the value $0.0508$ obtained from the two MCMC pressure branches. This agreement provides a consistency check on the two-region description and the configurational classification.

We further applied the trained classifier to configurations generated by uniform insertion sampling at other packing fractions and evaluated the pressure separately for configurations assigned to classes I and II. The resulting class-resolved pressures are shown by the black lines in Fig. 2(c) of the main text.

In the dilute limit, correlations beyond the pair excluded-volume constraint can be neglected, so that the distribution of the local order parameter is determined by the geometry of two hard squares. We fix one square as the reference and consider a second square whose center lies in one of the four adjacent square regions shown in Fig. S2. Both coordinates of the second-square center are measured in units of the square side length $a$. We denote its lateral displacement from the midpoint of the corresponding side of the reference square by $s=d/a\in[-1/2,1/2]$, and its perpendicular distance from that side by $h\in[0,1]$.

Because a square has fourfold rotational symmetry, it is sufficient to consider one angular period of length $\pi/2$. We take the orientation parallel to the reference square as $\alpha=0$ and restrict the relative orientation to $\alpha\in[-\pi/4,\pi/4]$, with positive $\alpha$ corresponding to clockwise rotation. For fixed $(s,h)$, the statistical weight in the dilute limit is proportional to the total angular range over which the two squares remain non-overlapping. We denote this allowed angular measure by $\mathcal{A}(s,h)$.

The geometry is symmetric under $s\rightarrow-s$, so we introduce $\xi=|s|$. The normalized dilute-limit reference curve can then be written as

The normalization is chosen such that $f_{\rm id}(0)=1$, consistent with that used in Fig. 4(c) of the main text.

The dashed construction in Fig. S2 divides the possible locations of the second-square center into regions I–IV. In region I, $0\leq h<1/2$, the two squares overlap for all orientations. In region IV, $1/\sqrt{2}\leq h\leq 1$, the two squares remain non-overlapping over the entire angular interval, giving $\mathcal{A}(\xi,h)=\pi/2$.

We next consider region II, where $1/2\leq h<h_{c}(\xi)$. The clockwise and counterclockwise rotations are limited by different contact geometries. We define the auxiliary angle

As illustrated in Fig. S2, we denote the maximum counterclockwise and clockwise rotation angles by $\theta_{-}$ and $\theta_{+}$, corresponding to panels (a) and (b), respectively. The counterclockwise limit is

whereas the clockwise limit is

Since positive $\alpha$ corresponds to clockwise rotation, the allowed orientations in region II satisfy $-\theta_{-}(h)\leq\alpha\leq\theta_{+}(\xi,h)$, and the corresponding angular measure is $\theta_{+}(\xi,h)+\theta_{-}(h)$. The boundary between regions II and III is reached when, upon clockwise rotation, the lower-right vertex of the second square just touches the upper-right vertex of the reference square. The corresponding crossover height is

At $h=h_{c}(\xi)$, the clockwise and counterclockwise limiting angles become equal.

For $h_{c}(\xi)\leq h<1/\sqrt{2}$, corresponding to region III, the limiting contacts in both rotational directions are geometrically equivalent: in each case, a vertex of the second square comes into contact with the upper side of the reference square. The clockwise and counterclockwise limiting angles therefore have the same magnitude $\theta_{-}(h)$, and the allowed angular measure is $2\theta_{-}(h)$.

Combining the four geometric regions, the allowed angular measure is

The four cases correspond to regions I–IV, respectively. Substituting Eq. (S30) into Eq. (S25), we obtain

The dilute-limit reference curve shown in Fig. 4(c) of the main text is therefore

Numerical evaluation of these integrals yields the gray dashed curve shown in Fig. 4(c) of the main text.