Noisy Cyclic Quantum Random Walk

B. M. Rodr\'iguez-Lara; G. Juarez Rangel

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 37 references

Noisy Cyclic Quantum Random Walk

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read For a cyclic quantum walk with static site noise, the participation ratio of the step operator's eigenstates predicts localization before and after a full traversal, and a sharp crossover in both spectral and dynamical indicators occurs…

desk verdict Solid noiseless spectral analysis; the numerical diagnostic claim is undercut by an MSD definition error and by the fact that PR and dynamics come from the same diagonalization. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.00536 v2 pith:NASKD22M submitted 2024-11-30 quant-ph

G. Juarez Rangel , B. M. Rodríguez-Lara This is my paper · ORCID

classification quant-ph

keywords quantumrandomwalkcyclicgraphAndersonlocalizationstaticphasenoiseparticipationratiospreadingexponentmeansquareddisplacementFouriertransform

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper asks whether a single spectral quantity can predict where a noisy quantum walk will localize without running the walk. The system is a discrete-time quantum walk on a ring of $N$ sites, with a three-parameter unitary coin and independent random phase noise on each site. The authors show that the participation ratio of the step-operator eigenstates, a number between $1$ and $N$ measuring how spread out each eigenstate is, tracks the dynamics: low values coincide with sub-diffusive spreading before the walker rounds the ring, and with early saturation of the mean squared displacement after it has gone around. Across both regimes a sharp crossover appears near static noise strength $\phi_s = \pi/3$, marked by a drop in the participation ratio. If the claim holds, localization in these walks can be anticipated from the spectrum alone, avoiding long-time dynamical simulations.

What carries the argument

The central object is the noisy step operator $\hat{S}_{\mathrm{noise}}=(\hat{D}_{\mathrm{noise}}\otimes\hat{1})\hat{S}_N$, where $\hat{D}_{\mathrm{noise}}$ adds independent random site phases in $[-\phi_s,\phi_s]$. The noiseless step operator $\hat{S}_N$ is diagonalized by the quantum Fourier transform, giving eigenstates $|\zeta_k\rangle$ whose eigenvalues sit on two arcs of the unit circle, separated by a gap set by $\gamma$ and rotated by $(\theta+\phi)/2$. The diagnostic that carries the argument is the participation ratio $\mathrm{PR}(\zeta_j)=(\sum_s P(s))^2/\sum_s P(s)^2$ of the marginal site distribution of each step eigenstate, a number between $1$ and $N$ that measures how many sites an eigenstate effectively occupies. Dynamically, the paper uses the step-resolved mean squared displacement $\Delta x^2(m)$, a power-law fit $\Delta x^2(m)\approx\alpha m^\beta$ to extract the spreading exponent in the walk-on-the-line regime, and a bias-corrected coefficient of variation of $\Delta x^2$ to define saturation in the walk-on-the-cycle regime.

What would settle it

Compute the spreading exponent on the same cycle before and after adding buffer sites so the walk cannot feel the boundary within the fit window; if the exponents diverge for different buffer sizes near $\phi_s=\pi/3$, the line-cycle equivalence that underpins the crossover is broken. Independently, search for a noisy realization with a high participation ratio whose dynamics are sub-diffusive; one such case would refute the proposed diagnostic.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that, for a discrete-time quantum walk on a cyclic graph with static site phase noise, the eigenstate participation ratio of the step operator is a reliable spectral proxy for localization in both dynamical regimes. Before the walker has traversed the whole ring, low participation ratios predict sub-diffusive spread ($\beta<1$) and high participation ratios predict ballistic or super-diffusive spread ($\beta>1$); after a full traversal, low participation ratios predict early saturation of the mean squared displacement at a low level, while high ratios correspond to persistent oscillations. A sharp crossover between these behaviours occurs near $\phi_s=\pi/3$, where the participation ratio drops. The three-parameter coin controls the noiseless spectrum: $\gamma$ opens two spectral bands, the half-sum $(\theta+\phi)/2$ rotates the spectrum and produces twofold degeneracy when $(\theta+\phi)/2=m\pi/N$, and degenerate spectra give sinusoidal marginal distributions while non-degenerate spectra give flat ones. The authors conclude that the participation ratio is a fast static diagnostic, complementary to full dynamical simulations, for analysing noisy quantum devices.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the early-time portion of the walk on the cycle is indistinguishable from a walk on an unbounded line, and that the 'initial steps' window used to fit $\beta$ lies entirely inside that portion for every noise level and graph size.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For a fixed coin and graph size, one can scan noise levels by computing participation ratios of the noisy step operator and identify the localization crossover without propagating the walk.
The crossover at $\phi_s=\pi/3$ appears for both the Hadamard and symmetric coins and across different graph sizes, indicating a coin-independent feature of this static phase-noise model.
In the walk-on-the-cycle regime, the coefficient-of-variation convergence criterion supplies a quantitative saturation level that can be used as a localization measure on finite graphs, where the spreading exponent is no longer defined.
The proposed gate-based circuits for the step operator and noise mean the model, and the spectral diagnostic, can be tested on small quantum processors.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The paper tests two coin settings; whether the crossover at $\phi_s=\pi/3$ persists for other values of $\gamma$ or for other phase combinations is left untested and is a natural next check.
The same participation-ratio diagnostic could plausibly extend to dynamic disorder or to two-dimensional lattice walks, but those extensions are outside the paper's scope.
A practical implementation would likely need a measurable proxy for the participation ratio, since reconstructing step-eigenstate probabilities may be as expensive as running the dynamics.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Two things to know. First, the noiseless spectral section is the real payload: closed-form eigenvalues of the three-parameter coin on a cycle, with band structure set by gamma and degeneracy by the half-sum of phases, and it checks out. Second, the numerical case for the participation ratio as a cheap localization diagnostic is not established yet, and there is a concrete error in the MSD definition that needs fixing.

What is good: The derivation in Sec. II is clean and self-contained. The distinction between degenerate (sinusoidal) and non-degenerate (flat) eigenstate probability distributions is nice. Using the participation ratio to anticipate localization is a sensible idea, and the observed crossover near phi_s = pi/3 across two coins and several N is the kind of thing worth reporting if it survives scrutiny. The circuit implementation is standard but not harmful.

Where it softens: Eq. (13) defines MSD as a sum over sites of [Delta x(m)]^2 P(s,m), but Delta x(m) in Eq. (14) is a single number depending only on m, the distance of the mean position. That makes the sum equal to [Delta x(m)]^2, which for a symmetric walk is always zero. The figures show non-zero MSD, so either the notation is wrong or the observable is misdefined. This needs to be corrected before the numerics can be interpreted. The fit window for beta is described only as 'initial steps' with no quantitative criterion; there are no error bars or realization counts; and the code/data are not available. That matters because the crossover is found numerically.

The efficiency claim also needs a softer framing. The PR is computed from the full diagonalization of the noisy step operator, and that same diagonalization gives you the full time evolution. So PR is not an alternative to simulating dynamics; it is a functional of the same spectral data. If the authors want to claim efficiency, they need to show how to estimate PR without full diagonalization, or compare runtimes. As it stands, the correlation between PR and beta is in-sample consistency between two functionals of the same eigenvectors, not a predictive shortcut.

The paper is worth a serious referee—the spectral part alone justifies it—but the numerical claims need major revision before acceptance. I would send it to review with a request for a corrected MSD definition, a reproducibility package, and a more honest statement about what PR adds over direct simulation. Not desk reject, but not close to accept as is.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies discrete-time quantum walks on a cyclic graph with a three-parameter unitary coin, adding static diagonal phase noise at the sites. It derives the noiseless spectral structure of the step operator, finding two spectral bands controlled by one coin parameter and degeneracies controlled by the half-sum of the two phases. The paper then divides the noisy dynamics into a walk-on-the-line regime and a walk-on-the-cycle regime, extracts a spreading exponent from the mean squared displacement in the former, and uses a coefficient-of-variation convergence criterion in the latter. The central claim is that the eigenstate participation ratio of the step operator is a computationally efficient static diagnostic that anticipates localization in both regimes, with a crossover near noise strength phi_s = pi/3.

Significance. If established, the participation-ratio diagnostic could be practically useful for predicting localization without long-time simulations, and the noiseless spectral analysis is a clean contribution: the paper explicitly shows how the coin parameters control spectral bands, gaps, and degeneracies, and it provides explicit eigenstates and eigenvalues of the noiseless walk. The main numerical claims, however, rest on limited simulations: two coin families, essentially one graph size in the walk-on-the-line regime, unspecified fit windows, and no reported disorder-realization statistics. The advertised computational-efficiency argument is also not supported as written because the participation ratio is computed from the same noisy step-operator diagonalization that would already provide the full dynamics. The crossover at phi_s = pi/3 is an interesting falsifiable numerical finding, but it needs a much more detailed statistical and finite-size analysis before it can be regarded as a general result.

major comments (4)

[Sec. IV, Eqs. (13)-(15)] Equation (13) is not a mean squared displacement as written. The quantity Dx(m) defined in Eq. (14) is the distance between the mean position x(m) and the initial site, independent of the summation index s, so summing [Dx(m)]^2 P(s,m) over s merely gives [Dx(m)]^2. For the symmetric coin starting at a localized site, the mean position remains at the initial site and this quantity is identically zero, which contradicts the nonzero curves in Fig. 5. Since the spreading exponent beta in Eq. (15) is the central dynamical observable, please replace Eq. (13) with a proper cycle-distance mean squared displacement, such as sum_s d(s,s0)^2 P(s,m), or clearly define the estimator being used.
[Secs. IV-V and Sec. VIII] The claim that the participation ratio is a computationally efficient alternative to full dynamical simulations is not supported by the computations described. The participation ratio in Sec. V is evaluated on eigenstates of the noisy step operator S_noise = D_noise S_N from Eq. (12), which requires diagonalizing the full 2N-by-2N unitary; the same diagonalization provides arbitrary powers U^m and therefore the complete dynamics. No runtime comparison, no independent estimator of the participation ratio from the noise amplitude and noiseless spectrum, and no held-out or out-of-sample validation are provided. Please either benchmark the diagnostic against direct simulation, provide a way to obtain it without full diagonalization, or restate the conclusion as a correlational static indicator rather than an alternative to dynamical simulation.
[Sec. V, Figs. 4-6] The numerical extraction of beta is under-specified. The text says the power-law fit is restricted to 'the initial steps where the system resembles a quantum walk on a line,' but no concrete fit window is given. The figures show mean squared displacement curves and participation-ratio boxplots without stating the number of independent disorder realizations, the graph sizes used in the line-regime analysis, or any error bars or confidence intervals on the reported beta values. Because the crossover at phi_s = pi/3 is identified numerically from beta, this missing statistical information is load-bearing for the paper's central claim.
[Secs. V-VI] The claimed robustness of the crossover and of the participation-ratio correlation is not demonstrated. In the walk-on-the-line regime, results are shown for N=128 and two coin parameter sets, while the text states the trend 'appears robust for graphs with diverse size N' without presenting that data. The walk-on-the-cycle regime likewise shows saturation levels for several N, but the connection between the participation ratio and the saturation level is discussed qualitatively rather than quantified. Please provide the finite-size scaling and parameter scans, or explicitly limit the claim to the reported cases.

minor comments (5)

[Sec. VII, Eq. (17) and Fig. 11] The phase gate definition contains a typo: it should be P_j = |0><0| + e^{i pi/2^j}|1><1|, not |0><0|+|0><1|+|1><0|+e^{i pi/2^j}|1><1|.
[Sec. II, Eq. (2)] The eigenvalue expression for c_j is garbled in the typesetting, with a missing radicand; please re-typeset this equation so the square root structure is clear.
[Secs. I and IV] There are minor language issues: 'finite-size effects become dominate' should be 'become dominant,' and 'the effects of the cyclic topology are null' should be 'are zero' or 'vanish.'
[Sec. VI] The convergence criterion CV <= 0.01 and the moving window size n = max{10, N/4} are introduced without a sensitivity analysis; a short discussion of how the saturation levels depend on these choices would strengthen the walk-on-the-cycle analysis.
[Data availability] The paper states that data may be obtained upon reasonable request, but no code or data are provided. Given the centrality of the numerical crossover and the PR-dynamics correlation, a supplementary package with simulation scripts and fit details would substantially aid reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the participation ratio and spreading exponent are independent functionals, and the crossover is identified from dynamics and only then checked against the spectrum.

full rationale

The paper's central correlation is between the eigenstate participation ratio PR(ζ_j) of Eq. (10) and the spreading exponent β obtained by fitting Eq. (15) to the step-resolved mean squared displacement. These are distinct functionals: PR is computed from the step-operator eigenstates, while β is extracted from the dynamical trajectory, and no equation defines either in terms of the other. The crossover at φ_s = π/3 is explicitly identified from the dynamics ('This value is not derived from an analytical expression, but obtained numerically from the behavior of the spreading exponent β', Sec. V) and then observed as a simultaneous drop in PR and saturation level, which is an independent consistency check rather than a construction. The self-citations [32,33] are used for the standard Fourier diagonalization of the noiseless cyclic step operator; they are not load-bearing uniqueness claims and they do not smuggle in the central result. The 'fast static diagnostic' assertion is a computational-efficiency claim that is not demonstrated — computing PR for a noisy realization requires diagonalizing the same 2N×2N noisy unitary that generates the dynamics, and Eq. (13) as written is problematic because Δx(m) is site-independent, so the displayed sum collapses to [Δx(m)]^2. These are correctness and overclaim concerns, not circularity: no result in the paper is equivalent to its input by definition, so no circular step is established.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The noiseless derivation relies on standard Fourier diagonalization; the dynamical claims rely on a uniform static-phase disorder model (distribution not fully specified), the line-equivalence assumption, and an empirically asserted correlation between the participation ratio and dynamics. Four numerically chosen or fitted quantities enter the central claims: alpha, beta, the numerically located crossover phi_s = pi/3, and the CV convergence threshold. No new physical entities are proposed.

free parameters (4)

spreading exponent beta = 0.419 to 1.996 across noise levels
Extracted by power-law fit Delta x^2(m) approx alpha m^beta (Eq. 15); regime classification and the crossover claim hinge on these fitted values, with no reported fit ranges or uncertainties.
spreading rate alpha = 0.297 to 3.006
Simultaneous fit parameter in Eq. 15, quoted in Figs. 4 and 5; not central to localization claims but part of the same fit.
crossover noise strength phi_s = pi/3 = pi/3 (about 1.047)
Located numerically from beta behavior; the paper states it is not derived analytically. This threshold is central to the reported transition from super-diffusive to sub-diffusive behavior.
convergence threshold and window for CV = CV <= 0.01, window n = max(10, N/4)
Arbitrary diagnostic choices in Sec. VI that define saturation in the walk-on-the-cycle regime; saturation-level claims depend on them.

assumptions (5)

standard math The noiseless cyclic step operator is diagonalized by the quantum Fourier transform with eigenvalues lambda_k = exp(-i 2 pi (k-1)/N).
Sec. II, Eqs. 5-8; standard Fourier diagonalization, valid for translation-invariant cycles.
domain assumption Site phase noise is static and applied as an N-site diagonal unitary with phases in [-phi, phi].
Sec. IV, Eqs. 11-12; the distribution of phases and the number of disorder realizations are not specified, yet all numerical claims depend on this noise model.
domain assumption Before the walker completes a full traversal, dynamics on the cycle are equivalent to a quantum walk on an unbounded line.
Secs. IV-V define the walk-on-the-line regime; the beta extraction and the pi/3 crossover rely on this equivalence.
ad hoc to paper Low participation ratio of step-operator eigenstates predicts dynamical localization on cyclic graphs.
The central diagnostic claim; it is supported only by numerical correlation with beta and saturation (Secs. III, V, VI), not derived from the equations of motion.
domain assumption After a full traversal, finite-size effects dominate and the coefficient-of-variation criterion is the right way to define localization.
Sec. VI introduces the CV convergence diagnostic with arbitrary thresholds; the cycle-regime conclusions depend on this modeling choice.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Noisy Cyclic Quantum Random Walk." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NASKD22M

@misc{pith2026241200536,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Noisy Cyclic Quantum Random Walk},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NASKD22M}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.00536}
}

abstract

We explore static noise in a discrete quantum random walk over a homogeneous cyclic graph, focusing on spectral and dynamical properties. Using a three-parameter unitary coin, we control the spectral structure of the noiseless step operator on the unit circle. One parameter induces two spectral bands separated by a gap proportional to its value, while the half-sum of the two phase parameters rotates the spectrum and enables twofold degeneracy under specific conditions. Degenerate spectra yield sinusoidal probability distributions; non-degenerate ones produce flat profiles. We introduce static phase noise on the sites and analyze its effects in two propagation regimes. In the walk-on-the-line regime, preceding a full graph traversal, we extract the spreading exponent $\beta$ from the step-resolved mean squared displacement. Low participation ratios correlate with sub-diffusive spread; high ratios indicate ballistic or super-diffusive evolution. Once the walker completes a cycle, finite-size effects dominate. In this walk-on-the-cycle regime, $\beta$ no longer characterizes the dynamics. Instead, we quantify localization using the coefficient of variation of the mean squared displacement. In both regimes, we observe a sharp crossover near static site noise $\phi_s = \pi/3$, marked by a drop in participation ratio, a transition from diffusive to sub-diffusive spread in the walk-on-the-line regime, and a reduced saturation level in the walk-on-the-cycle regime. Our results show that the eigenstate participation ratio is an efficient spectral diagnostic that anticipates localization across both regimes, offering an alternative to full dynamical simulations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.00536 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Probability distribution on the cyclic graph sites [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Average participation ratio for the step eigenstates using a coin with (a) variable [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (12 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Mean squared displacement ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Mean squared displacement ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Participation ratio boxplots (first row) depicting the distribution and spreading exponent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Mean squared displacement ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8. Mean squared displacement ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: FIG. 9. Minimum unbiased coefficient of variation over 5,000 steps at noise level [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png]

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: FIG. 10. Saturation level of the mean squared displacement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png]

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: FIG. 11. Quantum Fourier transform (QFT) circuit for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png]

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: FIG. 12. Circuit implementations for the diagonal (a) clockwise and (c) counter-clockwise opera [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_12.png]

**Figure 13.** Figure 13: FIG. 13. Efficient step operator circuit for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_13.png]

**Figure 14.** Figure 14: FIG. 14. Algorithm for performing multiple steps in the cyclic graph with coin operator [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_14.png]

**Figure 15.** Figure 15: FIG. 15. Algorithm for performing multiple steps with static phase noise on the cyclic graph. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_15.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

[1]

Anderson localization and nonlinearity in one dimensional disordered photonic lattices

Y. Lahini, A. Avidan, F. Pozzi, M. Sorel, R. Morandotti, D. N. Christodoulides, and Y. Silber- berg, Anderson localization and nonlinearity in one-dimensional disordered photonic lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 013906 (2008), arXiv:0704.3788 [quant-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2008
[2]

Anderson localization of entangled photons in an integrated quantum walk

A. Crespi, R. Osellame, R. Ramponi, V. Giovannetti, R. Fazio, L. Sansoni, F. De Nicola, F. Sciarrino, and P. Mataloni, Anderson localization of entangled photons in an integrated quantum walk, Nat. Photon. 7, 322 (2013), arXiv:1304.1012 [quant-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2013
[3]

Segev, Y

M. Segev, Y. Silberberg, and D. N. Christodoulides, Anderson localization of light, Nat. Pho- ton. 7, 197 (2013)

work page 2013
[4]

Anderson localization in generalized discrete time quantum walks

I. Vakulchyk, M. V. Fistul, P. Qin, and S. Flach, Anderson localization in generalized discrete- time quantum walks, Phys. Rev. B 96, 144204 (2017), arXiv:1708.08194 [quant-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[5]

Weidemann, M

S. Weidemann, M. Kremer, S. Longhi, and A. Szameit, Coexistence of dynamical delocalization and spectral localization through stochastic dissipation, Nat. Photon. 15, 576 (2021)

work page 2021
[6]

Anderson localization in dissipative lattices

S. Longhi, Anderson localization in dissipative lattices, Ann. Phys. 535, 2200658 (2023), arXiv:2304.07710 [quant-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2023
[7]

C. A. Condat and T. R. Kirkpatrick, Resonant scattering and Anderson localization of acoustic waves, Phys. Rev. B 36, 6782 (1987)

work page 1987
[8]

R. L. Weaver, Anderson localization of ultrasound, Wave Motion 12, 129 (1990). 19

work page 1990

Show all 37 references

[9]

Billy, V

J. Billy, V. Josse, Z. Zuo, A. Bernard, B. Hambrecht, P. Lugan, D. Cl´ ement, L. Sanchez- Palencia, P. Bouyer, and A. Aspect, Direct observation of Anderson localization of matter- waves in a controlled disorder, Nature 453, 891 (2008), arXiv:0804.1621 [quant-ph]

2008 arXiv
[10]

Piraud, L

M. Piraud, L. Sanchez-Palencia, and B. van Tiggelen, Anderson localization of matter waves in three-dimensional anisotropic disordered potentials, Phys. Rev. A 90, 063639 (2014)

2014
[11]

Y. Ye, M. Ke, J. Feng, M. Wang, C. Qiu, and Z. Liu, Transversal Anderson localization of sound in acoustic waveguide arrays, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 27, 155402 (2015)

2015
[12]

Schreiber, K

A. Schreiber, K. N. Cassemiro, V. Potoˇ cek, A. G´ abris, I. Jex, and C. Silberhorn, Decoherence and disorder in quantum walks: from ballistic spread to localization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 180403 (2011), arXiv:1101.2638 [quant-ph]

2011 arXiv
[13]

Nosrati, A

F. Nosrati, A. Laneve, M. K. Shadfar, A. Geraldi, K. Mahdavipour, F. Pegoraro, P. Mataloni, and R. Lo Franco, Readout of quantum information spreading using a disordered quantum walk, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 38, 2570 (2021), arXiv:2010.10592 [quant-ph]

2021 arXiv
[14]

A. R. C. Buarque, F. S. Passos, W. S. Dias, and E. P. Raposo, Discrete-time quantum walk dispersion control through long-range correlations, Phys. Rev. E 107, 064139 (2023), arXiv:2303.01608 [quant-ph]

2023 arXiv
[15]

G. R. M. de Almeida, N. Amaral, A. R. C. Buarque, and W. S. Dias, Noise correlations behind superdiffusive quantum walks, Phys. Rev. E 109, 064151 (2024), arXiv:2207.13145 [quant-ph]

2024
[16]

Derevyanko, Anderson localization of a one-dimensional quantum walker, Sci

S. Derevyanko, Anderson localization of a one-dimensional quantum walker, Sci. Rep. 8, 1795 (2018)

2018
[17]

Wang, X.-Y

Q.-Q. Wang, X.-Y. Xu, W.-W. Pan, K. Sun, J.-S. Xu, G. Chen, Y.-J. Han, C.-F. Li, and G.- C. Guo, Dynamic-disorder-induced enhancement of entanglement in photonic quantum walks, Optica 5, 1136 (2018), arXiv:1808.09298 [quant-ph]

2018 arXiv
[18]

Rebentrost, M

P. Rebentrost, M. Mohseni, I. Kassal, S. Lloyd, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Environment-assisted quantum transport, New J. Phys. 11, 033003 (2009)

2009
[19]

Sapienza, H

L. Sapienza, H. Thyrrestrup, S. Stobbe, P. D. Garcia, S. Smolka, and P. Lodahl, Cavity quantum electrodynamics with Anderson-localized modes, Science 327, 1352 (2010)

2010
[20]

Obuse and N

H. Obuse and N. Kawakami, Topological phases and delocalization of quantum walks in ran- dom environments, Phys. Rev. B 84, 195139 (2011)

2011
[21]

J. Asch, O. Bourget, and A. Joye, Dynamical localization of the Chalker-Coddington model far from transition, J. Stat. Phys. 147, 194 (2012). 20

2012
[22]

J. H. Bardarson, F. Pollmann, and J. E. Moore, Unbounded growth of entanglement in models of many-body localization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 017202 (2012)

2012
[23]

Agarwal, S

K. Agarwal, S. Gopalakrishnan, M. Knap, M. M¨ uller, and E. Demler, Anomalous diffusion and Griffiths effects near the many-body localization transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 160401 (2015)

2015
[24]

C. M. Chandrashekar and T. Busch, Localized quantum walks as secured quantum memory, Europhys. Lett. 110, 10005 (2015)

2015
[25]

J. M. Edge and J. K. Asboth, Localization, delocalization, and topological transitions in disordered two-dimensional quantum walks, Phys. Rev. B 91, 104202 (2015)

2015
[26]

Q. Lin, T. Li, L. Xiao, and et al., Observation of non-Hermitian topological Anderson insulator in quantum dynamics, Nat. Commun. 13, 3229 (2022)

2022
[27]

S. Pu, G. J. Sreejith, and J. K. Jain, Anderson localization in the fractional quantum Hall effect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 116801 (2022)

2022
[28]

T. A. Brun, H. A. Carteret, and A. Ambainis, Quantum random walks with decoherent coins, Phys. Rev. A 67, 032304 (2003)

2003
[29]

Nayak and A

A. Nayak and A. Vishwanath, Quantum walk on the line (2012), arXiv:0010117 [quant-ph]

2012
[30]

C. M. Chandrashekar, R. Srikanth, and S. Banerjee, Symmetries and noise in quantum walk, Phys. Rev. A 76, 022316 (2007)

2007
[31]

Y. S. Weinstein, M. A. Pravia, E. M. Fortunato, S. Lloyd, and D. G. Cory, Implementation of the quantum Fourier transform, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 1889 (2001)

2001
[32]

D. J. Nodal Stevens, B. Jaramillo ´Avila, and B. M. Rodr ´ ıguez-Lara, Necklaces of PT- symmetric dimers, Photon. Res. 6, A31 (2018), arXiv:1709.00498 [quant-ph]

2018 arXiv
[33]

Jaramillo ´Avila, J

B. Jaramillo ´Avila, J. Naya Hern´ andez, S. M. Toxqui Rodr ´ ıguez, and B. M. Rodr ´ ıguez-Lara, Symmetric supermodes in cyclic multicore fibers, OSA Continuum 2, 515 (2019)

2019
[34]

Koˇ s ´ ık, V

J. Koˇ s ´ ık, V. Buˇ zek, and M. Hillery, Quantum walks with random phase shifts, Phys. Rev. A 74, 022310 (2006)

2006
[35]

Sassetti, H

M. Sassetti, H. Schomerus, and U. Weiss, Subdiffusive and superdiffusive quantum transport and generalized duality, Phys. Rev. B 53, R2914 (1996)

1996
[36]

R. R. Sokal and F. J. Rohlf, Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research, 3rd ed. (W.H. Freeman and Company, New York, 1995). 21

1995
[37]

M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition (Cambridge University Press, 2010). 22

2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Anderson localization and nonlinearity in one dimensional disordered photonic lattices

Y. Lahini, A. Avidan, F. Pozzi, M. Sorel, R. Morandotti, D. N. Christodoulides, and Y. Silber- berg, Anderson localization and nonlinearity in one-dimensional disordered photonic lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 013906 (2008), arXiv:0704.3788 [quant-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2008

[2] [2]

Anderson localization of entangled photons in an integrated quantum walk

A. Crespi, R. Osellame, R. Ramponi, V. Giovannetti, R. Fazio, L. Sansoni, F. De Nicola, F. Sciarrino, and P. Mataloni, Anderson localization of entangled photons in an integrated quantum walk, Nat. Photon. 7, 322 (2013), arXiv:1304.1012 [quant-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2013

[3] [3]

Segev, Y

M. Segev, Y. Silberberg, and D. N. Christodoulides, Anderson localization of light, Nat. Pho- ton. 7, 197 (2013)

work page 2013

[4] [4]

Anderson localization in generalized discrete time quantum walks

I. Vakulchyk, M. V. Fistul, P. Qin, and S. Flach, Anderson localization in generalized discrete- time quantum walks, Phys. Rev. B 96, 144204 (2017), arXiv:1708.08194 [quant-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017

[5] [5]

Weidemann, M

S. Weidemann, M. Kremer, S. Longhi, and A. Szameit, Coexistence of dynamical delocalization and spectral localization through stochastic dissipation, Nat. Photon. 15, 576 (2021)

work page 2021

[6] [6]

Anderson localization in dissipative lattices

S. Longhi, Anderson localization in dissipative lattices, Ann. Phys. 535, 2200658 (2023), arXiv:2304.07710 [quant-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2023

[7] [7]

C. A. Condat and T. R. Kirkpatrick, Resonant scattering and Anderson localization of acoustic waves, Phys. Rev. B 36, 6782 (1987)

work page 1987

[8] [8]

R. L. Weaver, Anderson localization of ultrasound, Wave Motion 12, 129 (1990). 19

work page 1990