Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 73 references

Scrambling Enabled Entropy Accumulation in Open Quantum Systems

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

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

Pith's one-line read The second Rényi entropy increase saturates to a finite value only in the scrambling phase of an open system; in the dissipative phase it vanishes with the probe coupling.

desk verdict A novel probe-based entropy signature for scrambling phases with a plausible qualitative picture, but the main analytic formula rests on a truncation that is inconsistent with the stated initial conditions. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.07468 v1 pith:52LBDURQ submitted 2025-02-11 quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mechcond-mat.str-el

Yuke Zhang , Zeyu Liu , Shuo Zhang , Langxuan Chen , Pengfei Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcond-mat.stat-mechcond-mat.str-el
keywords entropyaccumulationinformationscramblingopenquantumsystemssecondRényiout-of-time-ordercorrelatorgeneralizedBoltzmannequationscrambling-dissipativetransitionoperatorsizegrowth
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 claims that the second Rényi entropy response of an open quantum system to a small external impulse carries a sharp fingerprint of the scrambling-to-dissipative transition. When a probe is weakly coupled to the system and traced out afterward, the entropy increase grows continuously and saturates at a finite value in the scrambling phase, even as the probe coupling tends to zero. In the dissipative phase the same entropy increase is of order $\kappa^2$ and disappears in the weak-probe limit. This matters because the system's own entropy thermalizes to the same value for any finite system-bath coupling, so it cannot reveal the transition, whereas the probe-traced entropy can. The paper derives the effect from general operator-growth arguments and confirms it with an explicit solvable flat-band model, producing an analytic formula for the saturation value.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is a generalized Boltzmann equation on a four-branch entropy contour — two replicas with forward and backward branches, the contour on which the purity is evaluated — which turns the purity trace into the evolution of six generalized distribution functions $f_z(t)$. In the solvable flat-band limit with weak probe coupling, the system collapses to a single ordinary differential equation for $f_3$, $d f_3/dt = w_{2\beta}^3 \tilde V - w_{2\beta}^2(\tilde V+\tilde J) f_3 + \tilde J f_3^3$, and linearization around the initial value $w_{2\beta}$ yields growth with Lyapunov exponent $n_{2\beta}(1-n_{2\beta})(2\tilde J-\tilde V)$ for $\tilde V<2\tilde J$ and decay above that threshold. The entropy response is read off from the identity $\delta S^{(2)}(t)=2-2(f_1(-t)+f_2(-t))-2(f_4(-t)+f_5(-t)-2f_3(-t))$, which converts the phase distinction into a measurable entropy difference. A scramblon effective theory that sums the leading OTOC contributions is used to confirm the same two-phase behavior in an exactly solvable large-$N$ model.

What would settle it

Numerically integrate the full six-function generalized Boltzmann system for the flat-band model at decreasing values of the effective probe coupling $\tilde\kappa$ and compare the long-time saturation of $\delta S^{(2)}$ with Eq. (21): a deviation that suppresses the plateau as $\tilde\kappa\to 0$ for $\tilde V<2\tilde J$, or moves the apparent threshold away from $\tilde V=2\tilde J$, would refute the central claim. Alternatively, in a quantum simulator with an independently calibrated scrambling transition, measure the saturation entropy as a function of $\tilde V/\tilde J$ at fixed weak probe coupling and check that the finite plateau appears exactly on the scrambling side of the transition.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a new entropic signature of the scrambling transition in open quantum systems. For a thermal system-plus-bath state perturbed by an impulse $U_\epsilon = e^{-i\epsilon X}$ on the system, the increase $\delta S^{(2)}(t)$ of the second Rényi entropy of $S\cup B$ after tracing out a weakly coupled probe is controlled by the out-of-time-order correlator on an entropy contour. In the scrambling phase (small system-bath coupling), the OTOC grows exponentially through operator growth, so $\delta S^{(2)}(t)$ rises continuously and saturates at a finite value that is nonzero even in the limit of vanishing probe coupling; in the dissipative phase the OTOC decays and the entropy increase is of order $\kappa^2$, vanishing as $\kappa\to 0$. In the flat-band limit the paper obtains the explicit formula $\delta S^{(2)}(\infty)=\theta(2\tilde J-\tilde V)\left(1-2\sqrt{n_{2\beta}(1-n_{2\beta})}\right)\left(3-\sqrt{1+4\tilde V/\tilde J}\right)$, with the phase boundary at $\tilde V=2\tilde J$. The paper's message is that a weak probe can keep building entanglement only while the perturbation stays nontrivially supported inside the system, which is exactly what the scrambling phase provides.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative saturation formula assumes that in the weak-probe limit the three single-replica distribution functions $f_0$, $f_1$, and $f_2$ stay fixed at their initial thermal values, so the entire entropy dynamics reduces to the single differential equation for $f_3$; if those functions drift, the predicted saturation value and possibly the phase boundary would have to change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The scrambling-to-dissipative transition acquires a sharp entropic observable: the existence of a finite, probe-independent saturation value of $\delta S^{(2)}(\infty)$ is a direct signature of the scrambling phase.
  • Because the saturation value stays finite as the probe coupling goes to zero, entropy accumulation can be measured without strong coupling to the measurement device.
  • For any finite system-bath coupling the reduced state of the system alone thermalizes to the same entropy, so the probe-traced entropy is a diagnostic that sees the transition where system-only entropies do not.
  • The closed-system limit is qualitatively different: without a bath, $\delta S^{(2)}(t)$ rises and then decays to zero, whereas an infinitesimal bath in the scrambling phase turns the response into a monotonic accumulation.
  • Equation (21) provides an analytic, experimentally testable curve for the saturation entropy as a function of the dimensionless ratio $\tilde V/\tilde J$ at fixed temperature.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One natural extension beyond the paper is to higher Rényi entropies: the same branched-OTOC structure suggests that the Rényi index $n>2$ would change the saturation value while preserving the phase threshold, giving a family of independent phase probes.
  • The threshold $\tilde V=2\tilde J$ is derived in the flat-band large-$N$ model; in generic systems the critical ratio will differ with microscopic details, but the qualitative dichotomy should survive because it follows from the sign of the OTOC growth rate.
  • These results suggest a practical protocol: randomized-measurement measurements of the second Rényi entropy after an impulse and weak probe coupling could map the scrambling phase diagram without direct OTOC measurements.
  • The pinning assumption for $f_0, f_1, f_2$ is a solvable-model convenience; if it fails in the full Boltzmann system, the saturation formula would get corrections even though the qualitative two-phase picture would likely remain.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the growth of the second Rényi entropy of an open system S coupled to a bath B after a weak impulse, when a probe P is weakly coupled to S and then traced out. The central claim is that in the scrambling phase (small system-bath coupling V) the entropy increase δS(2)(t) continues to grow and saturates at a finite value even as the system-probe coupling κ tends to zero, whereas in the dissipative phase the increase is of order κ² and vanishes. The argument combines a general OTOC-based scaling form, Eq. (11), with an explicit flat-band generalized Boltzmann calculation. The latter yields the quantitative prediction Eq. (21) for the saturation entropy, with a scrambling-dissipative threshold at 2J̃−Ṽ, and Fig. 2 reports numerical solutions of the Boltzmann equation supporting the prediction. The supplementary material provides the collision integrals, an equivalence between the flat-band Boltzmann model and a Brownian SYK model, and an exact scramblon-effective-theory calculation for a related BCSYK(3,1) model.

Significance. If Eq. (21) is correct, the paper provides a clean and falsifiable entropy-based diagnostic of the scrambling transition: after tracing out a weakly coupled probe, the system-bath entropy saturates at an O(1) value only in the scrambling phase. This is a genuinely interesting and testable proposal, and the explicit flat-band calculation is a strength: the linear stability analysis giving the 2J̃−Ṽ threshold and the fixed-point calculation giving Eq. (21) are internally coherent once the reduced ODE (19) is accepted. The supplement's exact BCSYK(3,1) scramblon calculation is an additional, independent check of the general scaling phenomenon. However, the derivation of Eq. (19) from the full Boltzmann system is not controlled, and there is an internal inconsistency in the stated initial condition; these issues directly affect the central quantitative claim. For this reason the manuscript is not yet acceptable in its present form.

major comments (4)
  1. The initial condition (15) sets f5(0)=n2β, but the ansatz f5=(1−n2β)f3/w2β used to obtain Eq. (19) gives f5(0)=1−n2β. This is an O(1) mismatch unless n2β=1/2. The supplementary material's rule for the bath collision integrals (line after Supp. Eq. (5), 'f0(ki)=f4(ki)=1−f5(ki)=n2β') likewise implies f5=1−n2β, so the manuscript is internally inconsistent. The inconsistency matters: with Eq. (15), Eq. (17) gives δS(2)(0)=2−4n2β at t=0, whereas the unitary-invariance argument (and the stated relation ②(0)=−①(0)) require δS(2)(0)=0 in the κ→0 limit. Please correct Eq. (15) or justify the ansatz as the exact initial condition; the derivation of Eq. (19), and hence of Eq. (21), depends on this point.
  2. The step after Eq. (18) asserts that the full system (16) 'collapses' once f0, f1, and f2 are frozen and f4 and f5 are identified with f3. This is not a derived reduction. The collision integrals in Supp. Eq. (5) contain products such as f1 f2 f3 and f3 f4 f5; the latter depend on f0, f1, and f2 through f3 and through the assumed relations, so the unstable growth of f3 feeds back into the quantities assumed pinned. No large-N factorization, invariant-manifold, or timescale-separation argument is supplied. Because Eq. (19) is the only route to the quantitative prediction (21), the prediction is not controlled by the stated κ→0 limit of the Boltzmann equation.
  3. Equation (19) contains no κ̃ term, and f3(0)=w2β is an exact fixed point of that ODE for every value of Ṽ/J̃. The linearization (20) therefore describes the growth of an infinitesimal displacement δf3, but the manuscript does not state what creates that displacement or how it scales with κ̃. With the stated initial condition δf3(0)=0, the solution is f3(t)≡w2β and Eq. (21) does not follow. The general scaling form (11) requires an O(κ̃²/J²) seed amplified over a time of order (1/λ) ln(J²/κ̃²), where λ is the Lyapunov exponent; the flat-band derivation must supply this matched-asymptotic input (or an equivalent explicit κ̃-dependence) before Eq. (21) can be considered a prediction of the Boltzmann system.
  4. The text states that the black solid line in Fig. 2 'accurately captures the limit of κ̃/J→0', but the figure caption and text do not report the parameter values used (n2β, the values of κ̃/J and Ṽ/J, the initial conditions for the six distribution functions), the integration scheme, or any convergence or error data. Without these, the agreement between the numerical solution of Eq. (16) and Eq. (21) cannot be verified. Please provide the data and parameters, or clearly label the figure as schematic.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Notation, paragraph before Eq. (11)] The symbol κ is used both for the system-probe coupling and for the quantum Lyapunov exponent, for example in the paragraph before Eq. (11) and in Eq. (11); this makes the scaling argument hard to follow. A distinct symbol (e.g., λ) for the Lyapunov exponent would remove the ambiguity.
  2. [Eq. (19)] The powers of w2β in Eq. (19) are typeset ambiguously as 'w3 2β' and 'w2 2β'; please use w_{2β}^3 and w_{2β}^2, and similarly in Eq. (20), for readability.
  3. [Supplementary Material, Eq. (17)-(18)] The BCSYK(3,1) calculation in the supplement uses the same symbol κ for the probe coupling and for the Lyapunov exponent, e.g., in the definition of g(t) and in Eq. (17); please introduce separate symbols.
  4. [Footnote [53]] The footnote says that an initial state without system-probe interaction changes the result only by O(κ²); this statement is used implicitly later but is not derived. A brief derivation or a citation would be helpful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No construction-level circularity: Eq. (21) follows from a fixed point of a reduced Boltzmann ODE rather than from fitted inputs; remaining concerns are approximation control and self-citation weight, not equivalence-by-construction.

full rationale

The central quantitative prediction, Eq. (21), is obtained by reducing the generalized Boltzmann system to the single ODE (19) for f3, then performing a linear stability analysis around f3(0)=w2β (Eq. (20)) and solving for the stable fixed point of f3. The saturation value and the threshold θ(2J˜−V˜) are consequences of that fixed-point structure; they are not parameters fitted to the numerical curves, and the Lyapunov exponent enters as the growth rate and threshold location rather than being inserted as the saturation amplitude. The Boltzmann collision integrals in the supplementary material (Supp. Eq. (5)) provide a self-contained dynamical system, and the main text explicitly labels the freeze of f0, f1, f2 as an approximation ('We approximate that all single-replica distribution functions (f0, f1, and f2) remain at their initial values'), which is a control/validity limitation rather than a circular step. The paper does rely on prior work by the same group: the phase-transition input is supported by 'general arguments presented in [50]', the resummation form in Eq. (11) is introduced as 'we generally expect [56–58]', and the supplementary scramblon calculation imports auxiliary functions from refs. [1–3] of the supplement. However, these self-citations do not make Eq. (21) equal to their inputs by construction: the main-text Boltzmann calculation independently produces the same threshold and saturation formula, and the cited prior results concern operator-size growth and OTOC resummation, not the target entropy formula. A separate internal-consistency issue is that the ansatz f5(t)=(1−n2β)f3(t)/w2β gives f5(0)=1−n2β, whereas the stated initial condition (15) sets f5(0)=n2β; this affects the reliability of the reduced ODE and therefore of Eq. (21), but it is a consistency defect rather than a circular derivation. Overall, the quantitative claim is not built into the input by definition, so the circularity score is low despite the presence of self-citations and an uncontrolled truncation.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim is supported by a solvable large-N random fermion model, and no numbers are fitted to the target entropy. The key unproved inputs are the scaling form of the OTOC contribution, the quasi-particle approximation, the freezing of single-replica distribution functions, and the flat-band limit. No new particles or forces are postulated.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The system-bath and system-probe couplings are independent Gaussian random variables with variances chosen so each system fermion acquires finite self-energy.
    Defines the SYK-like random all-to-all model in Eqs. (1)-(3); central for large-N solvability.
  • domain assumption The bath has many more modes than the system, M ≫ N ≫ 1, and the bath Green's functions are not modified by the system.
    Identifies B as a bath and is used in the self-energy in SM Eq. (2) to ignore backreaction.
  • domain assumption The quasi-particle approximation: interaction only alters distribution functions, not dispersion relations.
    Underlies the parameterization of G in terms of F(t) after Eq. (13) and the generalized Boltzmann equation.
  • domain assumption For κ→0, the single-replica distribution functions f0, f1, and f2 remain at their initial values, and f4, f5 collapse to f3 via the stated relations.
    Explicit approximation used to derive Eqs. (19)-(21); not derived from the full Boltzmann system.
  • ad hoc to paper The resummation of higher-order κ insertions yields the scaling form ②(t)=-①(0) g(κ² e^{κt}/J²) with g decaying to a finite value.
    Eq. (11) is stated as 'generally expect' and is not derived in the main text; it is the bridge from OTOC growth to entropy accumulation.
  • domain assumption The flat-band limit with constant dispersion ϵS=ϵB=ϵP=ϵ allows closed-form solutions.
    Used to reduce the Boltzmann equation to a single ODE; not a general-dispersion result.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Scrambling Enabled Entropy Accumulation in Open Quantum Systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/52LBDURQ

@misc{pith2026250207468,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Scrambling Enabled Entropy Accumulation in Open Quantum Systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/52LBDURQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.07468}
}
read the original abstract

In closed quantum many-body systems, initially localized information spreads throughout the system and becomes highly complex. This phenomenon, known as information scrambling, is closely related to entropy growth and quantum thermalization. Recent studies have shown that dissipation in open systems can hinder information scrambling, driving the system into a dissipative phase when the system-bath coupling is strong. However, the signature of this scrambling transition in entropy dynamics remains unexplored. In this work, we unveil a novel phenomenon in open quantum systems, termed entropy accumulation, which occurs exclusively within the scrambling phase. We consider a setup in which a probe is weakly coupled to a system that is already interacting with a bath. We calculate the increase in the second R\'enyi entropy induced by an external impulse on the system, after tracing out the probe. Despite the system-probe coupling being weak, the entropy continues to increase and eventually saturates at a finite value due to operator growth. In contrast, the entropy increase is limited by the coupling strength in the dissipative phase. The theoretical prediction is derived from both general arguments and an explicit example using generalized Boltzmann equations. Our results offer new insights into the intriguing relationship between entropy dynamics and information scrambling in open quantum systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.07468 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. We present a schematic of our setup, which involves coupling [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. We present the numerical results of entropy dynamics obtained by solving the Boltzmann equation ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    This choice ensures that the probe can establish extensive quantum entanglement

    The Hamiltonian of the probe readsHP = P k,mϵP,k cm,† P,k cm P,k. This choice ensures that the probe can establish extensive quantum entanglement. We consider a general coupling be- tween the system and the probe HS P = P iκOS,iOP,i with sys- tem operators OS,i and probe operators OP,i. Throughout the manuscript, we are focusing on the probe limit κ≪ V, J...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys

    M. Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys. Rev. E 50, 888 (1994)

    1994

  3. [3]

    J. M. Deutsch, Quantum statistical mechanics in a closed sys- tem, Phys. Rev. A 43, 2046 (1991)

    1991

  4. [4]

    Sekino and L

    Y . Sekino and L. Susskind, Fast Scramblers, JHEP 10, 065, arXiv:0808.2096 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  5. [5]

    Hayden and J

    P. Hayden and J. Preskill, Black holes as mirrors: Quan- tum information in random subsystems, JHEP 09, 120, arXiv:0708.4025 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  6. [6]

    D. A. Roberts, D. Stanford, and L. Susskind, Localized shocks, JHEP 03, 051, arXiv:1409.8180 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  7. [7]

    S. H. Shenker and D. Stanford, Stringy e ffects in scrambling, JHEP 05, 132, arXiv:1412.6087 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  8. [8]

    Nahum, S

    A. Nahum, S. Vijay, and J. Haah, Operator Spreading in Random Unitary Circuits, Phys. Rev. X 8, 021014 (2018), arXiv:1705.08975 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv 2018

Show all 73 references
  1. [9]

    A. I. Larkin and Y . N. Ovchinnikov, Quasiclassical method in the theory of superconductivity, Soviet Physics, JETP 28, 1200 (1969)

    1969

  2. [10]

    Hunter-Jones, Operator growth in random quantum circuits with symmetry, (2018), arXiv:1812.08219 [quant-ph]

    N. Hunter-Jones, Operator growth in random quantum circuits with symmetry, (2018), arXiv:1812.08219 [quant-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Qi and A

    X.-L. Qi and A. Streicher, Quantum Epidemiology: Op- erator Growth, Thermal E ffects, and SYK, JHEP 08, 012, arXiv:1810.11958 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  4. [12]

    Khemani, A

    V . Khemani, A. Vishwanath, and D. A. Huse, Operator spread- ing and the emergence of dissipative hydrodynamics under uni- tary evolution with conservation laws, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031057 (2018)

    2018

  5. [13]

    von Keyserlingk, T

    C. von Keyserlingk, T. Rakovszky, F. Pollmann, and S. Sondhi, Operator hydrodynamics, OTOCs, and entanglement growth in systems without conservation laws, Phys. Rev. X 8, 021013 (2018), arXiv:1705.08910 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2018 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Y . Wu, P. Zhang, and H. Zhai, Scrambling ability of quantum neural network architectures, Phys. Rev. Research 3, L032057 (2021)

    2021

  7. [15]

    B. C. Dias, M. Haque, P. Ribeiro, and P. McClarty, Di ffusive Operator Spreading for Random Unitary Free Fermion Circuits, (2021), arXiv:2102.09846 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2021 arXiv

  8. [16]

    X.-L. Qi, E. J. Davis, A. Periwal, and M. Schleier-Smith, Mea- suring operator size growth in quantum quench experiments (2019), arXiv:1906.00524 [quant-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  9. [17]

    D. A. Roberts, D. Stanford, and A. Streicher, Operator growth in the syk model, Journal of High Energy Physics 2018, 122 (2018)

    2018

  10. [18]

    Y . D. Lensky, X.-L. Qi, and P. Zhang, Size of bulk fermions in the SYK model, JHEP 10, 053, arXiv:2002.01961 [hep-th]

    2002 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Lucas and A

    A. Lucas and A. Osborne, Operator growth bounds in a cartoon matrix model, J. Math. Phys. 61, 122301 (2020), arXiv:2007.07165 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Chen and A

    C.-F. Chen and A. Lucas, Operator Growth Bounds from Graph Theory, Commun. Math. Phys. 385, 1273 (2021), arXiv:1905.03682 [math-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Lucas, Operator size at finite temperature and planckian bounds on quantum dynamics, Phys

    A. Lucas, Operator size at finite temperature and planckian bounds on quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 216601 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    Yin and A

    C. Yin and A. Lucas, Quantum operator growth bounds for kicked tops and semiclassical spin chains, Phys. Rev. A 103, 042414 (2021), arXiv:2010.06592 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2021 arXiv

  15. [23]

    X. Chen, Y . Gu, and A. Lucas, Many-body quantum dynam- ics slows down at low density, SciPost Phys. 9, 071 (2020), arXiv:2007.10352 [quant-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Omanakuttan, K

    S. Omanakuttan, K. Chinni, P. D. Blocher, and P. M. Poggi, Scrambling and quantum chaos indicators from long-time prop- erties of operator distributions, (2022), arXiv:2211.15872 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Zhou and B

    T. Zhou and B. Swingle, Operator Growth from Global Out-of- time-order Correlators, (2021), arXiv:2112.01562 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Xu and B

    S. Xu and B. Swingle, Scrambling Dynamics and Out-of-Time Ordered Correlators in Quantum Many-Body Systems: a Tuto- rial, (2022), arXiv:2202.07060 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Ippoliti, Y

    M. Ippoliti, Y . Li, T. Rakovszky, and V . Khemani, Operator Re- laxation and the Optimal Depth of Classical Shadows, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 230403 (2023), arXiv:2212.11963 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Hosur, X.-L

    P. Hosur, X.-L. Qi, D. A. Roberts, and B. Yoshida, Chaos in quantum channels, JHEP 02, 004, arXiv:1511.04021 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  21. [29]

    Bhattacharyya, L

    A. Bhattacharyya, L. K. Joshi, and B. Sundar, Quantum infor- mation scrambling: from holography to quantum simulators, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 458 (2022), arXiv:2111.11945 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Padmanabhan, S.-J

    P. Padmanabhan, S.-J. Rey, D. Teixeira, and D. Trancanelli, Supersymmetric many-body systems from partial symmetries — integrability, localization and scrambling, JHEP 05, 136, arXiv:1702.02091 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  23. [31]

    R. Fan, P. Zhang, H. Shen, and H. Zhai, Out-of-Time-Order Correlation for Many-Body Localization, Sci. Bull. 62, 707 (2017), arXiv:1608.01914 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2017 arXiv

  24. [32]

    P. D. Bergamasco, G. G. Carlo, and A. M. F. Rivas, Relevant out-of-time-order correlator operators: Footprints of the classi- cal dynamics, Phys. Rev. E 102, 052133 (2020)

    2020

  25. [33]

    P. D. Bergamasco, G. G. Carlo, and A. M. F. Rivas, Out-of- time ordered correlators, complexity, and entropy in bipartite systems, Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 033044 (2019). 6

    2019

  26. [34]

    J. Li, R. Fan, H. Wang, B. Ye, B. Zeng, H. Zhai, X. Peng, and J. Du, Measuring out-of-time-order correlators on a nuclear magnetic resonance quantum simulator, Phys. Rev. X7, 031011 (2017)

    2017

  27. [35]

    Chen, Entropy linear response theory with non-Markovian bath, JHEP 04, 215, arXiv:2012.00223 [hep-th]

    Y . Chen, Entropy linear response theory with non-Markovian bath, JHEP 04, 215, arXiv:2012.00223 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  28. [37]

    Dadras and A

    P. Dadras and A. Kitaev, Perturbative calculations of entangle- ment entropy, JHEP 03, 198, arXiv:2011.09622 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  29. [38]

    Zhang, Evaporation dynamics of the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model, Phys

    P. Zhang, Evaporation dynamics of the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model, Phys. Rev. B 100, 245104 (2019), arXiv:1909.10637 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2019 arXiv

  30. [39]

    Y . Chen, H. Zhai, and P. Zhang, Tunable Quantum Chaos in the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Model Coupled to a Thermal Bath, JHEP 07, 150, arXiv:1705.09818 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  31. [40]

    Tuziemski, Out-of-time-ordered correlation functions in open systems: A feynman-vernon influence functional approach, Phys

    J. Tuziemski, Out-of-time-ordered correlation functions in open systems: A feynman-vernon influence functional approach, Phys. Rev. A 100, 062106 (2019)

    2019

  32. [41]

    S. V . Syzranov, A. V . Gorshkov, and V . Galitski, Out-of-time- order correlators in finite open systems, Phys. Rev. B 97, 161114 (2018)

    2018

  33. [42]

    Zhang and Z

    P. Zhang and Z. Yu, Dynamical Transition of Operator Size Growth in Quantum Systems Embedded in an Environment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 250401 (2023)

    2023

  34. [43]

    Almheiri, A

    A. Almheiri, A. Milekhin, and B. Swingle, Universal Con- straints on Energy Flow and SYK Thermalization, (2019), arXiv:1912.04912 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  35. [44]

    C. Liu, H. Tang, and H. Zhai, Krylov complexity in open quan- tum systems, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 033085 (2023)

    2023

  36. [45]

    Weinstein, S

    Z. Weinstein, S. P. Kelly, J. Marino, and E. Altman, Scrambling Transition in a Radiative Random Unitary Circuit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 220404 (2023), arXiv:2210.14242 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  37. [46]

    Schuster and N

    T. Schuster and N. Y . Yao, Operator Growth in Open Quantum Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 160402 (2023), arXiv:2208.12272 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  38. [47]

    Bhattacharya, P

    A. Bhattacharya, P. Nandy, P. P. Nath, and H. Sahu, Operator growth and Krylov construction in dissipative open quantum systems, JHEP 12, 081, arXiv:2207.05347 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  39. [48]

    Bhattacharjee, P

    B. Bhattacharjee, P. Nandy, and T. Pathak, Operator dynamics in Lindbladian SYK: a Krylov complexity perspective, JHEP 01, 094, arXiv:2311.00753 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  40. [49]

    Bhattacharjee, X

    B. Bhattacharjee, X. Cao, P. Nandy, and T. Pathak, Operator growth in open quantum systems: lessons from the dissipative SYK, JHEP 03, 054, arXiv:2212.06180 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  41. [50]

    Alternative forms of the system-bath coupling, such as direct hopping, lead to qualita- tively the same behavior

    suggest that the system undergoes a scrambling transi- tion from a scrambling phase to a dissipative phase as V/J is increased beyond a critical value rc. Alternative forms of the system-bath coupling, such as direct hopping, lead to qualita- tively the same behavior. Next, we...

  42. [51]

    A. M. Garc ´ıa-Garc´ıa, J. J. M. Verbaarschot, and J.-p. Zheng, Lyapunov exponent as a signature of dissipative many-body quantum chaos, Phys. Rev. D 110, 086010 (2024)

    2024

  43. [53]

    S. Zhou, P. Zhang, and Z. Yu, Environment-induced Tran- sitions in Many-body Quantum Teleportation, (2024), arXiv:2406.02277 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  44. [54]

    I. L. Aleiner, L. Faoro, and L. B. Io ffe, Microscopic model of quantum butterfly effect: out-of-time-order correlators and trav- eling combustion waves, Annals of Physics 375, 378 (2016)

    2016

  45. [55]

    Considering an initial state without system-probe interaction leads only to a result differing by O(κ2)

  46. [56]

    D. N. Page, Average entropy of a subsystem, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 1291 (1993), arXiv:gr-qc/9305007

    1993 arXiv

  47. [57]

    Maldacena, S

    J. Maldacena, S. H. Shenker, and D. Stanford, A bound on chaos, JHEP 08, 106, arXiv:1503.01409 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  48. [59]

    Stanford, Z

    D. Stanford, Z. Yang, and S. Yao, Subleading Weingartens, JHEP 02, 200, arXiv:2107.10252 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  49. [60]

    Zhang and Y

    P. Zhang and Y . Gu, Operator Size Distribution in Large N Quantum Mechanics of Majorana Fermions, (2022), arXiv:2212.04358 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2022 arXiv

  50. [61]

    Equivalently, we can choose X = iη(c1 S,−k + c1,† S,k), with the aux- iliary Majorana fermion mode η, to make the perturbation op- erator X bosonic

  51. [62]

    Kamenev, Field theory of non-equilibrium systems (Cam- bridge University Press, 2011)

    A. Kamenev, Field theory of non-equilibrium systems (Cam- bridge University Press, 2011)

    2011

  52. [63]

    (2) The equivalence between the Complex SYK (CSYK) model with the quasi-particle approximation and the Brownian Complex SYK (BCSYK) model

    See supplementary material for: (1) The explicit form of the collision integral in the generalized Boltzmann equation, along with the generalized distribution function matrix for the probe and bath. (2) The equivalence between the Complex SYK (CSYK) model with the quasi-partic...

  53. [64]

    Islam, R

    R. Islam, R. Ma, P. M. Preiss, M. E. Tai, A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, and M. Greiner, Measuring entanglement entropy through the interference of quantum many-body twins 10.1038 /na- ture15750 (2015), arXiv:1509.01160 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2015 arXiv

  54. [65]

    A. M. Kaufman, M. E. Tai, A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, R. Schittko, P. M. Preiss, and M. Greiner, Quan- tum thermalization through entanglement in an iso- lated many-body system, Science 353, 794 (2016), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aaf6725

    2016 doi

  55. [66]

    Brydges, A

    T. Brydges, A. Elben, P. Jurcevic, B. Vermersch, C. Maier, B. P. Lanyon, P. Zoller, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Probing R´enyi entanglement entropy via randomized measurements, Science 364, aau4963 (2019)

    2019

  56. [67]

    Elben et al

    A. Elben et al. , Mixed-state entanglement from local ran- domized measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 200501 (2020), arXiv:2007.06305 [quant-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  57. [68]

    S. J. van Enk and C. W. J. Beenakker, Measuring Tr ρn on Sin- gle Copies ofρ Using Random Measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 110503 (2012), arXiv:1112.1027 [quant-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  58. [69]

    Elben, B

    A. Elben, B. Vermersch, M. Dalmonte, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, R´enyi Entropies from Random Quenches in Atomic Hub- bard and Spin Models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 050406 (2018), arXiv:1709.05060 [quant-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  59. [70]

    Elben, B

    A. Elben, B. Vermersch, C. F. Roos, and P. Zoller, Statis- tical correlations between locally randomized measurements: A toolbox for probing entanglement in many-body quantum states, Phys. Rev. A 99, 052323 (2019), arXiv:1812.02624 [quant-ph]. Supplementary Material for Scramb...

    2019 arXiv

  60. [71]

    GENERALIZED BOLTZMANN EQUA TION We begin with the Schwinger-Dyson equation. After introducing the center-of-mass time t and the relative time tr, we obtain: ∂Gss′ S,k(t, t) ∂t = ∫ +∞ −∞ dtr [ (−1)s Σss′′ S,k ( t + tr 2, t− tr 2 ) Gs′′ s′ S,k ( t− tr 2, t + tr 2 ) − (−1)s′ Gss′...

  61. [72]

    Jil, jl,al,bl (t)Jil, jl,al,bl (t′)∗ = o2J{ol}δ(t− t′) 4∏ l=1 ol!No1+o2−1Mo3+o4

    PROOF OF THE EQUIV ALENCE We first introduce the Brownian Complex SYK model, which is restricted to a four-point coupling form: HC(t) = ∑′ {ol} ∑ {il, jl,al,bl} Jil, jl,al,bl (t) c† S,i1 ··· c† S,o1 cS, j1··· cS, jo2 c† B,a1 ··· c† B,ao3 cB,b1··· cB,bo4 + ∑′ {pl} ∑ {il, jl,al,b...

  62. [73]

    ] + ∑ i,m<p<q [ κimpq (t)c† S,ic† P,mcP,pcP,q + H.C

    ENTROPY DYNAMICS FOR SOLV ABLE MODEL By choosing o = (2, 1, 0, 1), p = (1, 0, 1, 2), and q = (1, 0, 1, 2), we construct the BCSYK(3,1) model: H(t) = ∑ i< j,k,m [ Ji jkm(t)c† S,ic† S, jcS,kcV,m + H.C. ] + ∑ i,m<p<q [ κimpq (t)c† S,ic† P,mcP,pcP,q + H.C. ] + ∑ i,m<p<q [ Vimpq (t...

  63. [74]

    Y . Gu, A. Kitaev, and P . Zhang, A two-way approach to out-of-time-order correlators,JHEP 03, 133, arXiv:2111.12007 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  64. [75]

    Zhang, Perturbative Page curve induced by external impulse, JHEP 09, 056, arXiv:2305.18329 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    P . Zhang, Perturbative Page curve induced by external impulse, JHEP 09, 056, arXiv:2305.18329 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    arXiv

  65. [76]

    Zhang and Z

    P . Zhang and Z. Y u, Environment-induced information scrambling transition with charge conservations, AAPPS Bull. 34, 19 (2024) , arXiv:2403.08622 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.