REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 50 references
Imprints of information scrambling on eigenstates of a quantum chaotic system
T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read Correlations among quartets of eigenstates of the time-evolution operator encode the full spatiotemporal anatomy of information scrambling in a chaotic quantum system, and this paper derives them exactly for dual-unitary circuits.
desk verdict Clean exact identities connecting four-eigenstate correlations to scrambling diagnostics, with analytic lightcone results in dual-unitary circuits; the inside-lightcone formulas are numerical extrapolations presented as exact. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The load-bearing structure is the four-copy representation of the unitary: $U_t$ is mapped to a state $|U_t\rangle$ in the doubled Hilbert space, and second-Rényi entanglement quantities require two copies of $|U_t\rangle$ and two of $\langle U_t|$, producing tensor networks with four-index legs. The central object is the eigenstate correlation kernel $V^{(X)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\lambda}$, built from amplitudes of four eigenstates restricted to a subsystem $X$, together with the eigenphase combination $\theta_{\alpha\beta\gamma\lambda}$; these assemble into $F^{XY}(t)$ of Eq. (6). In dual-unitary circuits the four-copy network collapses to repeated applications of averaged transfer matrices: a one-dimensional chain on the lightcone with eigenvalues $4$ and $4\Lambda$; a ribbon of width $|d|+1$ inside the lightcone whose transfer matrix $T_2^{(d)}$ has leading eigenvalue $2$ and subleading $2\Gamma_d$; and an analogous matrix $T_3^{(d)}$ for macroscopic subsystems whose spectral gap is again $4\Lambda$. Unitarity and dual-unitarity diagrammatic rules are what peel the networks down to these transfer matrices.
What would settle it
Directly evaluate the eigenstate correlations in Floquet dual-unitary circuits at late times for several distances below the lightcone edge ($d \le -2$) in systems larger than those reported, and compare with the predicted saturation values and decay rates ($\Gamma_d$ for local subsystems, $2|\ln\Lambda|$ for macroscopic ones); alternatively, diagonalize the full ribbon transfer matrices at larger $|d|$ and check that no eigenvalue beyond the claimed leading and subleading ones contributes to the boundary contractions. A deviation in the saturation value, an additional contributing eigenvalue, or a $d$-dependent macroscopic decay rate would settle the claim as false.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The paper's central claim is that the full spatiotemporal anatomy of information scrambling is imprinted on four-eigenstate correlations of the Floquet unitary $U_F$. Writing $U_t$ as a state in a doubled Hilbert space and taking four copies, the second-Rényi operator mutual information between a subsystem $X$ at time $0$ and a subsystem $Y$ at time $t$ reduces exactly to $\exp[I^{XY}_2(U_t)] = q^{|X|+|Y|-2L} F^{XY}(t)$, where $F^{XY}(t) = \sum_{\alpha\beta\gamma\lambda} e^{-it\theta_{\alpha\beta\gamma\lambda}} V^{(X)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\lambda}(V^{(Y)}_{\alpha\beta\gamma\lambda})^*$ sums correlations among four eigenstates $|\alpha\rangle,|\beta\rangle,|\gamma\rangle,|\lambda\rangle$ with the eigenphase combination $\theta_{\alpha\beta\gamma\lambda} = \theta_\alpha-\theta_\beta-\theta_\gamma+\theta_\lambda$. The same $F^{XY}$ determines averaged two-point dynamical correlations and averaged OTOCs, so the framework unifies diagnostics that previously appeared separate. For Floquet dual-unitary circuits with qubits, the paper derives exact expressions: on the lightcone the local correlation decays as $4^{L-1}(1+3\Lambda^{2t})$, inside the lightcone OTOC-type correlations decay with a rate set by the distance from the lightcone through $\Gamma_d$, and for macroscopic subsystems the operator mutual information decays as $1 + 3(|d|+1)\Lambda^{2t-|d|}$ while the operator entanglement entropy grows linearly in time along velocity rays inside the lightcone.
Load-bearing premise
The load-bearing premise is that the numerically determined spectra of the averaged ribbon transfer matrices are complete and correctly extrapolated: if an unaccounted eigenvalue contributes, or the small-distance prefactor fits stop holding at larger distances, the explicit inside-lightcone decay formulas fail.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- The four-eigenstate correlation $F^{XY}$ is a single quantity from which operator mutual information, operator entanglement entropy, averaged two-point functions, and averaged OTOCs all follow, so measuring it fixes all the scrambling diagnostics for every subsystem pair.
- In dual-unitary circuits, all nontrivial two-point correlations and the operator mutual information vanish away from the lightcone, and on the lightcone they decay as $\Lambda^{2t}$ with $\Lambda = (2-\cos 4J)/3$, giving the butterfly lightcone a concrete spectral imprint.
- Inside the lightcone, OTOC-type correlations decay exponentially with a rate determined by the distance from the lightcone edge through $\Gamma_d$, not by the ray velocity, going beyond velocity-dependent Lyapunov exponents which are not well defined in the interior.
- For macroscopic subsystems, the operator mutual information decays at the same rate $2|\ln\Lambda|$ for all $d\le 0$, which translates along a ray of velocity $v$ to $\gamma(v) = |\ln\Lambda|(1+v/2)$ for $v\le 2$, and the operator entanglement entropy of $X\cup Y$ grows linearly in time inside the lightcone.
- In the frequency domain the correlation $\tilde F^{XY}(\omega)$ is supported on the four-eigenphase combination $\omega = \theta_{\alpha\beta\gamma\lambda}$, so spectral data of the Floquet unitary directly encode the lightcone structure.
Reading between the lines
- The paper notes that two-point correlations of operators with local and macroscopic support can reconstruct local OTOCs; taken literally, this suggests a spectral protocol that extracts scrambling data from averaged two-point measurements without time-resolved OTOC experiments, a step the paper does not take.
- A natural test of whether the interior decay structure is generic rather than a dual-unitary speciality: compute $F^{XY}$ in a generic (non-dual-unitary) chaotic Floquet model and check whether OTOC decay rates organize by distance from the lightcone edge rather than by ray velocity.
- The paper flags conserved systems as the next target; a concrete first step would be recomputing $F^{XY}$ in a dual-unitary circuit with a conserved charge and looking for sub-ballistic lightcone signatures and anomalous correlation decay in the four-eigenstate data.
- Because the framework identity is algebraic, it should hold for any unitary evolution; the exact DU results act as the calibrated test case against which approximate or numerical four-eigenstate analyses of more physical Hamiltonians can be benchmarked.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper develops a framework connecting the spatiotemporal structure of information scrambling to correlations among four eigenstates of the Floquet unitary. The central identity, Eq. (5), expresses the operator mutual information exp[I_2^{XY}(U_t)] in terms of a four-eigenstate correlation F^{XY}(t), and Eqs. (9)-(10) connect the same object to averaged two-point functions and OTOCs. The authors then specialize to Floquet dual-unitary circuits and, using diagrammatic reductions and averaged transfer matrices, obtain explicit expressions for these eigenstate correlations when X and Y are single sites (Eqs. (14) and (16)) and when they are macroscopic subsystems (Eqs. (17)-(18)). The on-lightcone (d=0) results for the two-point channel are derived analytically from the spectrum of a one-dimensional averaged transfer matrix. The inside-lightcone (d<0) results for the OTOC channel and for the macroscopic operator mutual information depend on numerical diagonalizations of the transfer matrices T_2^{(d)} and T_3^{(d)} for |d|<=4, with inferred prefactors and subleading eigenvalues.
Significance. The algebraic framework is the strongest part of the paper: Eqs. (5), (9), and (10) are exact identities following from spectral decomposition and unitarity, with no fitted constants, and the d=0 results are controlled analytically with explicit transfer-matrix eigenvalues 4 and 4 Lambda. The exact reduction leading to Eq. (18) is also a clear diagrammatic achievement. If the inside-lightcone spectral extrapolations were proven, the paper would provide a genuinely new demonstration that eigenstate quartets encode the full anatomy of scrambling beyond random matrix theory and ETH. As it stands, the d<0 results are presented as exact while their load-bearing coefficients are numerical fits over small |d|; this discrepancy is the main barrier to accepting the paper's central claim as stated.
major comments (3)
- [Eq. (16) and Supp. Sec. II] The inside-lightcone result for the local OTOC channel, Eq. (16), is quoted as an exact closed form, but its content for d<0 rests entirely on numerical diagonalization of T_2^{(d)} for |d|<=4. The leading eigenvalue 2, the subleading eigenvalue 2 Gamma_d, the claimed degeneracies, and the prefactor c_d are extracted from fits over a small number of d values; the transfer-matrix dimension grows as 2^{4(2|d|+1)}, so the manuscript provides no evidence that the retained eigenvectors dominate the boundary contractions at larger |d|. Since the d-dependent decay rate of OTOCs inside the lightcone is a central physical claim, this needs either an analytic derivation of the relevant spectral data or a clearly labeled numerical/conjectural status with independent convergence checks and release of the spectra and scripts.
- [Eq. (17) and Supp. Eq. (S25)] The macroscopic operator mutual information result for d<=0 is stated in Eq. (17) as an exact equality, but the supplementary material explicitly defines the prefactor only approximately: e_d ~ 3(|d|+1)/Lambda^{|d|}, inferred from a data collapse over d=0,...,-4. The main text then uses this approximate prefactor to assert an exact exponential decay rate and a velocity-dependent rate gamma(v). This is load-bearing because the finer inside-lightcone structure is a headline result. The authors should either derive the eigenvector overlaps of T_3^{(d)} analytically for all d, or reformulate Eq. (17) and the surrounding discussion as a numerically supported conjecture, with the approximation transparently stated in the main text.
- [Abstract and Conclusions] The language 'we derive exact results for eigenstate correlations' and 'we obtain exact results' overstates what is actually established for the d<0 sector. The exact framework identities and the d=0 analysis are exact, but the inside-lightcone expressions are numerical extrapolations. The manuscript should distinguish these two levels explicitly wherever 'exact' is used, and the hatched regions in Fig. 3 should be described in the main text as regions where the presented behavior is an extrapolation beyond the computed |d|.
minor comments (5)
- [Notation throughout] The two correlation functions F^{XY}(t) and \bar F^{XY}(t) are not consistently distinguished in the main text; Eq. (10) uses the barred quantity while Eq. (5) uses the unbarred one, and in several places both render identically. Please introduce and use a clear notation for both throughout.
- [Eqs. (15) and unnumbered macro expression after Eq. (18)] The frequency-domain expressions are presented without stating the Fourier convention or the derivation. Since fixed spatial separation r is related to t and d by r=2t+2d, the transformation between time and frequency is nontrivial; please add the derivation and the convention used.
- [Fig. 3] The heatmaps would benefit from labeled axes with explicit values of J, L, and the time range, and a color scale; the hatched regions should be explained in the caption as regions where the transfer-matrix size prevents direct computation.
- [Supplementary figures] Fig. S1 and Fig. S2 do not state the system size L, boundary conditions, or the number of disorder/sample realizations used in the numerical evaluation of the circuit diagrams; this information is needed to assess finite-size effects and reproducibility.
- [Typos] There are several typographical errors, including 'sptiotemporal' in the introduction, 'etropies' in the conclusions, and 'a la' with a stray space in the main text; these should be corrected in revision.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity: the framework identities are algebraic and the dual-unitary results are computed from the model's own transfer matrices.
full rationale
The central identities, Eqs. (5), (9), and (10), follow from spectral decomposition of the Floquet unitary together with unitarity; no fitted parameter enters and no target quantity is used to define another target quantity. The dual-unitary-circuit results are derived by circuit-diagrammatic reductions to averaged transfer matrices, whose eigenvalues and eigenvector contractions are spectral data of those auxiliary matrices, not parameters fitted to the correlations being reported. The self-citations [10,12] are contextual references to earlier work on four-eigenstate correlations and do not carry the present derivation. The only noteworthy caveat is that the inside-lightcone formulas in Eqs. (16) and (17) rely on numerically extracted or extrapolated spectral data for the transfer matrices, and the prefactors such as e_d are quoted from finite-|d| numerical analysis rather than proven for all d. That is a rigor or verifiability concern about the claimed exactness, not a circularity: the framework identities and the lightcone results remain independent of the fitted-looking constants, and no prediction is shown to reduce by construction to the data it is meant to explain.
Assumptions & free parameters
free parameters (3)
- Gamma_d (subleading eigenvalue ratio of T_2^{(d)}) =
d-dependent; e.g. ~0.93 for d=-1, decreasing with |d| (Fig. S1)
- c_d (prefactor in Eq. 16) =
d-dependent; extracted from eigenvector overlaps (Supp. Sec. II)
- e_d (prefactor in Eq. 17) =
~ 3(|d|+1)/Lambda^{|d|}
assumptions (3)
- domain assumption The Haar average over single-site gates u±,v± is the relevant ensemble for Floquet dual-unitary circuits, and results for the average describe the scrambling structure.
- standard math Spectral decomposition and unitarity identities suffice to reduce opMI to F^{XY}(t).
- domain assumption The transfer-matrix spectral decomposition is dominated by a few eigenvalues; subleading contributions are captured by Gamma_d and Lambda.
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Imprints of information scrambling on eigenstates of a quantum chaotic system." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZDYE6VHG
@misc{pith2026250702853,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Imprints of information scrambling on eigenstates of a quantum chaotic system},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZDYE6VHG}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.02853}
}
read the original abstract
How are the spatial and temporal patterns of information scrambling in locally interacting quantum many-body systems imprinted on the eigenstates of the system's time-evolution operator? We address this question by identifying statistical correlations among sets of minimally four eigenstates that provide a unified framework for various measures of information scrambling. These include operator mutual information and operator entanglement entropy of the time-evolution operator, as well as more conventional diagnostics such as two-point dynamical correlations and out-of-time-ordered correlators. We demonstrate this framework by deriving exact results for eigenstate correlations in a minimal model of quantum chaos -- Floquet dual-unitary circuits. These results reveal not only the butterfly effect and the information lightcone, but also finer structures of scrambling within the lightcone. Our work thus shows how the eigenstates of a chaotic system can encode the full spatiotemporal anatomy of quantum chaos, going beyond the descriptions offered by random matrix theory and the eigenstate thermalisation hypothesis.
Figures
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[34]
F. Fritzsch and T. c. v. Prosen, Eigenstate thermaliza- tion in dual-unitary quantum circuits: Asymptotics of spectral functions, Phys. Rev. E 103, 062133 (2021)
work page 2021
-
[38]
F. Fritzsch, M. F. I. Kieler, and A. B¨ acker, Eigenstate Correlations in Dual-Unitary Quantum Circuits: Partial Spectral Form Factor, Quantum 9, 1709 (2025)
work page 2025
-
[1]
J. M. Deutsch, Quantum statistical mechanics in a closed system, Phys. Rev. A 43, 2046 (1991); Eigenstate thermalization hypothesis, Rep. Prog. Phys. 81, 082001 (2018)
work page 1991
-
[2]
Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys
M. Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys. Rev. E 50, 888 (1994)
1994
-
[3]
D’Alessio, Y
L. D’Alessio, Y. Kafri, A. Polkovnikov, and M. Rigol, From quantum chaos and eigenstate thermalization to statistical mechanics and thermodynamics, Advances in Physics 65, 239–362 (2016)
2016
-
[4]
Foini and J
L. Foini and J. Kurchan, Eigenstate thermalization hy- pothesis and out of time order correlators, Phys. Rev. E 99, 042139 (2019)
2019
-
[5]
A. Chan, A. De Luca, and J. T. Chalker, Eigenstate cor- relations, thermalization, and the butterfly effect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 220601 (2019)
2019
-
[6]
Pappalardi, L
S. Pappalardi, L. Foini, and J. Kurchan, Eigenstate ther- malization hypothesis and free probability, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 170603 (2022)
2022
Show all 50 references
-
[7]
Z. D. Shi, S. Vardhan, and H. Liu, Local dynamics and the structure of chaotic eigenstates, Phys. Rev. B 108, 224305 (2023)
2023
-
[8]
D. Hahn, D. J. Luitz, and J. T. Chalker, Eigenstate cor- relations, the eigenstate thermalization hypothesis, and quantum information dynamics in chaotic many-body quantum systems, Phys. Rev. X 14, 031029 (2024)
2024
-
[9]
Jindal and P
S. Jindal and P. Hosur, Generalized free cumulants for quantum chaotic systems (2024), arXiv:2401.13829 [cond-mat.stat-mech]
2024 arXiv
-
[10]
Pain and S
B. Pain and S. Roy, Entanglement dynamics and eigen- state correlations in strongly disordered quantum many- body systems, Phys. Rev. B 110, 224201 (2024)
2024
-
[11]
Pappalardi, F
S. Pappalardi, F. Fritzsch, and T. Prosen, Full eigenstate thermalization via free cumulants in quantum lattice sys- tems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 140404 (2025)
2025
-
[12]
Thakur, B
R. Thakur, B. Pain, and S. Roy, Logarithmic entangle- ment light cone from eigenstate correlations in the many- body localized phase, Phys. Rev. B 111, 174206 (2025)
2025
-
[13]
Prosen and I
T. Prosen and I. Piˇ zorn, Operator space entanglement entropy in a transverse Ising chain, Phys. Rev. A 76, 032316 (2007)
2007
-
[14]
Piˇ zorn and T
I. Piˇ zorn and T. Prosen, Operator space entanglement entropy in XY spin chains, Phys. Rev. B 79, 184416 (2009)
2009
-
[15]
Zhou and D
T. Zhou and D. J. Luitz, Operator entanglement entropy of the time evolution operator in chaotic systems, Phys. Rev. B 95, 094206 (2017)
2017
-
[16]
Jonay, D
C. Jonay, D. A. Huse, and A. Nahum, Coarse-grained dynamics of operator and state entanglement (2018), arXiv:1803.00089 [cond-mat.stat-mech]
2018 arXiv
-
[17]
Mascot, M
E. Mascot, M. Nozaki, and M. Tezuka, Local operator entanglement in spin chains, SciPost Phys. Core 6, 070 6 (2023)
2023
-
[18]
E. H. Lieb and D. W. Robinson, The finite group velocity of quantum spin systems, Commun. Math. Phys. 28, 251 (1972)
1972
-
[19]
D. A. Roberts and D. Stanford, Diagnosing chaos using four-point functions in two-dimensional conformal field theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 131603 (2015)
2015
-
[20]
Maldacena, S
J. Maldacena, S. H. Shenker, and D. Stanford, A bound on chaos, Journal of High Energy Physics 2016, 106 (2016)
2016
-
[21]
Hosur, X.-L
P. Hosur, X.-L. Qi, D. A. Roberts, and B. Yoshida, Chaos in quantum channels, Journal of High Energy Physics 2016, 1 (2016)
2016
-
[22]
I. L. Aleiner, L. Faoro, and L. B. Ioffe, Microscopic model of quantum butterfly effect: Out-of-time-order correla- tors and traveling combustion waves, Annals of Physics 375, 378 (2016)
2016
-
[23]
Bohrdt, C
A. Bohrdt, C. B. Mendl, M. Endres, and M. Knap, Scrambling and thermalization in a diffusive quantum many-body system, New J. Phys. 19, 063001 (2017)
2017
-
[24]
D. J. Luitz and Y. Bar Lev, Information propagation in isolated quantum systems, Phys. Rev. B 96, 020406 (2017)
2017
-
[25]
Kukuljan, S
I. Kukuljan, S. Grozdanov, and T. Prosen, Weak quan- tum chaos, Phys. Rev. B 96, 060301 (2017)
2017
-
[26]
Nahum, S
A. Nahum, S. Vijay, and J. Haah, Operator spreading in random unitary circuits, Phys. Rev. X 8, 021014 (2018)
2018
-
[27]
C. W. von Keyserlingk, T. Rakovszky, F. Pollmann, and S. L. Sondhi, Operator hydrodynamics, OTOCs, and en- tanglement growth in systems without conservation laws, Phys. Rev. X 8, 021013 (2018)
2018
-
[28]
Bertini, P
B. Bertini, P. Kos, and T. Prosen, Exact spectral form factor in a minimal model of many-body quantum chaos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 264101 (2018)
2018
-
[29]
Bertini, P
B. Bertini, P. Kos, and T. Prosen, Entanglement spread- ing in a minimal model of maximal many-body quantum chaos, Phys. Rev. X 9, 021033 (2019)
2019
-
[30]
Bertini, P
B. Bertini, P. Kos, and T. Prosen, Exact correlation func- tions for dual-unitary lattice models in 1 + 1 dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 210601 (2019)
2019
-
[31]
Bertini, P
B. Bertini, P. Kos, and T. Prosen, Operator Entangle- ment in Local Quantum Circuits I: Chaotic Dual-Unitary Circuits, SciPost Phys. 8, 067 (2020)
2020
-
[32]
Piroli, B
L. Piroli, B. Bertini, J. I. Cirac, and T. Prosen, Exact dynamics in dual-unitary quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. B 101, 094304 (2020)
2020
-
[33]
P. W. Claeys and A. Lamacraft, Maximum velocity quan- tum circuits, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033032 (2020)
2020
-
[35]
P. W. Claeys and A. Lamacraft, Ergodic and noner- godic dual-unitary quantum circuits with arbitrary local hilbert space dimension, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 100603 (2021)
2021
-
[36]
Aravinda, S
S. Aravinda, S. A. Rather, and A. Lakshminarayan, From dual-unitary to quantum bernoulli circuits: Role of the entangling power in constructing a quantum ergodic hi- erarchy, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 043034 (2021)
2021
-
[37]
P. W. Claeys and A. Lamacraft, Operator dynamics and entanglement in space-time dual hadamard lattices, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 57, 405301 (2024)
2024
-
[39]
Foligno and B
A. Foligno and B. Bertini, Entanglement of Disjoint In- tervals in Dual-Unitary Circuits: Exact Results, Quan- tum 9, 1678 (2025)
2025
-
[40]
Bertini, P
B. Bertini, P. W. Claeys, and T. Prosen, Exactly solvable many-body dynamics from space-time duality (2025), arXiv:2505.11489 [cond-mat.stat-mech]
2025 arXiv
-
[41]
This is simply due to the fact that for iY to lie at dis- tance 2|d| inside the lightcone, the latter must spread to distance 2|d| at least which requires t >|d|
-
[42]
Khemani, D
V. Khemani, D. A. Huse, and A. Nahum, Velocity- dependent lyapunov exponents in many-body quantum, semiclassical, and classical chaos, Phys. Rev. B 98, 144304 (2018)
2018
-
[43]
Yoshimura, S
T. Yoshimura, S. J. Garratt, and J. T. Chalker, Operator dynamics in floquet many-body systems, Phys. Rev. B 111, 094316 (2025)
2025
-
[44]
G. O. Alves, F. Fritzsch, and P. W. Claeys, Probes of full eigenstate thermalization in ergodicity-breaking quan- tum circuits (2025), arXiv:2504.08517 [cond-mat.stat- mech]
2025
-
[45]
McCulloch, J
E. McCulloch, J. A. Jacoby, C. von Keyserlingk, and S. Gopalakrishnan, Subexponential decay of lo- cal correlations from diffusion-limited dephasing (2025), arXiv:2504.05380 [quant-ph]
2025 arXiv
-
[46]
Rakovszky, F
T. Rakovszky, F. Pollmann, and C. W. von Keyserlingk, Sub-ballistic Growth of R´ enyi Entropies due to Diffusion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 250602 (2019)
2019
-
[47]
Zhou and A
T. Zhou and A. W. W. Ludwig, Diffusive scaling of R´ enyi entanglement entropy, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033020 (2020)
2020
-
[48]
ˇZnidariˇ c, Entanglement growth in diffusive systems, Communications Physics 3, 100 (2020)
M. ˇZnidariˇ c, Entanglement growth in diffusive systems, Communications Physics 3, 100 (2020)
2020
-
[49]
Fishman, S
M. Fishman, S. R. White, and E. M. Stoudenmire, The ITensor Software Library for Tensor Network Calcula- tions, SciPost Phys. Codebases , 4 (2022). 7 END MA TTER In the main text, we mentioned that the exact re- sults for the eigenstate correlations can be obtained using a com...
2022
-
[50]
1 + 3 2 − cos 4J 3 2t# × 4L−2t−1 = 4L−1
into S′, the tensor T1 can be expressed as a 16 × 16 matrix which can be readily diagonalised. Diagonalisation leads to two non-zero eigenvalues, S2 e0 = 4 and e1 = 4(2 − cos 4J)/3 and the respective eigenvectors denoted by |e0/1⟩. The tensor T 2t 1 can therefore be written as...
Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.