Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

A general replica Keldysh field theory is developed for quantum-jump processes under efficient and inefficient detection, with an application to imbalanced fermion counting showing area-law entanglement and a correlation length set by detec

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 15:32 UTC pith:HP3WJN7Z

load-bearing objection Serious formalism paper — replica Keldysh for quantum-jump processes with state-dependent rates and inefficient detection — with strong numerics; the real open question is the order of limits in the R→1 replica trick, not an evident fatal flaw. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2512.16520 v2 pith:HP3WJN7Z submitted 2025-12-18 quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mech

Replica Keldysh field theory of quantum-jump processes: General formalism and application to imbalanced and inefficient fermion counting

Felix Kloiber-Tollinger , Lukas M. Sieberer This is my paper
classification quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mech MSC 81V7082B1081T10 PACS 03.65.-w05.30.-d71.10.Fd
keywords replica Keldysh field theoryquantum jumpsinefficient detectionmeasurement-induced phase transitionsfermion countingnonlinear sigma modelentanglement entropylogarithmic negativity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper develops a replica Keldysh field theory that describes continuous monitoring of bosonic or fermionic systems via quantum jumps, including the realistic case where only a fraction of jumps is detected. It claims to unify pure-state trajectory dynamics under perfect detection with mixed-state Lindbladian dynamics under inefficient detection, bridging measurement-induced phase transitions and steady states of driven open quantum systems. Applied to one-dimensional fermion counting with imbalanced gain and loss rates, the theory predicts no measurement-induced phase transition: entanglement is area-law for any nonzero jump rate, with an intermediate critical regime, and detection inefficiency introduces a correlation length scaling as the inverse square root of the inefficiency.

Core claim

The central discovery is a functional-integral representation of the trajectory-averaged replicated Keldysh partition function for general quantum-jump processes. The authors show that the action consists of three contributions—Liouvillian, decay, and jump terms—and that for inefficient detection, the jump term is multiplied by detection efficiency, the decay term is multiplied by efficiency, and an additional dissipative Lindbladian contribution emerges. In the replica limit R→1, efficiency and auxiliary jump rates cancel, recovering standard Lindblad-Keldysh theory. For imbalanced fermion counting, the theory yields a nonlinear sigma model with SU(R) or SU(2R)/Sp(R) target manifold, which

What carries the argument

The replica Keldysh field theory for quantum-jump processes, defined by a functional integral over replicated fermionic or bosonic fields on the closed time contour, with three action contributions: Liouvillian, decay, and jump terms. The central technical object is the replicated partition function Z_R, whose trajectory average is performed using a Poisson-distributed rescaled jump ensemble, and whose replica limit R→1 yields physical observables. In the application, the key machinery is the generalized Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation that decouples the measurement-induced vertex into a nonlinear sigma model with Goldstone modes, whose mass is generated by detection inefficiency.

Load-bearing premise

The entire construction relies on the replica trick: physical observables are obtained as the limit R→1 of an R-replica theory, and this limit is assumed to exist and be unique for the interacting replica theory, an assumption the paper explicitly flags as uncontrolled.

What would settle it

Compute the R→1 replica limit non-perturbatively (e.g., via large-N or exact numerical access to the replicated theory) and check whether the correlation length ξ∼(1−η)^−1/2 and area-law entanglement persist; alternatively, an experimental measurement of the correlation length exponent at low detection efficiency that deviates from 1/2 would falsify the central prediction.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Provides a general analytical framework for studying measurement-induced phenomena in quantum-jump processes beyond projective measurements, applicable to bosonic and fermionic systems including interacting ones.
  • Establishes a direct connection between measurement-induced dynamics and nonequilibrium steady states of driven open quantum systems, with inefficient detection interpolating between the two.
  • For imbalanced fermion counting, shows that the absence of a measurement-induced phase transition and the area-law entanglement for any nonzero jump rate persist beyond the balanced, perfectly efficient case.
  • Predicts that detection inefficiency introduces a correlation length scaling as ξ∼(1−η)^−1/2, beyond which genuine entanglement (fermionic logarithmic negativity) is area-law while subsystem entropy is volume-law.
  • Demonstrates that Gaussianity is preserved for inefficient fermion counting, enabling efficient numerical simulations of systems up to L=1000.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same mechanism that suppresses Goldstone-mode fluctuations for η<1—a mass term in the NLSM—may also operate in other monitored systems with non-Hermitian jump operators, suggesting a generic crossover from measurement-induced to Lindbladian behavior as detection becomes inefficient.
  • The ξ∼(1−η)^−1/2 scaling could be tested experimentally in cold-atom or quantum-optical setups by measuring density correlations or subsystem entropies as detection efficiency is varied; the sharp area-law-to-volume-law distinction in the logarithmic negativity may serve as a robust experimental signature.
  • If the replica trick limit R→1 is not unique, the predicted phase structure could be an artifact; however, the numerical confirmation of the correlation length and central-charge behavior suggests the limit is well-controlled in this model.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a replica Keldysh field theory for continuous quantum-jump processes with general, possibly non-Hermitian jump operators, and extends it to inefficient detection. The central technical device is a rescaled Kraus-operator representation that allows the trajectory average to be written as an R-replica functional integral, with physical observables recovered in the R→1 limit. The formalism is then applied to imbalanced and inefficient fermion counting in a 1D lattice. The main physical claims are: (i) for imbalanced but efficient counting there is no measurement-induced phase transition — entanglement is asymptotically area-law for any nonzero jump rate, with an intermediate quantum-critical regime characterized by scales l_0∼γ^{-1}, l_c∼γ^{-2}, l_m∼γ^{-3/2}; (ii) detection inefficiency δη=1−η generates a mass term and a correlation length ξ∼δη^{-1/2}, beyond which the fermionic logarithmic negativity obeys an area law while the von Neumann entropy displays volume-law scaling. These predictions are benchmarked against direct numerical simulations of up to L=1000 sites.

Significance. If the formalism is sound, it fills a genuine gap: previous replica field theories for monitored fermions were largely restricted to projective or generalized measurements at fixed rates and to perfectly efficient detection. The paper's construction is detailed and largely self-contained, with a notable Appendix B deriving the particle-hole-symmetrized Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation and correcting a missing prefactor in Ref. [29]. The application yields five separate scaling predictions (q_c∼γ², l_c∼γ^{-2}, l_m∼γ^{-3/2}, C_0∼δη^{1/2}, ξ∼δη^{-1/2}) that are explicitly checked against numerics. These strengths are substantial. However, the central formalism rests on an uncontrolled R→1 replica limit combined with a saddle-point approximation, and one symmetry assumption is explicitly flagged by the authors as unproven. These issues do not by themselves invalidate the application, but they need to be addressed before the general formalism can be accepted as rigorous.

major comments (2)
  1. [§VI C 1, Eq. (113); see also §III after Eq. (52)] The replica limit is exchanged with the saddle-point evaluation without controlling the O(R−1) dependence. Equation (113) sets 'R=1 in numerical prefactors' to obtain the replica-symmetric saddle point from the action containing the term iRηΣ_α γ_α det_R[tr_K(σ_α G)] in Eq. (102). For R near 1, the derivative of this determinant term shifts the saddle point at O(R−1), and the same applies to the Gaussian fluctuation kernel. Since the NLSM coupling g0, velocity v, and mass term (161) are derived from this Gaussian theory, their values are not shown to be independent of the order of limits. The numerical agreement in Sec. VI F is encouraging but does not resolve the general-formalism issue. I recommend computing the O(R−1) corrections to the saddle-point equations and fluctuation kernel explicitly, or providing a clear prescription for why they vanish in physical observables.
  2. [§VI B 3, after Eq. (110)] For balanced counting with Δγ=0, the block-diagonal form (108) is assumed rather than proved. The paper states 'We did not find a way to exclude the possibility that, for Δγ=0, the remaining third term might admit non-block-diagonal symmetries' and then proceeds with the block-diagonal ansatz. This assumption determines the symmetry group G≃U(1)⋊[SU(R)×SU(R)] and hence the NLSM target manifold in the balanced limit. The main imbalanced application is protected because the term ∝Δγ enforces block diagonality, but the paper claims a general formalism for arbitrary quantum-jump processes; the balanced case is part of that claim and currently rests on an unproven assumption. This should be either proven or explicitly stated as an assumption with its consequences flagged.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§VI D 1, before Eq. (142)] Typo: 'the the measurement Lagrangian' should read 'the measurement Lagrangian'.
  2. [§VI C 2, Eq. (117)] The notation tr_K is used for a partial trace in Keldysh space, but the relation between the density fluctuation δρ_{r,l} and δQ^{G}_{r,r,l} would benefit from an explicit definition of the Keldysh trace convention, since the expression is central to the correlation-function calculation.
  3. [§VI F 1 and Appendix C] The numerical scheme treats jumps at different lattice sites as independent in a randomly ordered sweep. The paper provides benchmarks but no rigorous error estimate for this approximation. This is acceptable for the present numerical results, but a short discussion of the expected error scaling would strengthen the presentation.
  4. [Eqs. (170)–(171)] The fits to extract the exponents q_c∼γ², l_c∼γ^{-2}, l_m∼γ^{-3/2}, C_0∼δη^{1/2}, and ξ∼δη^{-1/2} are presented without confidence intervals or a description of the fitting procedure. Reporting these would make the numerical validation more quantitative.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: central predictions (mass ∝ δη, ξ∼δη^{−1/2}, area-law negativity vs volume-law entropy) are derived in-paper from the actions (75)-(77) and benchmarked by free-fit simulation data; self-citations to Ref. [30] are not load-bearing; the flagged R→1 replica limit is a validity risk, not a circular step.

full rationale

The paper's central new results are derived step by step from a stated microscopic model, not imported from a fit or from prior work. Efficient and inefficient detection are encoded in the two-substep Kraus model (Eqs. 68-69) ("We model a detector of finite efficiency η∈[0,1] by splitting each time step into two substeps", Sec. V), which yields the Keldysh action (75)-(77). The detection-inefficiency mass term in the NLSM, "iδLR[U]=2n(1−n)δη γ[βtrCR(U+U^{−1})−2R]" (Eq. 161), is derived from the (1−η) term of the measurement Lagrangian (145), not posited; the correlation length ξ=l0/√δη (125) is then read off from the Gaussian correlator (122); and the RG-corrected intercept Cq∼√δη (166) completes the chain of analytic predictions. The numerical checks are genuine: fits (170) and (171) contain free parameters (p1, p2, p, ξ), and the extracted "intercept... consistent with the expected scaling∼δη^{1/2}" and "ξ... exhibits the expected scaling ξ∼δη^{−1/2}" (Sec. VI F 2) measure—not insert—the exponents. The NLSM coefficients are fixed internally by "matching it to the Gaussian theory" (Sec. VI D 5), a self-consistency condition rather than a fit to the target observables. Self-citations to Ref. [30] (Starchl, Fischer, Sieberer) supply the balanced-case baseline: NLSM target manifolds, RG flow ("identical to that obtained for balanced counting in Ref. [30]", Sec. VI D 6), and central-charge analysis. These citations are not load-bearing for the new claims because the imbalanced/inefficient manifolds are re-derived in-paper (Sec. VI D 3-5), the same one-loop RG is standard in the external literature [19, 29], and the balanced limit is reproduced with an independent, numerically exact method (Appendix C), which per the independent-validation criterion counts as real evidence, not circularity. The manuscript itself flags its genuine limitations; I weigh these as correctness risks, not circular steps: (i) the replica trick — "This cancellation is lost once we exchange the order of summing over trajectories with the limit R→1" (Sec. III after Eq. 52); (ii) the saddle point is taken with "Setting R=1 in numerical prefactors" (Eq. 113) before the NLSM construction, an order-of-limits assumption; (iii) "We did not find a way to exclude the possibility that, for Δγ=0, the remaining third term might admit non-block-diagonal symmetries" (Sec. VI B 3); (iv) "We have not attempted a rigorous analysis of the error incurred by treating local measurements independently" (Appe

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the standard replica-Keldysh toolkit rather than on data-fitting. The only hand-chosen quantities are the auxiliary jump rates Γ_α (Eq. 18), which the paper shows drop out of the physical action, and the fit parameters used to present numerical comparisons (Eqs. 170-171), which test analytic predictions rather than set constants. The physical model parameters (γ, n, η, J) are inputs, not ad hoc. The axioms are the replica limit itself, the Markovian modelling of monitored reservoirs, the weak-coupling NLSM/RG reasoning, the leading-cumulant truncation, and one admittedly-unproven symmetry assumption at Δγ=0. No new physical entities (particles, forces, dimensions) are introduced; the replica fields, the matrix field G, and the NLSM Goldstone mode U are mathematical scaffolding.

free parameters (2)
  • Auxiliary rescaling rates Γ_α (Γ0, Γ1 or Γa) = chosen freely, not fitted; cancel in replica limit
    Introduced in Eq. (18) ('The rates Γ_a may be chosen freely'); the paper shows they cancel from the final action only after the replica limit R→1, with the intermediate theory explicitly Γ-dependent (Sec. III). They are hand-chosen but do not enter the physical predictions.
  • Numerical fit parameters p1, p2, p, ξ = not quoted (fit constants in Eqs. 170 and 171)
    Fitted to trajectory data via Eqs. (170)-(171) to extract scaling behavior for the comparison plots; the exponents tested (δη^{1/2}, δη^{-1/2}, γ², γ^{-2}, γ^{-3/2}) are analytic predictions, so the fits verify rather than generate the results. They are not parameters of the theoretical claim.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Replica limit: trajectory averages of nonlinear observables are obtained as the R→1 analytic continuation of R-replica partition functions (Eq. 52).
    All physical predictions flow through this limit, and the artificial jump rates Γ cancel only there (Sec. III, after Eq. 52). Standard in the replica-Keldysh literature but analytically uncontrolled.
  • domain assumption Markov, Born, and single-excitation approximations for the monitored baths: Γ_a(t)=γ_a δ(t), perturbation theory to O(Δt) (Appendix A, Eq. A9).
    Defines the class of quantum-jump processes covered; the formalism is constructed for this standard quantum-optical setup and does not extend beyond it.
  • standard math Jordan-Wigner construction of the replicated Hilbert space for fermionic systems (footnote 65).
    Used to define replica density matrices for fermions; standard technical device.
  • domain assumption Weak-coupling validity of the nonlinear sigma model and its one-loop RG flow g=g0−(1/4πβ)ln(l/l0) (Eq. 163), inherited from Refs. [19,30].
    The area-law/no-transition predictions depend on this flow, controlled only for g≫1, i.e., γ/J≪1; the claim 'area law for any nonzero rate' extrapolates beyond the controlled regime.
  • ad hoc to paper Symmetry transformations R are block-diagonal in Keldysh space for balanced counting (Δγ=0) (Sec. VI B 3).
    The paper admits it could not exclude non-block-diagonal symmetries for Δγ=0 and assumes block-diagonality ('...transformations R should remain block-diagonal'). Not needed for the imbalanced application, but part of the general symmetry classification.
  • domain assumption Leading-cumulant truncation of the subsystem entropy series (Eq. 127).
    S_ℓ is evaluated from the second cumulant C^{(2)} only; the paper notes higher cumulants become significant in the volume-law regime, so quantitative entropy coefficients are approximate.
  • standard math Principal-value regularization and symmetrized equal-time limit in the G-based Hubbard-Stratonovich theory (Eqs. 99-100).
    Standard technical device in this literature, following Refs. [19,30,66].

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 47010 in / 32719 out tokens · 311555 ms · 2026-08-03T15:32:55.095029+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Measurement-induced phase transitions have largely been explored for projective or continuous measurements of Hermitian observables, assuming perfect detection without information loss. Yet such transitions also arise in more general settings, including quantum-jump processes with non-Hermitian jump operators, and under inefficient detection. A theoretical framework for treating these broader scenarios has been missing. Here we develop a comprehensive replica Keldysh field theory for general quantum-jump processes in both bosonic and fermionic systems. Our formalism provides a unified description of pure-state quantum trajectories under efficient detection and mixed-state dynamics emerging from inefficient monitoring, with deterministic Lindbladian evolution appearing as a limiting case. It thus establishes a direct connection between phase transitions in nonequilibrium steady states of driven open quantum matter and in measurement-induced dynamics. As an application, we study imbalanced and inefficient fermion counting in a one-dimensional lattice system: monitored gain and loss of fermions occurring at different rates, with a fraction of gain and loss jumps undetected. For imbalanced but efficient counting, we recover the qualitative picture of the balanced case: entanglement obeys an area law for any nonzero jump rate, with an extended quantum-critical regime emerging between two parametrically separated length scales. Inefficient detection introduces a finite correlation length beyond which entanglement, as quantified by the fermionic logarithmic negativity, obeys an area law, while the subsystem entropy shows volume-law scaling. Numerical simulations support our analytical findings. Our results offer a general and versatile theoretical foundation for studying measurement-induced phenomena across a wide class of monitored and open quantum systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.16520 by Felix Kloiber-Tollinger, Lukas M. Sieberer.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Rescaled density correlation function (169) in (a) mo￾mentum space and (b) real space for n = 0.4 and η = 1. (a) The numerical data deviate significantly from the Gaussian correlation function (119) (black dashed line) for ˜ql0 → 0: while the Gaussian result approaches a finite value, Cq/(g0q˜) → 1, the numerical data exhibit a maximum at qc and then decrease toward zero. Inset: The position of the maximum… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Rescaled density correlation function (169) in (a) momen￾tum space and (b) real space for n = 0.4 and γ/J = 0.1. (a) Finite detection inefficiency leads to a nonzero axis intercept for ˜ql0 → 0. Inset: The intercept follows the expected scaling ∼ δη1/2 . (b) In real space, detection inefficiency induces an exponential decay of corre￾lations on large scales. Inset: The fitted correlation length ξ agrees wel… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Rescaled subsystem entropy for γ/J = 0.1 and n = 0.4. For inefficient detection with δη = 1 − η > 0, the subsystem entropy exhibits volume-law scaling. In the limit δη = 1, the numerical data are consistent with Eq. (131), as expected for a fully mixed infinite￾temperature state with fixed fermion density n. contrast, the numerically obtained central charge remains ap￾proximately constant only near its max… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a) Rescaled entanglement entropy and (b) rescaled scale [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Rescaled logarithmic negativity for γ/J = 0.1 and n = 0.4 at varying measurement inefficiencies δη = 1 − η. For δη = 0, the data exhibit approximately logarithmic growth with subsystem size. Any finite δη > 0 leads to area-law scaling on scales ˜ℓ ≳ ξ. This region, with ξ obtained by fitting Eq. (171) to the data in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_5.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Universality of Measurement-Induced Criticality under Symmetry-Breaking Measurements

    cond-mat.stat-mech 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0

    Symmetry-breaking local measurements are a relevant perturbation that drives U(1)-symmetric monitored circuits into the generic non-symmetric MIPT universality class, with finite charge correlation length at any measu...

  2. Super-Logarithmic Entanglement Scaling in a Monitored Superconducting Chain

    quant-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0

    Rare measurements on a 1D spinful s-wave BCS chain dynamically project soft modes onto an SO(R) NLSM whose R→1 weak-anti-localization flow yields steady-state entanglement S(L) ~ ln² L without a WZW term.

  3. Universality of Measurement-Induced Criticality under Symmetry-Breaking Measurements

    cond-mat.stat-mech 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    In U(1)-symmetric monitored random circuits, symmetry-breaking measurements drive the entanglement transition to the non-symmetric universality class and keep the charge correlation length finite at any measurement rate.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

100 extracted references · 6 linked inside Pith · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Owing to the Hermiticity ofH, this condition is equivalently written as UH ⊺U† =−H

    Particle-hole symmetry The quadratic hopping Hamiltonian (78) exhibits PHS if there exists a unitary matrixUwithUU ∗ =±1 such that the Hamiltonian matrixHsatisfiesUH ∗U† =−H[71]. Owing to the Hermiticity ofH, this condition is equivalently written as UH ⊺U† =−H. Here we focus on the caseUU ∗ = +1, which, together with unitarity ofU, implies thatUis symmet...

  2. [2]

    For systems with PHS, Eq

    Generalized Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation with PHS We proceed with a generalized Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation of the particle-hole symmetrized action. For systems with PHS, Eq. (99) must be modified to 1= Z D[G,Σ] e−i Tr[(G+iΨ ¯Ψ)Σ],(143) 16 whereGandΣare now Hermitian 4R×4Rmatrix fields. As before, integrating overΣproduces a delta functiona...

  3. [3]

    VI C, we derived the Gaussian theory by expand- ing the action to quadratic order in fluctuations around the saddle point (113)

    NLSM target manifold for efficient detection,η=1 In Sec. VI C, we derived the Gaussian theory by expand- ing the action to quadratic order in fluctuations around the saddle point (113). For simplicity, we chose the replica- symmetric saddle point as the reference for this expansion. Applying symmetry transformations to the replica-symmetric saddle point g...

  4. [4]

    In this case, the first term in the measurement Lagrangian (145), which contains tr(ΛG) with coefficient 1−η, is nonzero

    Trivial target manifold for inefficient detection,η<1 We now turn to inefficient detection withη<1. In this case, the first term in the measurement Lagrangian (145), which contains tr(ΛG) with coefficient 1−η, is nonzero. Invariance of this term requiresRto satisfy condition (111). However, this is precisely the condition that determines the groupH. Thus,...

  5. [5]

    (156) into Eq

    Nonlinear sigma model Lagrangian The general form of the NLSM action forη=1 can be obtained by inserting the parameterization of the NLSM man- ifold from Eq. (156) into Eq. (146), taking the spatial con- tinuum limit in which the lattice-site indexlis replaced by the continuous coordinatex, and performing a gradient expan- sion [29]. This procedure does n...

  6. [6]

    The NLSM description and thus the RG flow is identical to that obtained for balanced counting in Ref

    Renormalization-group flow of the NLSM Forη=1, the large-scale behavior of our model is gov- erned by the RG flow of the NLSM coupling constantg. The NLSM description and thus the RG flow is identical to that obtained for balanced counting in Ref. [30]. For complete- ness, we briefly recall the relevant results. We then analyze how the RG flow is modified...

  7. [7]

    This enables the use of a simulation scheme that cap- tures the continuous-time limit∆t→0 numerically ex- actly [30, 64]

    Numerical methods For balanced and efficient fermion counting, the rates of gain and loss jumps are state-independent and constant in 19 time. This enables the use of a simulation scheme that cap- tures the continuous-time limit∆t→0 numerically ex- actly [30, 64]. In contrast, for imbalanced and inefficient fermion counting, the jump probabilities depend ...

  8. [8]

    In the steady state, this quantity be- comes time-independent and translationally invariant, so that Cl,l′(t)=C l−l′

    Connected density correlation function The first observable we analyze is the connected density correlation function (115). In the steady state, this quantity be- comes time-independent and translationally invariant, so that Cl,l′(t)=C l−l′. Since the system remains in a Gaussian state at all times, the correlation function can be expressed through the si...

  9. [9]

    (168) asD ℓ =(D l,l′)ℓ l,l′=1 [72]

    Subsystem entropy and effective central charge For the numerical evaluation of the subsystem en- tropy (126) in Gaussian states, we employ the formula Sℓ =− ℓX l=1 [λl ln(λl)+ (1−λ l) ln(1−λ l)],(172) whereλ l are the eigenvalues of the reduced single-particle density matrixD ℓ for a subsystem of sizeℓ, obtained by re- stricting Eq. (168) asD ℓ =(D l,l′)ℓ...

  10. [10]

    [61, 62]

    Fermionic logarithmic negativity To quantify entanglement in mixed-state dynamics forη < 1, we employ the fermionic logarithmic negativity introduced in Refs. [61, 62]. For mixed Gaussian states with vanishing anomalous correlations,⟨ ˆψl ˆψl′⟩=0, the logarithmic negativ- ity can be computed as follows [73]: We consider a bipartition into a subsystemA={1,...

  11. [11]

    Gaussian integrals with PHS We aim to show that Z= Z D[ψ∗,ψ] ei( ¯ΨG−1Ψ+J ⊺Ψ) =Pf −iCG−1 e i 4 J⊺GCJ,(B1) whereGis a matrix in Keldysh, charge-conjugation, replica, and, when applicable, position and discrete-time spaces. Thus,Gis a 4D×4Dmatrix, where 4 is the dimension of the combined Keldysh and charge-conjugation space, andD=R is the dimension of repli...

  12. [12]

    (B1) to derive Wick’s theorem for systems with PHS

    Wick’s theorem We now use Eq. (B1) to derive Wick’s theorem for systems with PHS. To begin, we rewrite Eq. (B1) as ⟨eiJ ⊺Ψ⟩= Z D[ψ∗,ψ] Pf−iCG−1 ei( ¯ΨG−1Ψ+J ⊺Ψ) =e i 4 J⊺GCJ.(B23) Expanding both sides in power series and matching terms in- volving the same total power of components ofJ, here equal to 2F, yields 1 (2F)!⟨ iJ ⊺ Ψ 2F ⟩= 1 F! i 4 J ⊺ GCJ !F .(...

  13. [13]

    Decoupling of measurement vertices with PHS As shown in Ref. [19] for symmetry class AIII, whenG in the generalized Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation (99) is used to describe long-wavelength fluctuations, measure- ment vertices must be decoupled simultaneously in all pos- sible channels. This requirement is satisfied by summing over all Wick contraction...

  14. [14]

    We begin by rewriting the measurement Lagrangian (142) in terms ofG=−iΨ ¯Ψ

    Generalized Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation with PHS Building on the preceding results, we now apply the gen- eralized Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation to the particle- hole-symmetrized actionS=S H +S M with the Hamiltonian action (140) and the measurement Lagrangian (142). We begin by rewriting the measurement Lagrangian (142) in terms ofG=−iΨ ¯Ψ....

  15. [15]

    However, we do not directly implement the trajectory evolution described in Secs

    Conditional evolution During the first time substep, the evolution is conditioned on the measurement outcome, and the algorithm samples dif- ferent outcomes stochastically. However, we do not directly implement the trajectory evolution described in Secs. II and V. Instead, exploiting the locality of the jump processes, we con- struct a more efficient sche...

  16. [16]

    Unconditional evolution Unconditional evolution during the second time substep is governed by Eq. (72). This equation corresponds to the first-order expansion in∆tof the evolution over the interval (1−η ) ∆tgenerated by the Liouvillian (7). In our numerical implementation, we treat this interval exactly by evolving the state under the master equation dˆρ(...

  17. [17]

    No-jump evolution It remains to derive Eq. (C16). For the jump operators in Eq. (C1), the effective Hamiltonian (3) becomes ˆHeff = ˆH−i h ˆH′ +tr(M +) i .(C25) where ˆH′ =− LX l,l′=1 ˆψ† l ∆Ml,l′ ˆψl′,∆M=M +−M−.(C26) For local gain and loss, this expression reduces to ˆHeff = ˆH+ i 2 ∆γ ˆN−Lγ + .(C27) Up to first order in∆t, the no-jump Kraus operator in...

  18. [18]

    Y . Li, X. Chen, and M. P. A. Fisher, Quantum Zeno effect and the many-body entanglement transition, Phys. Rev. B98, 205136 (2018)

    2018

  19. [19]

    Skinner, J

    B. Skinner, J. Ruhman, and A. Nahum, Measurement-Induced Phase Transitions in the Dynamics of Entanglement, Phys. Rev. X9, 031009 (2019)

    2019

  20. [20]

    Y . Li, X. Chen, and M. P. A. Fisher, Measurement-driven en- tanglement transition in hybrid quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. B 100, 134306 (2019)

    2019

  21. [21]

    M. P. Fisher, V . Khemani, A. Nahum, and S. Vijay, Random Quantum Circuits, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys.14, 335 (2023)

    2023

  22. [22]

    X. Cao, A. Tilloy, and A. De Luca, Entanglement in a fermion chain under continuous monitoring, SciPost Phys.7, 024 (2019)

    2019

  23. [23]

    Fuji and Y

    Y . Fuji and Y . Ashida, Measurement-induced quantum critical- ity under continuous monitoring, Phys. Rev. B102, 054302 (2020)

    2020

  24. [24]

    Goto and I

    S. Goto and I. Danshita, Measurement-induced transitions of the entanglement scaling law in ultracold gases with control- lable dissipation, Phys. Rev. A102, 033316 (2020)

    2020

  25. [25]

    Tang and W

    Q. Tang and W. Zhu, Measurement-induced phase transition: A case study in the nonintegrable model by density-matrix renormalization group calculations, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 013022 (2020)

    2020

  26. [26]

    Lang and H

    N. Lang and H. P. B ¨uchler, Entanglement transition in the pro- jective transverse field Ising model, Phys. Rev. B102, 094204 (2020)

    2020

  27. [27]

    Rossini and E

    D. Rossini and E. Vicari, Measurement-induced dynamics of many-body systems at quantum criticality, Phys. Rev. B102, 035119 (2020)

    2020

  28. [28]

    Alberton, M

    O. Alberton, M. Buchhold, and S. Diehl, Entanglement Transi- tion in a Monitored Free-Fermion Chain: From Extended Crit- icality to Area Law, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 170602 (2021)

    2021

  29. [29]

    Y . Bao, S. Choi, and E. Altman, Symmetry enriched phases of quantum circuits, Ann. Phys. (N. Y).435, 168618 (2021)

    2021

  30. [30]

    Buchhold, Y

    M. Buchhold, Y . Minoguchi, A. Altland, and S. Diehl, Effective Theory for the Measurement-Induced Phase Transition of Dirac Fermions, Phys. Rev. X11, 041004 (2021)

    2021

  31. [31]

    Botzung, S

    T. Botzung, S. Diehl, and M. M¨uller, Engineered dissipation in- duced entanglement transition in quantum spin chains: From logarithmic growth to area law, Phys. Rev. B104, 184422 (2021)

    2021

  32. [32]

    Turkeshi, A

    X. Turkeshi, A. Biella, R. Fazio, M. Dalmonte, and M. Schir ´o, Measurement-induced entanglement transitions in the quantum Ising chain: From infinite to zero clicks, Phys. Rev. B103, 224210 (2021)

    2021

  33. [33]

    C.-M. Jian, B. Bauer, A. Keselman, and A. W. W. Ludwig, Crit- icality and entanglement in nonunitary quantum circuits and tensor networks of noninteracting fermions, Phys. Rev. B106, 134206 (2022)

    2022

  34. [34]

    M ¨uller, S

    T. M ¨uller, S. Diehl, and M. Buchhold, Measurement-Induced Dark State Phase Transitions in Long-Ranged Fermion Sys- tems, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 010605 (2022)

    2022

  35. [35]

    Kells, D

    G. Kells, D. Meidan, and A. Romito, Topological transitions in weakly monitored free fermions, SciPost Physics14, 031 (2023)

    2023

  36. [36]

    Poboiko, P

    I. Poboiko, P. P¨opperl, I. V . Gornyi, and A. D. Mirlin, Theory of Free Fermions under Random Projective Measurements, Phys. Rev. X13, 041046 (2023)

    2023

  37. [37]

    C.-M. Jian, H. Shapourian, B. Bauer, and A. W. W. Ludwig, Measurement-induced entanglement transitions in quantum cir- cuits of non-interacting fermions: Born-rule versus forced mea- surements, arXiv:2302.09094 (2023)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    M. Fava, L. Piroli, T. Swann, D. Bernard, and A. Nahum, Nonlinear Sigma Models for Monitored Dynamics of Free Fermions, Phys. Rev. X13, 041045 (2023)

    2023

  39. [39]

    Merritt and L

    J. Merritt and L. Fidkowski, Entanglement transitions with free fermions, Phys. Rev. B107, 064303 (2023)

    2023

  40. [40]

    Chahine and M

    K. Chahine and M. Buchhold, Entanglement phases, localiza- tion, and multifractality of monitored free fermions in two di- mensions, Phys. Rev. B110, 054313 (2024)

    2024

  41. [41]

    Poboiko, I

    I. Poboiko, I. V . Gornyi, and A. D. Mirlin, Measurement- Induced Phase Transition for Free Fermions above One Dimen- sion, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 110403 (2024)

    2024

  42. [42]

    Tsitsishvili, D

    M. Tsitsishvili, D. Poletti, M. Dalmonte, and G. Chiriac`o, Mea- surement induced transitions in non-Markovian free fermion ladders, SciPost Phys. Core7, 011 (2024)

    2024

  43. [43]

    M. Fava, L. Piroli, D. Bernard, and A. Nahum, Monitored fermions with conservedU(1) charge, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 043246 (2024)

    2024

  44. [44]

    Turkeshi, L

    X. Turkeshi, L. Piroli, and M. Schir`o, Density and current statis- tics in boundary-driven monitored fermionic chains, Phys. Rev. B109, 144306 (2024)

    2024

  45. [45]

    H. Guo, M. S. Foster, C.-M. Jian, and A. W. W. Ludwig, Field theory of monitored interacting fermion dynamics with charge conservation, Phys. Rev. B112, 064304 (2025)

    2025

  46. [46]

    Poboiko, P

    I. Poboiko, P. P ¨opperl, I. V . Gornyi, and A. D. Mir- lin, Measurement-induced transitions for interacting fermions, Phys. Rev. B111, 024204 (2025)

    2025

  47. [47]

    Starchl, M

    E. Starchl, M. H. Fischer, and L. M. Sieberer, Generalized Zeno Effect and Entanglement Dynamics Induced by Fermion Count- ing, PRX Quantum6, 030302 (2025)

    2025

  48. [48]

    T. M. M¨uller, M. Buchhold, and S. Diehl, Monitored interacting Dirac fermions, arXiv:2502.02645 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    R. D. Soares, Y . Le Gal, and M. Schir`o, Entanglement transition due to particle losses in a monitored fermionic chain, Phys. Rev. B111, 064313 (2025)

    2025

  50. [50]

    B. Fan, C. Yin, and A. M. Garc ´ıa-Garc´ıa, Entanglement dy- namics of monitored non-interacting fermions on Graphic- Processing-Units, arXiv:2508.18468 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  51. [51]

    Niederegger, T

    C. Niederegger, T. V ovk, E. Starchl, and L. M. Sieberer, Ab- sence of measurement- and unraveling-induced entanglement transitions in continuously monitored one-dimensional free fermions, arXiv:2510.19459 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    Ladewig, S

    B. Ladewig, S. Diehl, and M. Buchhold, Monitored open fermion dynamics: Exploring the interplay of measurement, de- coherence, and free Hamiltonian evolution, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 033001 (2022)

    2022

  53. [53]

    Minoguchi, P

    Y . Minoguchi, P. Rabl, and M. Buchhold, Continuous gaussian measurements of the free boson CFT: A model for exactly solv- able and detectable measurement-induced dynamics, SciPost Physics12, 009 (2022)

    2022

  54. [54]

    Passarelli, X

    G. Passarelli, X. Turkeshi, A. Russomanno, P. Lucignano, M. Schir `o, and R. Fazio, Many-Body Dynamics in Monitored Atomic Gases without Postselection Barrier, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 163401 (2024)

    2024

  55. [55]

    C. Y . Leung, D. Meidan, and A. Romito, Theory of Free Fermions Dynamics under Partial Postselected Monitoring, Phys. Rev. X15, 021020 (2025)

    2025

  56. [56]

    C. Y . Leung and A. Romito, Entanglement and operator corre- lation signatures of many-body quantum Zeno phases in inef- 32 ficiently monitored noisy systems, Phys. Rev. A111, 022427 (2025)

    2025

  57. [57]

    Paviglianiti, G

    A. Paviglianiti, G. D. Fresco, A. Silva, B. Spagnolo, D. Valenti, and A. Carollo, Breakdown of Measurement-Induced Phase Transitions Under Information Loss, Quantum9, 1781 (2025)

    2025

  58. [58]

    Mezard, G

    M. Mezard, G. Parisi, and M. Virasoro,Spin Glass Theory and Beyond, World Scientific Lecture Notes in Physics, V ol. 9 (WORLD SCIENTIFIC, Singapore, 1986)

    1986

  59. [59]

    Evers and A

    F. Evers and A. D. Mirlin, Anderson transitions, Rev. Mod. Phys.80, 1355 (2008)

    2008

  60. [60]

    Y . Bao, S. Choi, and E. Altman, Theory of the phase transi- tion in random unitary circuits with measurements, Phys. Rev. B101, 104301 (2020)

    2020

  61. [61]

    Jian, Y .-Z

    C.-M. Jian, Y .-Z. You, R. Vasseur, and A. W. W. Ludwig, Measurement-induced criticality in random quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. B101, 104302 (2020)

    2020

  62. [62]

    Altland and B

    A. Altland and B. D. Simons,Condensed Matter Field Theory, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010)

    2010

  63. [63]

    L. M. Sieberer, M. Buchhold, and S. Diehl, Keldysh field the- ory for driven open quantum systems, Reports Prog. Phys.79, 096001 (2016)

    2016

  64. [64]

    L. M. Sieberer, M. Buchhold, J. Marino, and S. Diehl, Uni- versality in driven open quantum matter, Rev. Mod. Phys.97, 025004 (2025)

    2025

  65. [65]

    Thompson and A

    F. Thompson and A. Kamenev, Field theory of many-body Lindbladian dynamics, Ann. Phys. (N. Y).455, 169385 (2023)

    2023

  66. [66]

    Kamenev,Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems, 2nd ed

    A. Kamenev,Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2023)

    2023

  67. [67]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, 10th ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012)

    2012

  68. [68]

    Gardiner and P

    C. Gardiner and P. Zoller,The Quantum World of Ultra-Cold Atoms and Light Book I: Foundations of Quantum Optics, Cold Atoms, V ol. 2 (Imperial College Press, London, 2014)

    2014

  69. [69]

    Gardiner and P

    C. Gardiner and P. Zoller,The Quantum World of Ultra-Cold Atoms and Light Book II: The Physics of Quantum-Optical De- vices, Cold Atoms, V ol. 4 (Imperial College Press, London, 2015)

    2015

  70. [70]

    H. M. Wiseman and G. J. Milburn,Quantum Measurement and Control, 1st ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009)

    2009

  71. [71]

    Jacobs,Quantum Measurement Theory and its Applications (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014)

    K. Jacobs,Quantum Measurement Theory and its Applications (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014)

    2014

  72. [72]

    S. Lieu, M. McGinley, and N. R. Cooper, Tenfold Way for Quadratic Lindbladians, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 040401 (2020)

    2020

  73. [73]

    Altland, M

    A. Altland, M. Fleischhauer, and S. Diehl, Symmetry Classes of Open Fermionic Quantum Matter, Phys. Rev. X11, 021037 (2021)

    2021

  74. [74]

    L. S ´a, P. Ribeiro, and T. Prosen, Symmetry Classification of Many-Body Lindbladians: Tenfold Way and Beyond, Phys. Rev. X13, 031019 (2023)

    2023

  75. [75]

    Kawabata, A

    K. Kawabata, A. Kulkarni, J. Li, T. Numasawa, and S. Ryu, Symmetry of Open Quantum Systems: Classification of Dissi- pative Quantum Chaos, PRX Quantum4, 030328 (2023)

    2023

  76. [76]

    Xiao and K

    Z. Xiao and K. Kawabata, Topology of Monitored Quantum Dynamics, arXiv:2412.06133 (2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  77. [77]

    Bhuiyan, H

    A. Bhuiyan, H. Pan, and C.-M. Jian, Free Fermion Dynamics with Measurements: Topological Classification and Adaptive Preparation of Topological States, arXiv:2507.13437 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  78. [78]

    Shapourian, K

    H. Shapourian, K. Shiozaki, and S. Ryu, Partial time-reversal transformation and entanglement negativity in fermionic sys- tems, Phys. Rev. B95, 165101 (2017)

    2017

  79. [79]

    Shapourian and S

    H. Shapourian and S. Ryu, Entanglement negativity of fermions: Monotonicity, separability criterion, and classifica- tion of few-mode states, Phys. Rev. A99, 022310 (2019)

    2019

  80. [80]

    M. B. Plenio and P. L. Knight, The quantum-jump approach to dissipative dynamics in quantum optics, Rev. Mod. Phys.70, 101 (1998)

    1998

Showing first 80 references.