Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

The stabilizer Rényi entropy of an infinite matrix product state carries its own correlation length, distinct from the standard one, that diverges at continuous phase transitions.

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

2026-08-02 22:58 UTC pith:YDAL7VTW

load-bearing objection Exact skeleton results and the SRE correlation length definition are the real contributions; the universal-criticality claim is a conjecture supported by suggestive, not conclusive, numerics. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.15116 v2 pith:YDAL7VTW submitted 2026-02-16 quant-ph

Spectral signatures of nonstabilizerness and criticality in infinite matrix product states

Andrew Hallam , Ryan Smith , Zlatko Papi\'c This is my paper
classification quant-ph
keywords stabilizer Rényi entropynonstabilizernessmatrix product statestransfer matrixcorrelation lengthcluster-Ising modelquantum criticalitymutual magic
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 sets out to show that nonstabilizerness—'magic'—is not just a resource count but carries genuine many-body correlation structure: for a subsystem embedded in an infinite matrix product state, the stabilizer Rényi entropy decomposes into an extensive bulk term, a boundary mutual-magic term, and an exponentially decaying correction. The decay rate defines an SRE correlation length, extracted from the subleading spectrum of the replica transfer matrix, which is generally different from the ordinary correlation length and diverges at continuous phase transitions. On the exactly solvable χ = 2 MPS skeleton of the cluster-Ising model, the paper derives closed forms for all these quantities and shows the SRE correlation length diverges as g^(−2) while the standard one goes as g^(−1). Along the Z2 critical lines of the cluster-Ising model, the mutual SRE approaches a universal logarithmic scaling whose coefficient is consistent with the boundary conformal field theory value 1/8. A sympathetic reader would care because this gives a concrete, computable diagnostic through which magic can detect criticality even when the SRE density itself behaves smoothly.

Core claim

The central claim is that the eigenspectrum of the SRE replica transfer matrix E—not just its dominant eigenvalue—carries universal information. For an N-site subsystem, the paper derives M^(n)(ρ) = N log μ1/(1−n) + [log(c1 + f(N))]/(1−n), with f(N) ≈ c2 e^(−N/ξ_SRE) for large N; the length ξ_SRE = −1/log|μ2/μ1| is the SRE correlation length. This length governs both the approach of subsystem SRE to its thermodynamic limit and the exponential decay of SRE correlations induced by two spatially separated local unitary perturbations. The paper argues and verifies that ξ_SRE diverges at continuous phase transitions—with a different exponent from the standard correlation length—so nonstabilizerne

What carries the argument

The central object is the replica transfer matrix E (Eq. 9), built from 2n copies of the MPS tensor and Pauli replica operators; its spectral decomposition E = Σ μ_i |R_i^m)(L_i^m| generalizes the ordinary MPS transfer matrix. The ratio of subleading to leading eigenvalues defines ξ_SRE, while the overlap c1 between the dominant eigenvectors of E and the replicated ordinary transfer matrix defines the boundary/mutual SRE. This spectral split converts the SRE of a finite subsystem into a three-term expression (extensive, boundary, exponential correction), and converts two-point responses of magic into a sum of a disconnected term plus an exponential with length ξ_SRE.

Load-bearing premise

The broad claim that ξ_SRE diverges at every continuous phase transition rests on the assumption that the gap between the two leading eigenvalues of the SRE replica transfer matrix closes at the same critical points as the ordinary transfer matrix gap; this is proven exactly only for the χ = 2 skeleton and verified numerically along the cluster-Ising critical lines within a limited window.

What would settle it

Compute the ratio |μ2/μ1| of the SRE replica transfer matrix for an iMPS approximation of a known continuous phase transition, e.g., in the XXZ or J1–J2 chain, and check whether it approaches 1, i.e., whether ξ_SRE diverges. If for some transition the ordinary correlation length diverges while |μ2/μ1| stays bounded below 1, the universal-criticality claim fails. A more direct check is to look for the predicted exponential decay e^(−r/ξ_SRE) in the two-point SRE response in finite exact-diagonalization chains; if the decay instead follows the standard correlation length ξ, the distinct-length c

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

If this is right

  • The SRE of a finite subsystem is not featureless: it carries an exponentially decaying correction whose length scale can be read off from the second eigenvalue of the replica transfer matrix.
  • The SRE correlation length diverges at continuous phase transitions, so it can label critical points even where the SRE density or mutual SRE looks smooth.
  • Magic correlations respond to local unitaries with a characteristic decay e^(−r/ξ_SRE), giving an operational way to measure nonstabilizerness length scales.
  • For the χ = 2 cluster-Ising skeleton, exact formulas give ξ ≈ 1/(2g) and ξ_SRE ≈ 1/(14g²); the SRE reaches its maximum at g* = ±(3−2√2), where the preparing unitaries are closest to magic gates.
  • Along the Z2 critical line, the mutual SRE grows as (1/8) log ξ_SRE after a pre-asymptotic crossover, matching the predicted boundary CFT coefficient.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the gap of the SRE replica transfer matrix closes generically at criticality, ξ_SRE could become a standard numerical diagnostic for magic-specific length scales, complementing entanglement entropy.
  • The exact skeleton shows ξ_SRE diverges faster than ξ, suggesting magic correlations may be longer-ranged than ordinary ones near criticality; if this persists in other models, it would mean nonstabilizerness is a more sensitive probe of long-range order.
  • A testable extension is to compute ξ_SRE for other critical chains, e.g., the XXZ chain or J1–J2 chain, and check whether the ratio of critical exponents tracks properties of the replicated CFT.
  • The sign of the mutual SRE is negative in the SPT phase of the skeleton, hinting that it encodes entanglement dominance; one could ask whether this sign correlates with symmetry-protected topological order in general.

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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a spectral transfer-matrix framework for the stabilizer Rényi entropy (SRE) of infinite matrix product states. For an N-site subsystem, Eqs. (17)–(19) decompose the SRE into an extensive term set by the dominant eigenvalue μ1 of the 2n-replica transfer matrix E, an O(1) boundary term, and subleading corrections that decay with a newly defined SRE correlation length ξ_SRE = −1/log|μ2/μ1|. The paper shows that ξ_SRE controls the exponential decay of the SRE response to two local unitary perturbations (Sec. IV). For the χ=2 cluster–Ising MPS skeleton, the eigenvalues of E are obtained in closed form (Eq. (40)), giving ξ and ξ_SRE that diverge at g=0 with different exponents (Eq. (51)). Numerics for the full cluster–Ising model map m^(2), L∞^(2), and ξ_SRE across the phase diagram (Fig. 4) and test a proposed universal scaling W∞^(2) = (1/8) log ξ_SRE + b along the Z2 critical lines (Eq. (53), Fig. 5). Appendices provide exact diagonalization benchmarks and a χ=4 skeleton example.

Significance. The spectral decomposition in Sec. III is clean and exact for any iMPS, and the skeleton results (Eqs. (40), (50), (51)) provide a valuable analytic benchmark. The perturbation-response formula in Sec. IV gives ξ_SRE a concrete operational meaning that goes beyond a formal definition. If the universal divergence of ξ_SRE at continuous transitions is generic, the paper would establish a new nonstabilizerness length scale and a route to detect criticality using magic even when the SRE density is smooth. However, the generality of that claim and the coefficient 1/8 in Eq. (53) are not yet established: the exact evidence covers a two-parameter skeleton, and the numerical evidence is limited to one model with a narrow converged window (χ_t ≤ 64).

major comments (3)
  1. [III A, VI B, Conclusions] The abstract and Conclusions assert that ξ_SRE diverges at continuous phase transitions in general, but the proof covers only the χ=2 skeleton (Eq. (50)) and the χ=4 skeleton (Appendix C), plus numerical cluster-Ising Z2 lines with χ_t≤64 (Fig. 5). The subleading gap of the filtered Pauli-replica transfer matrix E (Eq. (9)) is not guaranteed to close whenever the physical transfer-matrix gap closes; the local Pauli filter Λ could, in principle, suppress the soft mode. This unproven gap-closing step is exactly what converts the skeleton calculation into the headline universality claim. The authors should either prove gap closure for a class of MPS (e.g., symmetry-constrained or free-fermion states) or explicitly restrict the claim to the studied cases. A concrete test would be a different universality class, such as the XXZ or J1–J2 chain.
  2. [Eq. (53), Sec. VI B] The universal scaling form W∞^(n) = (2Δ_{2n}/(n−1)) log ξ_SRE + b is introduced by analogy with the BCFT result Eq. (27), with an ad hoc factor-of-two reduction for a single boundary; it is not derived from the spectral decomposition. Numerical support is partial: only g_c=0 and g_c=2 are consistent with the 1/8 slope, while intermediate points overshoot (Fig. 5(c)). Appendix E states that ξ_SRE is not fully converged at the largest χ_t and that the cleanest linear behavior is found using log ξ rather than log ξ_SRE. Since Eq. (53) underlies the 'universal scaling' claim in the abstract, this is load-bearing. The authors should either derive the form from the spectral framework or clearly label it as a conjecture supported only at the Ising and cluster endpoints.
  3. [Eqs. (19)–(20), Sec. III A] The decomposition relies on f(N)≪c1 in the large-N limit, i.e., on |μ2/μ1|<1. At a continuous transition in the χ→∞ limit, μ2→μ1, so the exponential correction does not decay and the limits N→∞ and χ→∞ do not commute. The paper should state the finite-χ interpretation of ξ_SRE in Eq. (53) and explain how the double-scaling limit is taken. Without this, the definition of ξ_SRE as a 'diverging correlation length' at criticality is ambiguous, and the numerical extraction of the 1/8 slope in Fig. 5 rests on an implicit choice of ordering of limits.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. V B] The text near Fig. 3 says 'Figure 2(c) shows the effect of separation distance r...' — the correct cross-reference is Fig. 3(c).
  2. [Eq. (12)] The notation M^(n)(ρ) for the mixed-state SRE is used before it is defined. Please give the explicit mixed-state definition (analogous to Eq. (6)) or cite the original reference more precisely.
  3. [Appendix B, Eqs. (B6)–(B7)] The superscripts S^(2)(ρ_AB) and I^(2)(A:B) should be S^(n)(ρ_AB) and I^(n)(A:B) for the general n-th order Rényi and mutual SRE, unless the authors intend to specialize to n=2.
  4. [Fig. 4(c)] The divergence of ξ_SRE along the critical lines is visually inferred from a color plot. A logarithmic color scale or contour lines would make the divergence much easier to assess.
  5. [Sec. V A, c_i discussion] The statement that c3 diverges while c1→0.25 as g→−1, and that these divergences 'are acceptable' because 'the coefficients c_i are weighted with the corresponding eigenvalue,' would benefit from a brief explanation of the regularization mechanism.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circular derivation: the spectral decomposition is an exact identity, and the universal 1/8 slope is imported from an external BCFT result and tested, not fitted.

full rationale

The central decomposition, Eqs. (12)-(20), is algebraic: given the SRE replica transfer matrix E defined in Eq. (9), the contraction in Eq. (12) is exact, and the spectral expansion Eq. (13) directly gives the three-term structure and the definition of ξ_SRE in Eq. (20) as -1/log|μ2/μ1|. This is a definition from the spectrum, not a fitted parameter. The perturbation response derivation, Eqs. (34)-(37), similarly follows by inserting the spectral resolution of E, and the numerical check in Fig. 3 fixes ξ_SRE from the exact Eq. (50) while fitting only an amplitude, so it does not fit the quantity it claims to predict. The χ=2 skeleton and χ=4 skeleton results are exact eigenvalue computations (Eqs. (40), (50)-(51), Appendix C), not fits. The proposed scaling form Eq. (53) is explicitly introduced by analogy with the external BCFT result Eq. (27) from Ref. [40]; its coefficient 1/8 is taken from that external source, and the paper then tests it against iMPS and exact diagonalization data. Deviations are acknowledged as pre-asymptotic in Figs. 5(c), 8(c), 9(b)-(c), and Appendix E, which also states that ξ_SRE is not fully converged at the largest χ_t. This is a convergence caveat about numerical support, not circularity. The only self-citation, Ref. [61], is used for motivation and as a contrasting example in the introduction; it is not load-bearing for the derived spectral identities or the universal scaling claim. The unproven generic step—that |μ2/μ1|→1 whenever |λ2|→1 at every continuous transition—is an assumption/correctness risk, not circularity, because the paper never defines ξ_SRE in terms of ξ and explicitly allows different critical exponents. Score 2 reflects only the presence of a minor, non-load-bearing self-citation; no circular step is present.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 7 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central exact results are derived in-paper from the spectral decomposition of the SRE transfer matrix; the main external inputs are the standard SRE replica trick [12] and iMPS transfer-matrix theory [28]. The proposed universal scaling form Eq. (53) introduces an analogy-to-BCFT axiom that is not derived, and the numerical convergence rests on an unvalidated truncation assumption. One fitted constant (b) enters the scaling test; no parameters are fit in the exact skeleton results.

free parameters (1)
  • b (non-universal offset in Eq. (53)) = not given (fit offset in W∞ vs log ξ_SRE)
    The proposed scaling form W∞^(2) = (1/8) log ξ_SRE + b is compared to linear fits in Fig. 5(b)-(c); b is a fitted constant with no predicted value. It does not affect the exact skeleton results but is a free parameter in the numerical scaling test.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption SRE replica-trick formula for iMPS: m^(n) = (1-n)^{-1} log μ1, with μ1 the dominant eigenvalue of the replica transfer matrix E (Eq. (10)).
    Background result from Haug-Piroli [12] and Tarabunga et al. [13,37]; the entire paper builds on this. The paper cites but does not re-derive it (Sec. II B).
  • domain assumption Injective iMPS transfer matrix has a unique dominant eigenvalue λ1=1 and exponentially decaying correlations with length ξ = -1/log|λ2| (Eqs. (2)-(4)).
    Standard MPS theory [28]; used to define the conventional correlation length (Sec. II A) and for the boundary-vector arguments throughout.
  • domain assumption The dominant eigenvectors of E^{⊗2n} are (L1|^{⊗2n}) and |R1)^{⊗2n}, so the environment outside the subsystem is described by the replicated dominant eigenvectors.
    Invoked in Eq. (12) and Appendix B; requires injectivity and non-degenerate λ1. Standard from transfer-matrix theory.
  • domain assumption Finite-entanglement scaling: at criticality, the iMPS correlation length diverges as χ increases and SE = (c/6) log ξ.
    From Refs. [74,75]; used in Sec. VI B to motivate using log ξ_SRE (or log ξ) as the scaling variable for W∞.
  • domain assumption BCFT result Eq. (27): W^(n)(ℓ) = (4Δ_{2n}/(n-1)) log ℓ_c with Δ_{2n}=1/16 for the Ising (Z_2) universality class.
    External benchmark from Hoshino-Oshikawa-Ashida [40] and Rajabpour [66]; used as the predicted universal coefficient 1/8 in Eq. (53) and as the 1/4 slope in Appendix D.
  • ad hoc to paper The proposed scaling form Eq. (53), W∞^(n) = (2Δ_{2n}/(n-1)) log ξ_SRE + b, with the factor-of-two reduction for the single boundary.
    Proposed by analogy with Eq. (27) (Sec. VI B); not derived from the transfer-matrix framework or from BCFT. Its validity for intermediate g_c is the main open question in the paper.
  • domain assumption The truncation of the Pauli-basis MPS at bond dimension χ_t provides a good approximation of the n-th order SRE transfer matrix spectrum for the quantities computed.
    Pauli-basis conversion and truncation from Tarabunga et al. [80]; the paper states it introduces an approximation (Sec. II B). All phase-diagram numerics rely on it.
invented entities (1)
  • SRE correlation length ξ_SRE^(n) = -1/log|μ2/μ1| independent evidence
    purpose: Characterizes the exponential spatial decay of SRE correlations and acts as a criticality diagnostic distinct from the standard correlation length.
    Defined directly from the replica transfer matrix spectrum (Eq. (20)); for the χ=2 skeleton it is computed exactly (Eq. (50)), and the predicted exponential decay of the two-perturbation response δM is confirmed numerically in Fig. 3(c). The entity has a concrete falsifiable handle: the decay rate of δM_{U,U} - 2δM_U with separation r.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 28552 in / 29356 out tokens · 265723 ms · 2026-08-02T22:58:45.175001+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

While nonstabilizerness (''magic'') is a key resource for universal quantum computation, its behavior in many-body quantum systems, especially near criticality, remains poorly understood. We develop a spectral transfer-matrix framework for the stabilizer R\'enyi entropy (SRE) in infinite matrix product states, showing that its spectrum contains universal subleading information. In particular, we identify an SRE correlation length -- distinct from the standard correlation length -- which diverges at continuous phase transitions and governs the spatial response of the SRE to local perturbations. We derive exact SRE expressions for the bond dimension $\chi=2$ MPS ''skeleton'' of the cluster-Ising model, and we numerically probe its universal scaling along the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ critical lines in the phase diagram. These results demonstrate that nonstabilizerness captures signatures of criticality and local perturbations, providing a new lens on the interplay between computational resources and emergent phenomena in quantum many-body systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.15116 by Andrew Hallam, Ryan Smith, Zlatko Papi\'c.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Our central result, Eq. (19), for the mixed state SRE, Mf(n) , of order n. The density matrix ρ describes an N-qubit subsystem of an infinite MPS state. Mf(n) splits into three boxed terms. The red box is an extensive term ∝ Nm(n) due to the dominant eigenvalue µ1 of the replica transfer ma￾trix. This term is non-universal, as illustrated by its different behavior for the Ising-spin and Rydberg-atom realiz… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Nonstabilizer properties of the MPS skeleton in Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The SRE correlation length and response to per [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Phase diagram of nonstabilizerness in the cluster Ising model, Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a): The logarithm of the SRE correlation length log [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The witness of non-stabilizerness, Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Nonstabilizerness of the χ = 4 MPS skeleton in Eq. (C7). (a): The SRE density m(2) calculated via the dominant eigenvalue µ1 of the transfer matrix E. (b): The n = 2 mutual SRE for two semi-infinite subsystems embedded in an infinite, translationally-invariant chain. The vertical blue and red dashed lines in panels (a)-(b) denote points where |b1| = 1 and |b2| = 1, respectively. (c): The correlation length… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (a)-(b): The n = 2 mutual SRE for multiple system sizes L with PBCs and all admissible subsystem sizes ℓ. Panel (a) is for gc = 0, while panel (b) is for gc = 0.7. The black dashed lines are the linear fits to extract the slope 4∆4 accord￾ing to Eq. (27). (c): The extracted 4∆4 across the critical line for different system sizes L, along with their extrapolation to the thermodynamic limit (black line). The… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (a): The mutual SRE density W (2) ∞ at the points gc = 0 and gc = 2 on the horizontal cluster-Ising critical line, plotted as a function of log ξ. The linear fit to the data is shown in red dashed lines, with the expected value 1/8 shown in black, demonstrating good agreement. (b): Analogous results for the points gc = 0.1, 0.25, 0.5 along the horizontal critical line, where the numerical data shows a visi… 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 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Magic without a phase: phase-independent stabilizer R\'enyi entropy in gluon scattering

    hep-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    A phase-averaged stabilizer Rényi entropy is introduced for tree-level gluon scattering, with color-independent phase-independent magic that is larger in 3→2 than 2→2 and has a soft-limit lower bound in 2→3.

  2. Hidden Conformal Boundary Data in Finite-Temperature Stabilizer Entropy

    quant-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    The stabilizer Rényi entropy at Rényi index 1/2 for the finite-temperature transverse-field Ising chain reduces exactly to a Pfaffian whose universal scaling function is a level-eight eta quotient encoding hidden defe...

  3. Entanglement Pattern Transition of Quantum States from Directed Percolation

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Mapping the Domany-Kinzel automaton to isoTNS yields a 2D quantum state with algebraic correlations whose continuous parent Hamiltonian exhibits a degenerate manifold containing an entanglement-pattern transition at t...

  4. Long-range nonstabilizerness of topologically encoded states from mutual information

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Mutual information between non-contractible regions on the torus fully classifies long-range nonstabilizerness for toric-code states but leaves a finite subset undetected in the doubled-Fibonacci string-net model.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

101 extracted references · 11 linked inside Pith · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

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

    2010

  2. [2]

    Gottesman, The heisenberg representation of quan- tum computers (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9807006 [quant- ph]

    D. Gottesman, The heisenberg representation of quan- tum computers (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9807006 [quant- ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  3. [3]

    Eastin and E

    B. Eastin and E. Knill, Restrictions on transversal en- coded quantum gate sets, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 110502 (2009)

    2009

  4. [4]

    Knill, Fault-tolerant postselected quantum computa- tion: Schemes (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0402171 [quant- ph]

    E. Knill, Fault-tolerant postselected quantum computa- tion: Schemes (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0402171 [quant- ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  5. [5]

    Bravyi and A

    S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, Universal quantum computa- tion with ideal clifford gates and noisy ancillas, Phys. Rev. A71, 022316 (2005)

    2005

  6. [6]

    E. T. Campbell and D. E. Browne, Bound states for magic state distillation in fault-tolerant quantum com- putation, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 030503 (2010)

    2010

  7. [7]

    Howard and E

    M. Howard and E. Campbell, Application of a resource theory for magic states to fault-tolerant quantum com- puting, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 090501 (2017)

    2017

  8. [8]

    Zhou, Z.-C

    S. Zhou, Z.-C. Yang, A. Hamma, and C. Chamon, Single T gate in a Clifford circuit drives transition to universal entanglement spectrum statistics, SciPost Phys.9, 087 (2020)

    2020

  9. [9]

    K. Goto, T. Nosaka, and M. Nozaki, Probing chaos by magic monotones, Phys. Rev. D106, 126009 (2022)

    2022

  10. [10]

    Liu and A

    Z.-W. Liu and A. Winter, Many-body quantum magic, PRX Quantum3, 020333 (2022)

    2022

  11. [11]

    Leone, S

    L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, and A. Hamma, Stabilizer R´ enyi entropy, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 050402 (2022)

    2022

  12. [12]

    Haug and L

    T. Haug and L. Piroli, Quantifying nonstabilizerness of matrix product states, Phys. Rev. B107, 035148 (2023)

    2023

  13. [13]

    P. S. Tarabunga, E. Tirrito, T. Chanda, and M. Dal- monte, Many-body magic via pauli-markov chains— from criticality to gauge theories, PRX Quantum4, 040317 (2023)

    2023

  14. [14]

    Turkeshi, M

    X. Turkeshi, M. Schir` o, and P. Sierant, Measuring non- stabilizerness via multifractal flatness, Phys. Rev. A 108, 042408 (2023)

    2023

  15. [15]

    Bejan, C

    M. Bejan, C. McLauchlan, and B. B´ eri, Dynamical magic transitions in monitored Clifford+Tcircuits, PRX Quantum5, 030332 (2024)

    2024

  16. [16]

    Niroula, C

    P. Niroula, C. D. White, Q. Wang, S. Johri, D. Zhu, C. Monroe, C. Noel, and M. J. Gullans, Phase transition in magic with random quantum circuits, Nature Physics 20, 1786 (2024)

    2024

  17. [17]

    P. S. Tarabunga and C. Castelnovo, Magic in general- ized Rokhsar-Kivelson wavefunctions, Quantum8, 1347 (2024)

    2024

  18. [18]

    T. Haug, L. Aolita, and M. Kim, Probing quantum com- plexity via universal saturation of stabilizer entropies, Quantum9, 1801 (2025)

    2025

  19. [19]

    Kitaev and J

    A. Kitaev and J. Preskill, Topological entanglement en- tropy, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 110404 (2006)

    2006

  20. [20]

    Levin and X.-G

    M. Levin and X.-G. Wen, Detecting topological order in a ground state wave function, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 110405 (2006)

    2006

  21. [21]

    Li and F

    H. Li and F. D. M. Haldane, Entanglement spectrum as a generalization of entanglement entropy: Identification of topological order in non-abelian fractional quantum hall effect states, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 010504 (2008)

    2008

  22. [22]

    Pollmann, E

    F. Pollmann, E. Berg, A. M. Turner, and M. Os- hikawa, Symmetry protection of topological phases in 19 one-dimensional quantum spin systems, Phys. Rev. B 85, 075125 (2012)

    2012

  23. [23]

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

    2012

  24. [24]

    Serbyn, Z

    M. Serbyn, Z. Papi´ c, and D. A. Abanin, Universal slow growth of entanglement in interacting strongly disor- dered systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 260601 (2013)

    2013

  25. [25]

    Lukin, M

    A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, R. Schittko, M. E. Tai, A. M. Kaufman, S. Choi, V. Khemani, J. L´ eonard, and M. Greiner, Probing entanglement in a many- body–localized system, Science364, 256–260 (2019)

    2019

  26. [26]

    Laflorencie, Quantum entanglement in condensed matter systems, Physics Reports646, 1 (2016)

    N. Laflorencie, Quantum entanglement in condensed matter systems, Physics Reports646, 1 (2016)

    2016

  27. [27]

    Schollw¨ ock, The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Annals of Physics326, 96 (2011), january 2011 Special Issue

    U. Schollw¨ ock, The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Annals of Physics326, 96 (2011), january 2011 Special Issue

    2011

  28. [28]

    J. I. Cirac, D. P´ erez-Garc ´ ıa, N. Schuch, and F. Ver- straete, Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states: Concepts, symmetries, theorems, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 045003 (2021)

    2021

  29. [29]

    S. R. White, Density matrix formulation for quan- tum renormalization groups, Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 2863 (1992)

    1992

  30. [30]

    S. F. E. Oliviero, L. Leone, A. Hamma, and S. Lloyd, Measuring magic on a quantum processor, npj Quantum Information8, 148 (2022)

    2022

  31. [31]

    Heinrich and D

    M. Heinrich and D. Gross, Robustness of Magic and Symmetries of the Stabiliser Polytope, Quantum3, 132 (2019)

    2019

  32. [33]

    P. S. Tarabunga, Critical behaviors of non-stabilizerness in quantum spin chains, Quantum8, 1413 (2024)

    2024

  33. [34]

    M. Frau, P. S. Tarabunga, M. Collura, M. Dalmonte, and E. Tirrito, Nonstabilizerness versus entanglement in matrix product states, Phys. Rev. B110, 045101 (2024)

    2024

  34. [36]

    Liu and B

    Z. Liu and B. K. Clark, Nonequilibrium quantum monte carlo algorithm for stabilizer R´ enyi entropy in spin sys- tems, Phys. Rev. B111, 085144 (2025)

    2025

  35. [37]

    P. S. Tarabunga, E. Tirrito, M. C. Ba˜ nuls, and M. Dal- monte, Nonstabilizerness via matrix product states in the pauli basis, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 010601 (2024)

    2024

  36. [38]

    Y.-M. Ding, Z. Wang, and Z. Yan, Evaluating many- body stabilizer R´ enyi entropy by sampling reduced Pauli strings: Singularities, volume law, and nonlocal magic, PRX Quantum6, 030328 (2025)

    2025

  37. [39]

    Viscardi, M

    M. Viscardi, M. Dalmonte, A. Hamma, and E. Tirrito, Interplay of entanglement structures and stabilizer en- tropy in spin models (2025), arXiv:2503.08620 [quant- ph]

    arXiv 2025

  38. [40]

    Hoshino, M

    M. Hoshino, M. Oshikawa, and Y. Ashida, Stabi- lizer R´ enyi entropy and conformal field theory (2025), arXiv:2503.13599 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  39. [41]

    C. P. Moca, D. Sticlet, and B. D´ ora, Non-stabilizerness as a diagnostic of criticality and exceptional points in non-hermitian spin chains (2025), arXiv:2510.17248 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  40. [42]

    A. G. Catalano, S. B. Koˇ zi´ c, G. Torre, C. Ciaramel- letti, S. Paganelli, F. Franchini, and S. M. Giampaolo, Resource complexity of symmetry protected topological phases (2025), arXiv:2509.08053 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  41. [43]

    Bera and M

    S. Bera and M. Schir` o, Non-stabilizerness of Sachdev- Ye-Kitaev model, SciPost Phys.19, 159 (2025)

    2025

  42. [44]

    Zhang, S

    P. Zhang, S. Zhou, and N. Sun, Stabilizer R´ enyi entropy and its transition in the coupled Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model (2025), arXiv:2509.17417 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  43. [45]

    Jasser, J

    B. Jasser, J. Odavi´ c, and A. Hamma, Stabilizer entropy and entanglement complexity in the sachdev-ye-kitaev model, Phys. Rev. B112, 174204 (2025)

    2025

  44. [46]

    Russomanno, G

    A. Russomanno, G. Passarelli, D. Rossini, and P. Lu- cignano, Nonstabilizerness in the unitary and monitored quantum dynamics of XXZ-staggered and Sachdev-Ye- Kitaev models, Phys. Rev. B112, 064312 (2025)

    2025

  45. [47]

    Turkeshi, E

    X. Turkeshi, E. Tirrito, and P. Sierant, Magic spreading in random quantum circuits, Nature Communications 16, 2575 (2025)

    2025

  46. [48]

    P. R. N. Falc˜ ao, P. Sierant, J. Zakrzewski, and E. Tir- rito, Nonstabilizerness dynamics in many-body localized systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 240404 (2025)

    2025

  47. [49]

    Hern´ andez-Yanes, P

    T. Hern´ andez-Yanes, P. Sierant, J. Zakrzewski, and M. P lodzie´ n, Nonstabilizerness in quantum-enhanced metrological protocols, Phys. Rev. A113, 012416 (2026)

    2026

  48. [50]

    Odavi´ c, M

    J. Odavi´ c, M. Viscardi, and A. Hamma, Stabilizer en- tropy in nonintegrable quantum evolutions, Phys. Rev. B112, 104301 (2025)

    2025

  49. [51]

    Tirrito, X

    E. Tirrito, X. Turkeshi, and P. Sierant, Anticoncen- tration and nonstabilizerness spreading under ergodic quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 220401 (2025)

    2025

  50. [52]

    J. A. Monta˜ n` a L´ opez and P. Kos, Exact solution of long- range stabilizer R´ enyi entropy in the dual-unitary XXZ model, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theo- retical57, 475301 (2024)

    2024

  51. [53]

    C. P. Moca, D. Sticlet, B. D´ ora, A. Valli, D. Szombathy, and G. Zar´ and, Non-stabilizerness generation in a multi- particle quantum walk (2025), arXiv:2504.19750 [quant- ph]

    arXiv 2025

  52. [54]

    Dowling, P

    N. Dowling, P. Kos, and X. Turkeshi, Magic resources of the Heisenberg picture, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 050401 (2025)

    2025

  53. [55]

    Dowling, K

    N. Dowling, K. Modi, and G. A. L. White, Bridging en- tanglement and magic resources within operator space, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 160201 (2025)

    2025

  54. [56]

    Collura, J

    M. Collura, J. D. Nardis, V. Alba, and G. Lami, The non-stabilizerness of fermionic gaussian states (2025), arXiv:2412.05367 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  55. [57]

    Sierant, P

    P. Sierant, P. Stornati, and X. Turkeshi, Fermionic magic resources of quantum many-body systems, PRX Quantum7, 010302 (2026)

    2026

  56. [58]

    Sarkis, P

    M. Sarkis, P. Martinez-Azcona, and A. Tkatchenko, Magic for hybrid boson-fermion systems: A Grassmann phase-space approach (2025), arXiv:2509.05264 [quant- ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  57. [59]

    Wang, Z.-C

    C. Wang, Z.-C. Yang, T. Zhou, and X. Chen, Magic transition in monitored free fermion dynamics (2025), arXiv:2507.10688 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  58. [60]

    Crew, Y.-L

    S. Crew, Y.-L. Li, H.-H. Li, and P.-Y. Chang, Magic entropy in hybrid spin-boson systems (2025), arXiv:2508.06018 [cond-mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  59. [61]

    Smith, Z

    R. Smith, Z. Papi´ c, and A. Hallam, Nonstabilizerness in kinetically constrained Rydberg atom arrays, Phys. 20 Rev. B111, 245148 (2025)

    2025

  60. [63]

    C. Cao, G. Cheng, A. Hamma, L. Leone, W. Munizzi, and S. F. Oliviero, Gravitational backreaction is magi- cal, PRX Quantum6, 040375 (2025)

    2025

  61. [64]

    Passarelli, R

    G. Passarelli, R. Fazio, and P. Lucignano, Nonstabiliz- erness of permutationally invariant systems, Phys. Rev. A110, 022436 (2024)

    2024

  62. [65]

    Hoshino and Y

    M. Hoshino and Y. Ashida, Stabilizer R´ enyi entropy en- codes fusion rules of topological defects and boundaries (2025), arXiv:2507.10656 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  63. [66]

    M. A. Rajabpour, Stabilizer-shannon renyi equiva- lence: Exact results for quantum critical chains (2025), arXiv:2509.10700 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  64. [67]

    D´ ora and C

    B. D´ ora and C. P. Moca, Momentum space nonstabi- lizerness for the transverse field quantum ising model, Phys. Rev. B112, 125427 (2025)

    2025

  65. [68]

    S. F. E. Oliviero, L. Leone, and A. Hamma, Magic-state resource theory for the ground state of the transverse- field Ising model, Phys. Rev. A106, 042426 (2022)

    2022

  66. [69]

    P. R. N. Falc˜ ao, P. S. Tarabunga, M. Frau, E. Tirrito, J. Zakrzewski, and M. Dalmonte, Nonstabilizerness in U(1) lattice gauge theory, Phys. Rev. B111, L081102 (2025)

    2025

  67. [70]

    L.-Y.-N. Liu, S. Yi, and J. Cui, Stabilizer R´ enyi entropy for translation-invariant matrix product states (2025), arXiv:2508.03534 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  68. [71]

    M. M. Wolf, G. Ortiz, F. Verstraete, and J. I. Cirac, Quantum phase transitions in matrix product systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 110403 (2006)

    2006

  69. [72]

    Smith, B

    A. Smith, B. Jobst, A. G. Green, and F. Pollmann, Crossing a topological phase transition with a quantum computer, Phys. Rev. Res.4, L022020 (2022)

    2022

  70. [73]

    Calabrese and J

    P. Calabrese and J. Cardy, Entanglement entropy and quantum field theory, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2004, P06002 (2004)

    2004

  71. [74]

    Tagliacozzo, T

    L. Tagliacozzo, T. R. de Oliveira, S. Iblisdir, and J. I. Latorre, Scaling of entanglement support for matrix product states, Phys. Rev. B78, 024410 (2008)

    2008

  72. [75]

    Pollmann, S

    F. Pollmann, S. Mukerjee, A. M. Turner, and J. E. Moore, Theory of finite-entanglement scaling at one- dimensional quantum critical points, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 255701 (2009)

    2009

  73. [76]

    Leone and L

    L. Leone and L. Bittel, Stabilizer entropies are mono- tones for magic-state resource theory, Phys. Rev. A110, L040403 (2024)

    2024

  74. [77]

    P. S. Tarabunga and T. Haug, Efficient mutual magic and magic capacity with matrix product states, SciPost Phys.19, 085 (2025)

    2025

  75. [78]

    Haug and P

    T. Haug and P. S. Tarabunga, Efficient witnessing and testing of magic in mixed quantum states (2025), arXiv:2504.18098 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  76. [79]

    Lami and M

    G. Lami and M. Collura, Nonstabilizerness via perfect pauli sampling of matrix product states, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 180401 (2023)

    2023

  77. [80]

    P. S. Tarabunga, E. Tirrito, M. C. Ba˜ nuls, and M. Dal- monte, Nonstabilizerness via matrix product states in the Pauli basis, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 010601 (2024)

    2024

  78. [81]

    R. G. Melko, A. B. Kallin, and M. B. Hastings, Finite- size scaling of mutual information in monte carlo sim- ulations: Application to the spin- 1 2 XXZ model, Phys. Rev. B82, 100409 (2010)

    2010

  79. [82]

    Wilms, M

    J. Wilms, M. Troyer, and F. Verstraete, Mutual in- formation in classical spin models, Journal of Statisti- cal Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2011, P10011 (2011)

    2011

  80. [83]

    Kudler-Flam, R´ enyi mutual information in quantum field theory, Phys

    J. Kudler-Flam, R´ enyi mutual information in quantum field theory, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 021603 (2023)

    2023

Showing first 80 references.