pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2603.23948 · v2 · submitted 2026-03-25 · ✦ hep-lat · hep-ph· nucl-th· quant-ph

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Thermalization of SU(2) Lattice Gauge Fields on Quantum Computers

Jiunn-Wei Chen , Yu-Ting Chen , Ghanashyam Meher , Berndt M\"uller , Andreas Sch\"afer , Xiaojun Yao
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 01:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-lat hep-phnucl-thquant-ph
keywords thermalizationSU(2) lattice gauge theoryquantum simulationentanglement entropyerror mitigationplaquette chainsnonabelian gauge fields
0
0 comments X

The pith

Current quantum computers can simulate thermalization dynamics in SU(2) lattice gauge theories after error mitigation.

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

The paper simulates the thermalization of a minimally truncated SU(2) pure gauge theory on linear plaquette chains using IBM quantum computers. It follows the time dependence of the entanglement spectrum, Rényi-2 entropy, and anti-flatness on small subsystems for chains up to 151 plaquettes. After error mitigation, the quantum hardware results match extrapolated classical simulator data for chains up to 101 plaquettes. This agreement shows that local thermalization studies for chaotic nonabelian gauge theories are feasible on present noisy quantum platforms. Such work could eventually address real-time dynamics that grow intractable for classical methods as system size increases.

Core claim

By implementing a minimally truncated SU(2) pure gauge theory on linear plaquette chains and running it on IBM quantum processors, the authors obtain time-dependent entanglement properties that, after error mitigation, agree with classical simulations extrapolated to 101 plaquettes, thereby establishing the feasibility of local thermalization studies for nonabelian lattice gauge theories on current noisy quantum hardware.

What carries the argument

Minimally truncated SU(2) pure gauge theory on linear plaquette chains, executed with error mitigation on quantum hardware to extract subsystem entanglement spectrum and entropies.

If this is right

  • The approach validates quantum simulation of real-time dynamics in nonabelian gauge theories.
  • Local thermalization studies become accessible for other chaotic quantum systems on similar hardware.
  • Entanglement-based probes such as anti-flatness can be measured directly on quantum devices.
  • Error mitigation enables reliable comparison between quantum and classical results up to at least 101 plaquettes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Extension to larger chains could eventually reach regimes where classical exact diagonalization becomes impossible.
  • The same framework might be adapted to probe deconfinement or other phase-related dynamics in gauge theories.
  • Varying the truncation cutoff and checking consistency would test whether the observed thermalization is robust to the approximation.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen minimal truncation of the SU(2) theory together with the applied error mitigation faithfully reproduces the thermalization dynamics without introducing uncontrolled artifacts.

What would settle it

A statistically significant mismatch between the quantum hardware entanglement spectrum and the classical extrapolation on a chain size where both are feasible would show that the truncation or mitigation fails to capture the true dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.23948 by Andreas Sch\"afer, Berndt M\"uller, Ghanashyam Meher, Jiunn-Wei Chen, Xiaojun Yao, Yu-Ting Chen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Single- and two-qubit quantum gates for the imple [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Quantum circuit for the time evolution of an initial strong-coupling vacuum state [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Scaling of two-qubit gate counts with system size [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Entanglement spectrum for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. R´enyi-2 entropy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. R´enyi-2 entropy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. ODR factors for one-qubit and three-qubit operators [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. R´enyi-2 entropy and anti-flatness of entanglement spectrum as functions of time for system size [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. R´enyi-2 entropy and anti-flatness of entanglement spectrum as functions of time for system size [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We simulate the thermalization dynamics for minimally truncated SU(2) pure gauge theory on linear plaquette chains with up to 151 plaquettes using IBM quantum computers. We study the time dependence of the entanglement spectrum, R\'enyi-2 entropy and anti-flatness on small subsystems. The quantum hardware results obtained after error mitigation agree with extrapolated classical simulator results for chains consisting of up to 101 plaquettes. Our results demonstrate the feasibility of local thermalization studies for chaotic quantum systems, such as nonabelian lattice gauge theories, on current noisy quantum computing platforms.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports numerical simulations of thermalization dynamics in a minimally truncated SU(2) pure gauge theory on linear plaquette chains of up to 151 plaquettes, performed on IBM quantum computers. The authors track the time evolution of the entanglement spectrum, Rényi-2 entropy, and anti-flatness on small subsystems, claiming that error-mitigated quantum hardware results agree with extrapolated classical simulator data for chains up to 101 plaquettes and thereby demonstrate the feasibility of local thermalization studies for nonabelian lattice gauge theories on current noisy platforms.

Significance. If the central comparison holds after proper validation, the work would establish a concrete benchmark for quantum simulation of chaotic gauge-field dynamics, showing that NISQ devices can access nonlocal observables in truncated nonabelian theories at scales inaccessible to exact classical diagonalization. This would strengthen the case for quantum hardware in hep-lat applications, provided the truncation and mitigation steps are shown to be free of uncontrolled artifacts.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and Results] Abstract and Results sections: the claim that error-mitigated quantum results 'agree' with classical extrapolations is stated without quantitative error bars, statistical measures of agreement, or details of the mitigation protocol (e.g., zero-noise extrapolation parameters or probabilistic error cancellation weights). Because the observables are nonlocal and sensitive to decoherence, this omission leaves the central feasibility demonstration unsubstantiated.
  2. [Methods and Truncation] Truncation and Methods: the paper relies on a 'minimally truncated' SU(2) Hilbert space but reports no convergence tests with respect to truncation level for the entanglement spectrum, Rényi-2 entropy, or anti-flatness. This assumption is load-bearing for the claim that the observed thermalization dynamics faithfully represent the target theory.
  3. [Results and Classical Comparison] Comparison to classical data: no explicit validation is provided that the chosen error-mitigation procedure leaves the truncated-model unitary evolution invariant for the reported nonlocal quantities, nor are details given on how the classical extrapolations (system sizes, fitting procedure) were performed. This directly addresses the skeptic concern that mitigation could introduce undetectable distortions.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would benefit from stating the specific IBM backend, qubit count per plaquette, and circuit depth or shot count to aid reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions planned for the next version of the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and Results] Abstract and Results sections: the claim that error-mitigated quantum results 'agree' with classical extrapolations is stated without quantitative error bars, statistical measures of agreement, or details of the mitigation protocol (e.g., zero-noise extrapolation parameters or probabilistic error cancellation weights). Because the observables are nonlocal and sensitive to decoherence, this omission leaves the central feasibility demonstration unsubstantiated.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative error bars, statistical measures of agreement, and explicit mitigation parameters are required to substantiate the central claim. In the revised manuscript we will add error bars obtained from repeated hardware runs, report a statistical measure of agreement (e.g., reduced chi-squared between quantum and extrapolated classical data), and provide a dedicated subsection detailing the mitigation protocol, including the noise-scaling factors used for zero-noise extrapolation and the weights employed in any probabilistic error cancellation. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Methods and Truncation] Truncation and Methods: the paper relies on a 'minimally truncated' SU(2) Hilbert space but reports no convergence tests with respect to truncation level for the entanglement spectrum, Rényi-2 entropy, or anti-flatness. This assumption is load-bearing for the claim that the observed thermalization dynamics faithfully represent the target theory.

    Authors: The minimal truncation is chosen to retain the essential non-Abelian structure while remaining simulable on current hardware. We nevertheless accept that explicit convergence tests are needed. The revised manuscript will include an appendix or subsection presenting the entanglement spectrum, Rényi-2 entropy, and anti-flatness for a sequence of increasing truncation levels on representative small chains (where higher truncations remain classically tractable), thereby demonstrating that the reported observables have converged within the minimal truncation employed for the larger systems. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Results and Classical Comparison] Comparison to classical data: no explicit validation is provided that the chosen error-mitigation procedure leaves the truncated-model unitary evolution invariant for the reported nonlocal quantities, nor are details given on how the classical extrapolations (system sizes, fitting procedure) were performed. This directly addresses the skeptic concern that mitigation could introduce undetectable distortions.

    Authors: We will add a validation subsection that compares mitigated versus unmitigated quantum results against exact classical unitary evolution on small systems (up to ~10 plaquettes) where the truncated model is exactly diagonalizable; this will confirm that the mitigation protocol preserves the dynamics of the nonlocal observables. We will also document the classical extrapolation procedure in full, specifying the system sizes simulated classically, the functional form of the fit (e.g., polynomial or exponential in 1/N), and the extrapolation target used to compare with the quantum data up to 101 plaquettes. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct numerical benchmark of quantum hardware results against independent classical simulations

full rationale

The paper reports quantum hardware simulations of a minimally truncated SU(2) plaquette chain, applies standard error mitigation, and compares resulting observables (entanglement spectrum, Rényi-2 entropy, anti-flatness) to extrapolated classical simulator data for the same truncated model. No derivation chain exists that reduces a claimed prediction or first-principles result to its own inputs by construction; the agreement is presented as an empirical validation of feasibility rather than a tautological outcome. Self-citations, if present, are not load-bearing for the central numerical claim, which remains externally falsifiable via the classical benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on standard lattice discretization of SU(2) Yang-Mills theory and the assumption that a minimal truncation suffices to capture thermalization physics; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced beyond conventional lattice gauge theory setup.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption SU(2) pure gauge theory admits a lattice discretization whose dynamics can be simulated by Trotterized quantum circuits
    Standard assumption in lattice gauge theory simulations; invoked implicitly by the choice of plaquette-chain Hamiltonian.
  • ad hoc to paper Minimal truncation of the gauge-field Hilbert space preserves the essential thermalization behavior
    The paper explicitly uses a 'minimally truncated' version; this truncation level is chosen to fit current hardware but is not independently justified in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5416 in / 1372 out tokens · 36054 ms · 2026-05-15T01:02:46.180028+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Non-Abelian String-Breaking Dynamics on a Qudit Quantum Computer

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    First experimental quantum simulation of genuine non-Abelian string breaking in an SU(2) pure gauge theory on a qudit trapped-ion computer, resolving oscillations and coherent breaking driven by plaquette interactions.

  2. Observation of glueball excitations and string breaking in a $2+1$D $\mathbb{Z}_2$ lattice gauge theory on a trapped-ion quantum computer

    hep-lat 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    A trapped-ion quantum computer simulates 2+1D Z2 lattice gauge theory dynamics, revealing glueball excitations and multi-order string breaking.

  3. Observation of genuine $2+1$D string dynamics in a U$(1)$ lattice gauge theory with a tunable plaquette term on a trapped-ion quantum computer

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Quantum simulation on trapped ions shows that a plaquette term in a 2+1D U(1) gauge theory enables string propagation in the plane and extended matter creation, realizing genuine two-dimensional dynamics.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

128 extracted references · 128 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers · 19 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Many-Body Quantum Magic

    This is attributed to the parallel arrangement of the 5 N Total Two-qubit Two-qubit gate depth gate depth gate number 5 96 28 36 7 97 31 54 9 97 45 74 15 97 58 132 51 99 64 480 101 99 63 964 133 366 300 1707 151 582 502 2703 TABLE I. Total gate depth, two-qubit gate depth and the number of two-qubit gates per Trotter step for system sizes N= 5, . . . ,151...

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    C. W. Bauer, Z. Davoudi, N. Klco, and M. J. Savage, Nature Rev. Phys.5, 420 (2023), arXiv:2404.06298 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    J. C. Halimeh, N. Mueller, J. Knolle, Z. Papi´ c, and Z. Davoudi, (2025), arXiv:2509.03586 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Davoudi, (2025), arXiv:2507.15840 [hep-lat]

    Z. Davoudi, (2025), arXiv:2507.15840 [hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    Yao, Phys

    X. Yao, Phys. Rev. D108, L031504 (2023), arXiv:2303.14264 [hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Ebner, B

    L. Ebner, B. M¨ uller, A. Sch¨ afer, C. Seidl, and X. Yao, Phys. Rev. D109, 014504 (2024), arXiv:2308.16202 [hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Ebner, B

    L. Ebner, B. M¨ uller, A. Sch¨ afer, L. Schmotzer, C. Seidl, and X. Yao, Commun. Phys.8, 368 (2025), arXiv:2411.04550 [hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    D. Das, L. Ebner, S. V. Kadam, I. Raychowdhury, A. Sch¨ afer, and X. Yao, (2025), arXiv:2509.18269 [hep- th]

    work page arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Ebner, B

    L. Ebner, B. M¨ uller, A. Sch¨ afer, L. Schmotzer, C. Seidl, and X. Yao, (2025), arXiv:2510.11681 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

    A cold-atom quantum simulator for SU(2) Yang-Mills lattice gauge theory

    E. Zohar, J. I. Cirac, and B. Reznik, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 125304 (2013), arXiv:1211.2241 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  11. [11]

    Digital quantum simulation of $\mathbb{Z}_2$ lattice gauge theories with dynamical fermionic matter

    E. Zohar, A. Farace, B. Reznik, and J. I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 070501 (2017), arXiv:1607.03656 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  12. [12]

    Gonz´ alez-Cuadra, E

    D. Gonz´ alez-Cuadra, E. Zohar, and J. I. Cirac, New J. Phys.19, 063038 (2017), arXiv:1702.05492 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2017

  13. [13]

    Digital quantum simulation of lattice gauge theories in three spatial dimensions

    J. Bender, E. Zohar, A. Farace, and J. I. Cirac, New J. Phys.20, 093001 (2018), arXiv:1804.02082 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  14. [14]

    D. A. Abanin, E. Altman, I. Bloch, and M. Serbyn, Rev. Mod. Phys.91, 021001 (2019), arXiv:1804.11065 [cond-mat.dis-nn]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  15. [15]

    Arringtonet al., inIntersections between Nuclear 13 Physics and Quantum Information, edited by I

    J. Arringtonet al., inIntersections between Nuclear 13 Physics and Quantum Information, edited by I. C. Clo¨ et and M. R. Dietrich (2019) arXiv:1903.05453 [nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2019

  16. [16]

    J. C. Halimeh, M. Van Damme, V. Zauner-Stauber, and L. Vanderstraeten, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 033111 (2020), arXiv:1810.07187 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2020

  17. [17]

    Rajput, A

    A. Rajput, A. Roggero, and N. Wiebe, npj Quantum Inf.9, 41 (2023), arXiv:2112.05186 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  18. [18]

    Zohar, Phil

    E. Zohar, Phil. Trans. A. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci.380, 20210069 (2021), arXiv:2106.04609 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  19. [19]

    C. W. Baueret al., PRX Quantum4, 027001 (2023), arXiv:2204.03381 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  20. [20]

    Mildenberger, W

    J. Mildenberger, W. Mruczkiewicz, J. C. Halimeh, Z. Jiang, and P. Hauke, Nature Phys.21, 312 (2025), arXiv:2203.08905 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  21. [21]

    Mueller, J

    N. Mueller, J. A. Carolan, A. Connelly, Z. Davoudi, E. F. Dumitrescu, and K. Yeter-Aydeniz, PRX Quan- tum4, 030323 (2023), arXiv:2210.03089 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  22. [22]

    Wang, W.-Y

    H.-Y. Wang, W.-Y. Zhang, Z.-Y. Yao, Y. Liu, Z.-H. Zhu, Y.-G. Zheng, X.-K. Wang, H. Zhai, Z.-S. Yuan, and J.-W. Pan, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 050401 (2023), arXiv:2210.17032 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Belyansky, S

    R. Belyansky, S. Whitsitt, N. Mueller, A. Fahimniya, E. R. Bennewitz, Z. Davoudi, and A. V. Gorshkov, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 091903 (2024), arXiv:2307.02522 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Becket al.(2023) arXiv:2303.00113 [nucl-ex]

    D. Becket al.(2023) arXiv:2303.00113 [nucl-ex]

    work page arXiv 2023

  25. [25]

    Di Meglioet al., PRX Quantum5, 037001 (2024), arXiv:2307.03236 [quant-ph]

    A. Di Meglioet al., PRX Quantum5, 037001 (2024), arXiv:2307.03236 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    M. K. Joshi, C. Kokail, R. van Bijnen, F. Kranzl, T. V. Zache, R. Blatt, C. F. Roos, and P. Zoller, Nature624, 539 (2023), arXiv:2306.00057 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  27. [27]

    J. J. Osborne, I. P. McCulloch, and J. C. Halimeh, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 043076 (2025), arXiv:2310.12210 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    A. N. Ciavarella and C. W. Bauer, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 111901 (2024), arXiv:2402.10265 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    T. I. Andersenet al., Nature638, 79 (2025), arXiv:2405.17385 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    R. C. Farrell, M. Illa, A. N. Ciavarella, and M. J. Sav- age, Phys. Rev. D109, 114510 (2024), arXiv:2401.08044 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  31. [31]

    R. C. Farrell, M. Illa, and M. J. Savage, Phys. Rev. C 111, 015202 (2025), arXiv:2405.06620 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    Gonzalez-Cuadraet al., Nature642, 321 (2025), arXiv:2410.16558 [quant-ph]

    D. Gonzalez-Cuadraet al., Nature642, 321 (2025), arXiv:2410.16558 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    M. Illa, C. E. P. Robin, and M. J. Savage, Phys. Rev. D110, 014507 (2024), arXiv:2403.14537 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Davoudi, C.-C

    Z. Davoudi, C.-C. Hsieh, and S. V. Kadam, Quantum 8, 1520 (2024), arXiv:2402.00840 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    Spagnoli, A

    L. Spagnoli, A. Roggero, and N. Wiebe, Quantum10, 1968 (2026), arXiv:2405.19293 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 1968

  36. [36]

    A. N. Ciavarella, Phys. Rev. D111, 054501 (2025), arXiv:2411.05915 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    Kaufman, J

    A. Kaufman, J. Corona, Z. Ozzello, B. Senseman, M. Asaduzzaman, and Y. Meurice, Phys. Rev. A112, 032430 (2025), arXiv:2411.07092 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Kaufman, M

    A. Kaufman, M. Asaduzzaman, Z. Ozzello, B. Sense- man, J. Corona, and Y. Meurice, (2025), arXiv:2507.14128 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Aditya, X

    S. Aditya, X. Turkeshi, and P. Sierant, (2025), arXiv:2512.14827 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    I. A. Chernyshevet al., Nature Commun.17, 1826 (2026), arXiv:2506.05757 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  41. [41]

    Cataldi, S

    G. Cataldi, S. Orlando, and J. C. Halimeh, (2025), arXiv:2509.08868 [hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    De Paciani, L

    G. De Paciani, L. Homeier, J. C. Halimeh, M. Aidels- burger, and F. Grusdt, (2025), arXiv:2506.14747 [cond- mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Davoudi, C.-C

    Z. Davoudi, C.-C. Hsieh, and S. V. Kadam, (2025), arXiv:2505.20408 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    R. C. Farrell, N. A. Zemlevskiy, M. Illa, and J. Preskill, (2025), arXiv:2505.03111 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  45. [45]

    Froland, D

    H. Froland, D. M. Grabowska, and Z. Li, (2025), arXiv:2512.22782 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  46. [46]

    Luoet al., (2025), arXiv:2505.09607 [quant-ph]

    D. Luoet al., (2025), arXiv:2505.09607 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    Joshi, J

    R. Joshi, J. C. Louw, M. Meth, J. J. Osborne, K. Mato, G.-X. Su, M. Ringbauer, and J. C. Halimeh, (2025), arXiv:2507.12614 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    Joshi, M

    R. Joshi, M. Meth, J. C. Louw, J. J. Osborne, K. Mato, M. Ringbauer, and J. C. Halimeh, (2025), arXiv:2507.12589 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    Z. Li, M. Illa, and M. J. Savage, (2025), arXiv:2512.05210 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    Miranda-Riaza, P

    M. Miranda-Riaza, P. Fontana, and A. Celi, (2025), arXiv:2510.18594 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  51. [51]

    Fontana, M

    P. Fontana, M. M. Riaza, and A. Celi, Phys. Rev. X 15, 031065 (2025), arXiv:2409.04441 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    G. C. Santra, J. Mildenberger, E. Ballini, A. Bottarelli, M. M. Wauters, and P. Hauke, (2025), arXiv:2510.07385 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  53. [53]

    Schuhmacher, G.-X

    J. Schuhmacher, G.-X. Su, J. J. Osborne, A. Gan- don, J. C. Halimeh, and I. Tavernelli, (2025), arXiv:2505.20387 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    K. Xu, U. Borla, S. Moroz, and J. C. Halimeh, (2025), arXiv:2507.01950 [hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    Yao, (2025), arXiv:2511.13721 [quant-ph]

    X. Yao, (2025), arXiv:2511.13721 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    A. N. Ciavarella, I. M. Burbano, and C. W. Bauer, Phys. Rev. D112, 054514 (2025), arXiv:2503.11888 [hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    Balaji, C

    P. Balaji, C. Conefrey-Shinozaki, P. Draper, J. K. El- haderi, D. Gupta, L. Hidalgo, A. Lytle, and E. Rinaldi, Phys. Rev. D112, 054511 (2025), arXiv:2503.08866 [hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2025

  58. [58]

    W. Huie, C. Conefrey-Shinozaki, Z. Jia, P. Draper, and J. P. Covey, PRX Quantum7, 010327 (2026), arXiv:2507.18426 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  59. [59]

    Balaji, C

    P. Balaji, C. Conefrey-Shinozaki, P. Draper, J. K. El- haderi, D. Gupta, L. Hidalgo, and A. Lytle, (2025), arXiv:2509.25865 [hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    Asaduzzamanet al., (2026), arXiv:2603.12391 [quant-ph]

    M. Asaduzzamanet al., (2026), arXiv:2603.12391 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  61. [61]

    J. Cao, R. Joshi, Y. Tian, N. S. Srivatsa, and J. C. Halimeh, (2026), arXiv:2601.16166 [hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2026

  62. [62]

    The Quantum Complexity of String Breaking in the Schwinger Model

    S. Grieninger, M. J. Savage, and N. A. Zemlevskiy, (2026), arXiv:2601.08825 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  63. [63]

    Majcen, J

    P. Majcen, J. J. Osborne, P. Hauke, B. Yang, S. Mon- tangero, and J. C. Halimeh, (2026), arXiv:2602.04948 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2026

  64. [64]

    N. S. Modi, A. N. Ciavarella, J. C. Halimeh, and C. W. Bauer, (2026), arXiv:2602.02344 [hep-lat]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  65. [65]

    Orlando, G.-X

    S. Orlando, G.-X. Su, B. Yang, and J. C. Halimeh, (2026), arXiv:2601.04345 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2026

  66. [66]

    Pato and N

    B. Pato and N. Klco, (2026), arXiv:2602.22121 [quant- ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  67. [67]

    Rouxinol, T

    G. Rouxinol, T. Magorsch, J. J. Osborne, N. Brambilla, and J. C. Halimeh, (2026), arXiv:2603.12194 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  68. [68]

    Spagnoli, A

    L. Spagnoli, A. Roggero, and N. Wiebe, (2026), arXiv:2602.20661 [quant-ph]. 14

    work page arXiv 2026

  69. [69]

    Thermalization and its mechanism for generic isolated quantum systems

    M. Rigol, V. Dunjko, and M. Olshanii, Nature452, 854 (2008), arXiv:0708.1324 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  70. [70]

    J. C. Halimeh, V. Zauner-Stauber, I. P. McCulloch, I. de Vega, U. Schollw¨ ock, and M. Kastner, Phys. Rev. B95, 024302 (2017), arXiv:1610.01468 [cond- mat.quant-gas]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  71. [71]

    A. J. James, R. M. Konik, and N. J. Robinson, Physical Review Letters122(2019), 10.1103/phys- revlett.122.130603

    work page doi:10.1103/phys- 2019

  72. [72]

    W. A. de Jong, K. Lee, J. Mulligan, M. P losko´ n, F. Ringer, and X. Yao, Phys. Rev. D106, 054508 (2022), arXiv:2106.08394 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  73. [73]

    L. V. Delacretaz, A. L. Fitzpatrick, E. Katz, and M. T. Walters, SciPost Phys.12, 119 (2022), arXiv:2105.02229 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2022

  74. [74]

    Mueller, T

    N. Mueller, T. V. Zache, and R. Ott, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 011601 (2022), arXiv:2107.11416 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  75. [75]

    Zhou, G.-X

    Z.-Y. Zhou, G.-X. Su, J. C. Halimeh, R. Ott, H. Sun, P. Hauke, B. Yang, Z.-S. Yuan, J. Berges, and J.- W. Pan, Science377, abl6277 (2022), arXiv:2107.13563 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2022

  76. [76]

    L. V. Delacretaz, A. L. Fitzpatrick, E. Katz, and M. T. Walters, JHEP02, 045 (2023), arXiv:2207.11261 [hep- th]

    work page arXiv 2023

  77. [77]

    Mueller, T

    N. Mueller, T. Wang, O. Katz, Z. Davoudi, and M. Cetina, (2024), arXiv:2408.00069 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  78. [78]

    Florio and S

    A. Florio and S. Murciano, (2025), arXiv:2511.01966 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2025

  79. [79]

    Hayata, Y

    T. Hayata, Y. Hidaka, and Y. Kikuchi, (2026), arXiv:2601.13530 [hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2026

  80. [80]

    Ebner, A

    L. Ebner, A. Sch¨ afer, C. Seidl, B. M¨ uller, and X. Yao, Phys. Rev. D110, 014505 (2024), arXiv:2401.15184 [hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2024

Showing first 80 references.