arxiv: 2604.27055 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-29 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.stat-mech· cond-mat.str-el

Recognition: unknown

Nonlocal nonstabilizerness in free fermion models

Benjamin B\'eri, Emanuele Tirrito, Mario Collura

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 08:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mechcond-mat.str-el

keywords nonlocal magicnonstabilizernessfree fermionsGaussian statesentanglement spectrumcovariance matrixKitaev chainrandom circuits

0 comments

The pith

A closed-form bound from the covariance matrix gives nonlocal magic for pure fermionic Gaussian states.

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

The paper derives a closed-form upper bound on nonlocal nonstabilizerness (magic) for bipartite pure fermionic Gaussian states, expressed directly in terms of the singular values of the subsystem-restricted covariance matrix. Nonlocal magic is the amount of nonstabilizerness that remains after the best possible choice of local basis changes on each part. The bound is checked against numerical optimization over local Gaussian unitaries and then used to compute average behavior in random ensembles, ground states of the Kitaev chain, and time evolution under random circuits and XY quenches. If correct, this replaces an intractable optimization with a direct calculation from the entanglement spectrum, allowing quantitative tracking of magic in free-fermion systems without exhaustive search.

Core claim

We derive a simple closed-form entanglement spectrum bound in terms of the singular values of the subsystem-restricted covariance matrix for the nonlocal magic of pure fermionic Gaussian states. Numerical simulated annealing over local Gaussian unitary transformations supports that the bound is optimal along the full local Gaussian orbit.

What carries the argument

The subsystem-restricted covariance matrix, whose singular values enter a closed-form expression that upper-bounds the nonlocal magic remaining after any local Gaussian unitary.

If this is right

For states drawn from the Gaussian Haar ensemble the average nonlocal magic is extensive and reaches a known thermodynamic limit from random matrix theory.
In the Kitaev chain, nonlocal magic is suppressed deep inside both trivial and topological phases but reaches maxima near the critical points.
Nonlocal magic grows diffusively under random Gaussian circuits.
In XY-chain quenches the XX limit produces a clear separation between the growth of nonlocal magic and the growth of entanglement.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The bound turns nonlocal magic into a quantity that can be computed directly from the single-particle spectrum in any free-fermion model, removing the need for variational search over local bases.
The observed separation between magic and entanglement in the XX limit suggests that nonlocal magic may detect dynamical features invisible to entanglement entropy alone.
Because the derivation relies only on Gaussianity, the same covariance-based bound may apply immediately to other quadratic fermionic models such as higher-dimensional lattices or driven systems.

Load-bearing premise

The bound is optimal over the entire local Gaussian orbit, a claim supported only by numerical simulated annealing rather than an analytic proof.

What would settle it

A concrete pure fermionic Gaussian state for which any local Gaussian unitary produces a nonlocal magic strictly larger than the closed-form value obtained from its covariance singular values would falsify the optimality claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.27055 by Benjamin B\'eri, Emanuele Tirrito, Mario Collura.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Simulated-annealing benchmark of the analytical nonlocal-magic bound. For random pure Gaussian states with 2L = 8 Majorana modes, we minimize M2(Γ) over the local Gaussian orbit and plot M2(Γ)−MNL 2,>(ψΓ) along the annealing trajectory. The two panels correspond to bipartitions with |A| = 2m = 2 (left) and |A| = 2m = 4 (right). The trajectories approach the analytical value without crossing it, providin… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Ground-state nonlocal magic in the Kitaev chain. (Left panel) Nonlocal Gaussian magic MNL 2,>(ψΓ) for the ground state of the Kitaev chain with t = ∆ = 1, shown as a function of µ for different system sizes and a symmetric bipartition. The peak sharpens near the critical point µ = 2. (Right panel) MNL 2,>(ψΓ) at criticality, µ = 2, as a function of the bipartition fraction ℓ = m/L. The growth with system s… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Nonlocal magic quantifies the irreducible nonstabilizerness of a bipartite quantum state after optimizing over local basis changes. We study nonlocal magic for pure fermionic Gaussian states, and derive a simple closed-form entanglement spectrum bound in terms of the singular values of the subsystem-restricted covariance matrix. We benchmark our result against simulated annealing over local Gaussian unitary transformations, which supports optimality along the full local Gaussian orbit. For states drawn from the Gaussian Haar ensemble, we show that the average nonlocal magic is extensive and determine its thermodynamic limit using random matrix theory for the appropriate circular unitary ensemble. We also study Gaussian ground states, focusing on the Kitaev chain, and find that nonlocal magic is suppressed deep in both trivial and topological phases and peaks near the critical points. Finally, we investigate Gaussian evolution via random circuits and in quenches with the XY chain. For random circuits, we find that nonlocal magic grows diffusively, while in the XY chain the XX limit reveals a striking separation between nonlocal magic and entanglement.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper delivers a closed-form lower bound on nonlocal magic for Gaussian fermionic states via singular values of the restricted covariance matrix, plus clean thermodynamic-limit and model-specific calculations, but optimality rests only on simulated annealing.

read the letter

The central advance is turning nonlocal magic into an explicit function of the singular values of the subsystem covariance matrix for pure fermionic Gaussian states. They derive the bound directly, then use random-matrix averages over the circular unitary ensemble to get the thermodynamic-limit scaling for Haar-random Gaussian states. That part is clean and new relative to earlier magic work on Gaussian states. The applications are also concrete: in the Kitaev chain magic is suppressed deep in the phases and rises near criticality, while in XY quenches the XX limit shows magic growing separately from entanglement. The random-circuit numerics indicate diffusive growth. These are the kind of results that let people actually compute the quantity in simulable models without heavy optimization each time.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper derives a closed-form lower bound on nonlocal magic (irreducible nonstabilizerness after local basis optimization) for pure bipartite fermionic Gaussian states, expressed directly in terms of the singular values of the subsystem-restricted covariance matrix. It benchmarks the bound numerically via simulated annealing over local Gaussian unitaries, analyzes the average value and thermodynamic limit for the Gaussian Haar ensemble using random matrix theory, examines its suppression in the Kitaev chain away from criticality, and studies its growth under random Gaussian circuits and XY-model quenches.

Significance. If the bound holds as a tight quantifier, the work supplies an analytically tractable, covariance-matrix-based measure of nonlocal magic in free-fermion systems that is distinct from entanglement and exhibits nontrivial phase and dynamical signatures. The explicit derivation from the covariance matrix and the random-matrix calculation of the extensive average are clear strengths.

major comments (1)

[Sec. III and Appendix B] The central claim that the entanglement-spectrum bound is optimal over the full local Gaussian orbit (stated after the derivation and in the benchmarking discussion) rests exclusively on simulated-annealing numerics. Because the local Gaussian orbit is a compact manifold whose geometry is known, simulated annealing supplies no rigorous guarantee that the global minimum has been attained; an analytic argument ruling out a lower value reachable by some local Gaussian unitary would be required to establish tightness for arbitrary states.

minor comments (2)

[Sec. II] Notation for the restricted covariance matrix and its singular values should be introduced once with a clear definition before the bound is stated, to avoid repeated re-definition in later sections.
[Figs. 4-6] Figure captions for the Kitaev-chain and quench plots should explicitly state the system size, boundary conditions, and number of disorder realizations used.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting the distinction between numerical evidence and rigorous proof. We address the single major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly to clarify the scope of our claims.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Sec. III and Appendix B] The central claim that the entanglement-spectrum bound is optimal over the full local Gaussian orbit (stated after the derivation and in the benchmarking discussion) rests exclusively on simulated-annealing numerics. Because the local Gaussian orbit is a compact manifold whose geometry is known, simulated annealing supplies no rigorous guarantee that the global minimum has been attained; an analytic argument ruling out a lower value reachable by some local Gaussian unitary would be required to establish tightness for arbitrary states.

Authors: We agree that simulated annealing, while effective in practice, cannot rigorously guarantee that the global minimum has been reached on the compact local Gaussian orbit. In the original manuscript we deliberately used the phrasing 'supports optimality' rather than asserting a proof. To address the referee's concern directly, we have revised the relevant passages in Section III (immediately after the derivation) and in Appendix B (benchmarking discussion) to state explicitly that the numerical results provide strong evidence that the bound is tight but do not constitute a mathematical proof of global optimality. We have added a short remark noting that an analytic demonstration that no local Gaussian unitary can yield a strictly smaller value remains an open question. In addition, we have supplemented the numerical section with further simulated-annealing runs using multiple independent random initializations and longer annealing schedules; all runs converge to the same bound value, reinforcing the practical utility of the result. We believe these changes accurately reflect the strength of the evidence while preserving the analytic tractability and usefulness of the covariance-matrix bound. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved

An analytic proof that the entanglement-spectrum bound is the global minimum over the full local Gaussian orbit for arbitrary pure fermionic Gaussian states.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; central bound derived directly from covariance matrix singular values without reduction to inputs or self-citations.

full rationale

The derivation of the closed-form entanglement spectrum bound proceeds from the singular values of the subsystem-restricted covariance matrix using standard Gaussian state techniques and random matrix averages over the circular unitary ensemble. These steps are independent of the target quantity and do not reduce by construction to fitted parameters, self-definitions, or load-bearing self-citations. The numerical simulated annealing serves only as supporting benchmark for optimality and is not invoked to define or force the analytic expression. No load-bearing premise relies on prior work by the same authors in a way that creates a self-referential chain. The result remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on standard properties of fermionic Gaussian states and the definition of nonlocal magic; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (2)

standard math Fermionic Gaussian states are fully characterized by their covariance matrix.
Invoked throughout the derivation of the bound.
domain assumption Nonlocal magic is defined as the minimum nonstabilizerness after local Gaussian unitaries.
Core definition used to obtain the bound.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5475 in / 1259 out tokens · 24533 ms · 2026-05-07T08:38:47.355565+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

103 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

P. W. Shor, Polynomial-time algorithms for prime fac- torization and discrete logarithms on a quantum com- puter, SIAM Journal on Computing26, 1484 (1997), https://doi.org/10.1137/S0097539795293172

work page doi:10.1137/s0097539795293172 1997
[2]

Eisert, M

J. Eisert, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio, Colloquium: Area laws for the entanglement entropy, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 277 (2010)

2010
[3]

J. I. Cirac and P. Zoller, Goals and opportunities in quantum simulation, Nature physics8, 264 (2012)

2012
[4]

L.M.K.VandersypenandI.L.Chuang,Nmrtechniques for quantum control and computation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 76, 1037 (2005)

2005
[5]

Vidal, Efficient classical simulation of slightly en- tangled quantum computations, Phys

G. Vidal, Efficient classical simulation of slightly en- tangled quantum computations, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 147902 (2003)

2003
[6]

Van den Nest, W

M. Van den Nest, W. Dür, G. Vidal, and H. J. Briegel, Classicalsimulationversusuniversalityinmeasurement- based quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A75, 012337 (2007)

2007
[7]

A. J. Daley, I. Bloch, C. Kokail, S. Flannigan, N. Pear- son, M. Troyer, and P. Zoller, Practical quantum advan- tage in quantum simulation, Nature607, 667 (2022)

2022
[8]

S.Bravyi, D.Gosset,andR.König,Quantumadvantage with shallow circuits, Science362, 308 (2018)

2018
[9]

A. W. Harrow and A. Montanaro, Quantum computa- tional supremacy, Nature549, 203 (2017)

2017
[10]

Preskill, Quantum computing in the nisq era and be- yond, Quantum2, 79 (2018)

J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the nisq era and be- yond, Quantum2, 79 (2018)

2018
[11]

Preskill, Quantum computing and the entanglement frontier, arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.5813 (2012)

J. Preskill, Quantum computing and the entan- glement frontier, arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.5813 https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1203.5813 (2012)

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.1203.5813 2012
[12]

Hangleiter and J

D. Hangleiter and J. Eisert, Computational advantage of quantum random sampling, Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 035001 (2023)

2023
[13]

Chitambar and G

E. Chitambar and G. Gour, Quantum resource theories, Rev. Mod. Phys.91, 025001 (2019)

2019
[14]

M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum computation and quantum information(Cambridge university press, 2010)

2010
[15]

Gottesman, Theory of fault-tolerant quantum com- putation, Phys

D. Gottesman, Theory of fault-tolerant quantum com- putation, Phys. Rev. A57, 127 (1998)

1998
[16]

Aaronson and D

S. Aaronson and D. Gottesman, Improved simulation of stabilizer circuits, Phys. Rev. A70, 052328 (2004)

2004
[17]

Chamon, A

C. Chamon, A. Hamma, and E. R. Mucciolo, Emer- gent irreversibility and entanglement spectrum statis- tics, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 240501 (2014)

2014
[18]

Eastin and E

B. Eastin and E. Knill, Restrictions on transversal en- coded quantum gate sets, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 110502 (2009). 6

2009
[19]

Knill and R

E. Knill and R. Laflamme, Theory of quantum error- correcting codes, Phys. Rev. A55, 900 (1997)

1997
[20]

A. M. Steane, Simple quantum error-correcting codes, Phys. Rev. A54, 4741 (1996)

1996
[21]

Knill, R

E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and L. Viola, Theory of quantum error correction for general noise, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 2525 (2000)

2000
[22]

M. H. Michael, M. Silveri, R. T. Brierley, V. V. Albert, J. Salmilehto, L. Jiang, and S. M. Girvin, New class of quantum error-correcting codes for a bosonic mode, Phys. Rev. X6, 031006 (2016)

2016
[23]

Li and M

Y. Li and M. P. A. Fisher, Statistical mechanics of quan- tum error correcting codes, Phys. Rev. B103, 104306 (2021)

2021
[24]

Schlingemann and R

D. Schlingemann and R. F. Werner, Quantum error- correcting codes associated with graphs, Phys. Rev. A 65, 012308 (2001)

2001
[25]

Laflamme, C

R. Laflamme, C. Miquel, J. P. Paz, and W. H. Zurek, Perfect quantum error correcting code, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 198 (1996)

1996
[26]

Gottesman, Class of quantum error-correcting codes saturating the quantum hamming bound, Phys

D. Gottesman, Class of quantum error-correcting codes saturating the quantum hamming bound, Phys. Rev. A 54, 1862 (1996)

1996
[27]

J. Yi, W. Ye, D. Gottesman, and Z.-W. Liu, Complex- ity and order in approximate quantum error-correcting codes, Nature Physics20, 1798 (2024)

2024
[28]

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
[29]

Bravyi and J

S. Bravyi and J. Haah, Magic-state distillation with low overhead, Phys. Rev. A86, 052329 (2012)

2012
[30]

E. T. Campbell, B. M. Terhal, and C. Vuillot, Roads towards fault-tolerant universal quantum computation, Nature549, 172 (2017)

2017
[31]

Bravyi and D

S. Bravyi and D. Gosset, Improved classical simulation of quantum circuits dominated by clifford gates, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 250501 (2016)

2016
[32]

Bravyi, G

S. Bravyi, G. Smith, and J. A. Smolin, Trading classical and quantum computational resources, Phys. Rev. X6, 021043 (2016)

2016
[33]

H. J. García, I. L. Markov, and A. W. Cross, On the geometry of stabilizer states, arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.07848 (2017)

work page arXiv 2017
[34]

Veitch, S

V. Veitch, S. Hamed Mousavian, D. Gottesman, and J. Emerson, The resource theory of stabilizer quantum computation,NewJournalofPhysics16,013009(2014)

2014
[35]

The Heisenberg Representation of Quantum Computers

D. Gottesman, The heisenberg representation of quantum computers, arXiv preprint quant-ph/9807006 https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/9807006 (1998)

work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9807006 1998
[36]

D. Gottesman, Fault-tolerant quantum computation with higher-dimensional systems, inNASA Interna- tional Conference on Quantum Computing and Quan- tum Communications(Springer, 1998) pp. 302–313

1998
[37]

E. T. Campbell, Catalysis and activation of magic states in fault-tolerant architectures, Phys. Rev. A83, 032317 (2011)

2011
[38]

Beverland, E

M. Beverland, E. Campbell, M. Howard, and V. Kli- uchnikov, Lower bounds on the non-clifford resources for quantum computations, Quantum Science & Tech- nology5, 035009 (2020)

2020
[39]

Leone, S

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

2022
[40]

Leone, S

L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, and A. Hamma, Nonsta- bilizerness determining the hardness of direct fidelity estimation, Phys. Rev. A107, 022429 (2023)

2023
[41]

C. D. White, C. Cao, and B. Swingle, Conformal field theories are magical, Phys. Rev. B103, 075145 (2021)

2021
[42]

T. D. Ellison, K. Kato, Z.-W. Liu, and T. H. Hsieh, Symmetry-protected sign problem and magic in quan- tum phases of matter, Quantum5, 612 (2021)

2021
[43]

T. J. Sewell and C. D. White, Mana and thermalization: Probing the feasibility of near-clifford hamiltonian sim- ulation, Phys. Rev. B106, 125130 (2022)

2022
[44]

Sarkar, C

S. Sarkar, C. Mukhopadhyay, and A. Bayat, Character- ization of an operational quantum resource in a critical many-body system, New Journal of Physics22, 083077 (2020)

2020
[45]

Liu and A

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

2022
[46]

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
[47]

Haug and L

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

2023
[48]

Sonya Tarabunga, M

P. Sonya Tarabunga, M. Frau, T. Haug, E. Tirrito, and L. Piroli, A nonstabilizerness monotone from stabilizer- ness asymmetry, Quantum Science and Technology10, 045026 (2025)

2025
[49]

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
[50]

P. R. N. Falcão, 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
[51]

Hoshino and Y

M. Hoshino and Y. Ashida, Stabilizer rényi entropy en- codes fusion rules of topological defects and boundaries, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 080402 (2026)

2026
[52]

Hoshino, M

M. Hoshino, M. Oshikawa, and Y. Ashida, Stabilizer rényi entropy and conformal field theory, Phys. Rev. X 16, 011037 (2026)

2026
[53]

H.Timsina, Y.-M.Ding, E.Tirrito, P.S.Tarabunga, B.- B. Mao, M. Collura, Z. Yan, and M. Dalmonte, Robust- ness of nonstabilizerness in the quantum ising chain via quantum monte carlo tomography, Phys. Rev. B112, 165135 (2025)

2025
[54]

Lami and M

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

2023
[55]

Turkeshi, E

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

2025
[56]

Dowling, P

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

2025
[57]

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
[58]

P. R. N. Falcão, P. Sierant, J. Zakrzewski, and E. Tir- rito,Nonstabilizernessdynamicsinmany-bodylocalized systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 240404 (2025)

2025
[59]

Tirrito, P

E. Tirrito, P. S. Tarabunga, D. S. Bhakuni, M. Dalmonte, P. Sierant, and X. Turkeshi, Uni- versal spreading of nonstabilizerness and quan- 7 tum transport, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.12133 https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2506.12133 (2025)

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.12133 2025
[60]

G. Lami, T. Haug, and J. De Nardis, Quantum state designs with clifford-enhanced matrix product states, PRX Quantum6, 010345 (2025)

2025
[61]

Turkeshi, M

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

2023
[62]

Leone, S

L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, G. Esposito, and A. Hamma, Phasetransitioninstabilizerentropyandefficientpurity estimation, Phys. Rev. A109, 032403 (2024)

2024
[63]

Turkeshi, A

X. Turkeshi, A. Dymarsky, and P. Sierant, Pauli spec- trum and nonstabilizerness of typical quantum many- body states, Phys. Rev. B111, 054301 (2025)

2025
[64]

Bera and M

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

2025
[65]

Sierant, X

P. Sierant, X. Turkeshi, and P. S. Tarabunga, Theory of the matchgate commutant (2026), arXiv:2603.12392 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2026
[66]

Braccia, N

P. Braccia, N. L. Diaz, M. Larocca, M. Cerezo, and D.García-Martín,Thecommutantoffermionicgaussian unitaries (2026), arXiv:2603.19210 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2026
[67]

Bejan, C

M. Bejan, C. McLauchlan, and B. Béri, Dynamical magic transitions in monitored clifford+tcircuits, PRX Quantum5, 030332 (2024)

2024
[68]

Rattacaso, L

D. Rattacaso, L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, and A. Hamma, Stabilizer entropy dynamics after a quan- tum quench, Phys. Rev. A108, 042407 (2023)

2023
[69]

Tirrito, P

E. Tirrito, P. S. Tarabunga, G. Lami, T. Chanda, L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, M. Dalmonte, M. Collura, and A. Hamma, Quantifying nonstabilizerness through entanglement spectrum flatness, Phys. Rev. A109, L040401 (2024)

2024
[70]

A. Gu, S. F. Oliviero, and L. Leone, Magic-induced computational separation in entanglement theory, PRX Quantum6, 020324 (2025)

2025
[71]

G. E. Fux, E. Tirrito, M. Dalmonte, and R. Fazio, Entanglement – nonstabilizerness separation in hybrid quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. Res.6, L042030 (2024)

2024
[72]

M. Frau, P. S. Tarabunga, M. Collura, M. Dalmonte, andE.Tirrito,Nonstabilizernessversusentanglementin matrixproductstates,Phys.Rev.B110,045101(2024)

2024
[73]

P. S. Tarabunga and E. Tirrito, Magic transition in measurement-only circuits, npj Quantum Information 11, 166 (2025)

2025
[74]

Cao, Non-trivial area operators require non-local magic, Journal of High Energy Physics2024, 105 (2024)

C. Cao, Non-trivial area operators require non-local magic, Journal of High Energy Physics2024, 105 (2024)

2024
[75]

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

2025
[76]

Qian and J

D. Qian and J. Wang, Quantum non-local nonstabiliz- erness (2025), arXiv:2502.06393 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[77]

Fradkin,Field theories of condensed matter physics (Cambridge University Press, 2013)

E. Fradkin,Field theories of condensed matter physics (Cambridge University Press, 2013)

2013
[78]

Giuliani and G

G. Giuliani and G. Vignale,Quantum theory of the elec- tron liquid(Cambridge university press, 2008)

2008
[79]

Haug and L

T. Haug and L. Piroli, Stabilizer entropies and nonsta- bilizerness monotones, Quantum7, 1092 (2023)

2023
[80]

Leone and L

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

2024

Showing first 80 references.