Reply to Comment on "Controlling the Dynamical Evolution of Quantum Coherence and Quantum Correlations in e⁺e⁻ to Λbar{Λ} Processes at BESIII"

Elhabib Jaloum , Mohamed Amazioug

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 17:00 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph hep-ph

keywords quantum coherencequantum correlationsLambda anti-LambdaBESIIIQCD fragmentationopen quantum systemse+e- collisions

0 comments

The pith

The modeling of the Lambda anti-Lambda system as an effective open bipartite quantum system during production is grounded in QCD physics.

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

This reply defends the physical foundations of modeling the Lambda anti-Lambda pair in electron-positron collisions as an effective open bipartite quantum system. The authors argue that this treatment applies specifically during the intrinsic production stage and draws directly from QCD fragmentation and production dynamics. They cite recent experimental and theoretical support to counter the claim that the assumptions lack operational basis. A reader would care because it clarifies how quantum information concepts can be applied rigorously to high-energy particle processes at facilities like BESIII.

Core claim

The authors demonstrate that their approach treats the system as an effective open bipartite system during the intrinsic production stage, aligning with the established physics of QCD fragmentation and production dynamics in e+e−→ΛΛ¯ processes, as backed by recent advancements.

What carries the argument

Effective open bipartite quantum system model applied to the Lambda anti-Lambda pair at the intrinsic production stage, enabling study of coherence and correlation evolution.

Load-bearing premise

The Lambda anti-Lambda system can be validly treated as an effective open bipartite quantum system specifically during the intrinsic production stage with modeling choices having a clear operational basis in QCD.

What would settle it

A measurement or calculation showing quantum correlations in the produced Lambdas that cannot be reproduced by open-system dynamics at the production stage would challenge the model.

read the original abstract

We thank the Commentator for his detailed critique, which provides an opportunity to clarify the physical foundations of our work. While we appreciate the emphasis on rigor when applying quantum information concepts to high-energy physics (HEP), we respectfully disagree with the assertion that our assumptions lack a physical or operational basis. In the following sections, we address each point raised, demonstrating that our modeling is grounded in the established physics of QCD fragmentation and production dynamics in $e^+e^-\to \Lambda\bar{\Lambda}$, as supported by recent experimental and theoretical advancements. Our approach treats the system as an effective open bipartite system during the intrinsic production stage, rather than during post-production propagation, which aligns with the analyses cited in our references.

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

This reply defends the original modeling by restating its QCD grounding but adds no new derivations or direct counters to the comment's objections.

read the letter

This reply to the comment on the earlier work about quantum coherence in e+e- to Lambda anti-Lambda at BESIII mainly defends the modeling approach without introducing fresh results. The authors clarify that they treat the system as an effective open bipartite quantum system specifically during the intrinsic production stage, and they tie this to QCD fragmentation and production dynamics backed by cited experiments and theory. What stands out as positive is the direct engagement with the critique. They thank the commentator and explicitly disagree with the claim that the assumptions lack physical or operational basis. By highlighting the distinction between the production stage and later propagation, they try to ground the open system treatment in the actual physics of the process rather than abstract quantum info ideas. This kind of clarification can be helpful for readers trying to understand the choices in the original paper. On the soft spots, the response appears to rely primarily on alignment with existing literature and references rather than providing new derivations or specific counter-calculations to the objections. The abstract mentions addressing each point raised, but without detailed new evidence or checks shown, the defense stays at the level of assertion. This leaves the circularity concern intact if the original modeling's justification was already based on those same citations. The central assumption about the effective open bipartite treatment during production gets restated but not re-derived or tested against the comment's specific points in a way that would convince a skeptic. Overall, this paper is for the narrow audience already invested in the original study and the comment on it. It won't interest broader quantum information or particle physics readers looking for new insights. The work shows honest engagement with the literature and the critique, so it qualifies as serious thinking on its own terms. I would not bring this to a reading group or cite it in my own papers. For peer review, I recommend against sending it out to referees. As a reply, it can be handled editorially or published directly if the journal allows the exchange, but it does not rise to the level of requiring formal review since no new claims or methods are presented.

Referee Report

0 major / 1 minor

Summary. This manuscript is a reply to a comment on the authors' prior work concerning the dynamical evolution of quantum coherence and quantum correlations in e⁺e⁻ → ΛΛ̄ processes at BESIII. The authors defend their treatment of the ΛΛ̄ system as an effective open bipartite quantum system specifically during the intrinsic production stage, asserting that this modeling is physically grounded in established QCD fragmentation and production dynamics, as supported by recent experimental and theoretical advancements cited in their references. They address each point of the critique and disagree that their assumptions lack a physical or operational basis.

Significance. If the defense is accepted, the reply clarifies the applicability of quantum-information concepts to high-energy physics processes and reinforces the validity of the original analysis by linking it to standard QCD frameworks. This contributes to the broader discussion on operational foundations for such models, though its impact is primarily clarificatory rather than introducing new results.

minor comments (1)

The reply refers to 'the following sections' that address each point raised by the commentator, but the provided text does not include those detailed responses; ensuring the final version contains self-contained summaries of the comment's objections would improve readability for readers unfamiliar with the original exchange.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment and recommendation to accept the manuscript. The referee's summary correctly reflects our goal of clarifying the physical and operational foundations of our quantum-information analysis in the context of QCD dynamics for e⁺e⁻ → ΛΛ̄ production.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity detected in defense of modeling assumptions

full rationale

The reply asserts that the effective open-bipartite treatment during the intrinsic production stage is grounded in established QCD fragmentation and production dynamics, supported by recent experimental and theoretical advancements, and aligns with analyses in the references. No derivation chain, equations, fitted parameters, or self-referential reductions are present in the text. The central claim is an appeal to external physical foundations rather than any step that reduces by construction to the paper's own inputs or unverified self-citations, rendering the argument self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review provides no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities. The claim rests on 'established physics of QCD fragmentation' and 'recent experimental and theoretical advancements' referenced but not detailed here.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5436 in / 1073 out tokens · 34364 ms · 2026-05-07T17:00:35.027042+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

[1]

Tinto and J

Y . Du, X.-G. He, J.-P. Ma, and X.-Y . Du, Phys. Rev. D110, 076019 (2024), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD. 110.076019

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd 2024
[2]

Chen, X.-G

K.-B. Chen, X.-G. He, J.-P. Ma, and X.-B. Tong, arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.22087 (2025), 2509.22087, URLhttps://arxiv.org/ abs/2509.22087

work page arXiv 2025
[3]

Fu, H.-B

J. Fu, H.-B. Li, J.-P. Wang, F.-S. Yu, and J. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D108, L091301 (2023), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevD.108.L091301

2023
[4]

Ablikim, M

M. Ablikim, M. Achasov, P. Adlarson, X. Ai, R. Aliberti, A. Amoroso, Q. An, Y . Bai, O. Bakina, Y . Ban, et al.,Precise measurement of theλelectric dipole moment through the entangled strange baryon-antibaryon system(2025), 2506.19180, URLhttps://arxiv. org/abs/2506.19180

work page arXiv 2025
[5]

A. u. Rahman, A.-X. Liu, S. Haddadi, and C.-F. Qiao, Phys. Rev. D111, 064077 (2025), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevD.111.064077

2025
[6]

Jaloum, M

E. Jaloum, M. Amazioug, and S. Haddadi, Scientific Reports15, 18594 (2025), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/ s41598-025-03593-5

2025
[7]

Jaloum and M

E. Jaloum and M. Amazioug, Physica Scripta100, 055120 (2025), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/1402-4896/add0f2

work page doi:10.1088/1402-4896/add0f2 2025
[8]

M. Guo, Z. Zhang, R. Ping, and J. Jiao,Search for cp violations in the production and decay of the hyperon-antihyperon pairs(2025), 2502.20274, URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2502.20274

work page arXiv 2025
[9]

Zhang, Y

F. Zhang, Y . Gao, and L. Huo, Physics Letters B681, 237 (2009), ISSN 0370-2693, URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0370269309011903

2009
[11]

He and J

X. He and J. Ma, Physics Letters B839, 137834 (2023), ISSN 0370-2693, URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0370269323001685

2023
[12]

S. Wu, C. Qian, Q. Wang, and X.-R. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D110, 054012 (2024), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevD.110.054012

2024
[13]

Gabrielli and L

E. Gabrielli and L. Marzola, Symmetry16(2024), ISSN 2073-8994, URLhttps://www.mdpi.com/2073-8994/16/8/1036

2024
[14]

Ehat¨aht, M

K. Ehat¨aht, M. Fabbrichesi, L. Marzola, and C. Veelken, Phys. Rev. D109, 032005 (2024), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevD.109.032005

2024
[15]

Schlosshauer, Physics Reports831, 1 (2019), ISSN 0370-1573, quantum decoherence, URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0370157319303084

M. Schlosshauer, Physics Reports831, 1 (2019), ISSN 0370-1573, quantum decoherence, URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0370157319303084

2019
[16]

Jaloum and M

E. Jaloum and M. Amazioug, Nuclear Physics B1022, 117255 (2026), ISSN 0550-3213, URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0550321325004614

2026
[17]

Ablikim and al

M. Ablikim and al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 251902 (2023), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ 3 PhysRevLett.130.251902

2023
[18]

Ablikim and al

M. Ablikim and al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. C109, L052201 (2024), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevC.109.L052201

2024
[19]

Ablikim and al

M. Ablikim and al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 231902 (2024), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.132.231902

2024
[20]

Caban, J

P. Caban, J. Rembieli´nski, P. Rybka, K. A. Smoli´nski, and P. Witas, Phys. Rev. A89, 032107 (2014), URLhttps://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.89.032107

work page doi:10.1103/physreva.89.032107 2014
[21]

Y .-G. Yang, C. Qian, and Q. Wang, International Journal of Modern Physics A0, null (0), https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X26430025, URLhttps://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X26430025

work page doi:10.1142/s0217751x26430025
[22]

S. Wu, C. Qian, Q. Wang, and Y .-G. Yang, Phys. Rev. D113, 056030 (2026), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ x43x-3wgy

2026
[23]

Y . Afik, R. Demina, A. Herrera, O. Hindrichs, J. R. M. de Nova, and B. Ravina,Experimental characterization of the hierarchy of quantum correlations in top quark pairs(2026), 2602.15115, URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2602.15115

work page arXiv 2026
[24]

Severi, C

C. Severi, C. D. E. Boschi, F. Maltoni, and M. Sioli, The European Physical Journal C82, 285 (2022), URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1140/epjc/s10052-022-10245-9

2022
[25]

A. J. Larkoski, Phys. Rev. D105, 096012 (2022), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.105.096012

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.096012 2022
[26]

J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra and J. Casas, The European Physical Journal C82, 666 (2022), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/ s10052-022-10630-4

work page doi:10.1140/epjc/ 2022
[27]

Bl´ azquez-Salcedo, C

Y . Afik and J. R. M. n. de Nova, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 221801 (2023), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 130.221801

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett 2023
[28]

Afik and J

Y . Afik and J. R. M. de Nova, Quantum6, 820 (2022)

2022
[29]

W. Gong, G. Parida, Z. Tu, and R. Venugopalan, Phys. Rev. D106, L031501 (2022), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevD.106.L031501

2022
[30]

A. J. Barr, Physics Letters B825, 136866 (2022), ISSN 0370-2693, URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ pii/S0370269321008066

2022
[31]

J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra, A. Bernal, J. A. Casas, and J. M. Moreno, Phys. Rev. D107, 016012 (2023), URLhttps://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.016012

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.016012 2023
[32]

Ashby-Pickering, A

R. Ashby-Pickering, A. J. Barr, and A. Wierzchucka, Journal of High Energy Physics2023, 1 (2023), URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1007/JHEP05(2023)020

2023
[33]

Fabbrichesi, R

M. Fabbrichesi, R. Floreanini, E. Gabrielli, and L. Marzola, The European Physical Journal C83, 823 (2023), URLhttps://doi. org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11935-8

work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11935-8 2023
[34]

S. Haddadi,Comment on ”controlling the dynamical evolution of quantum coherence and quantum correlations in e+e− →λ ¯Λprocesses at besiii”(2026), 2605.00127, URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2605.00127

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[35]

S. Haddadi,Comment on ”quantum teleportation, entanglement, lqu and lqfi in e +e− →Y yprocesses at besiii through noisy channels” (2026), 2605.00129, URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2605.00129

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026