pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.00210 · v1 · pith:PUF2KHMBnew · submitted 2026-06-30 · 🪐 quant-ph

Classification and Exact Local Masking in Finite-Field Clifford Dual-Unitary Circuits

Basanta R Pahari This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-02 18:26 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords dual-unitary circuitsClifford dual-unitary gatesfinite fieldslocal maskingMDS configurationsoperator transportWeyl operatorsquantum circuits
0
0 comments X

The pith

Finite-field Clifford dual-unitary circuits achieve exact local masking of short messages from one- or two-qudit subsystems.

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

The paper classifies two-qudit finite-field Clifford dual-unitary gates under one-qudit Clifford equivalence into q-2 perfect-tensor cores indexed by determinant δ, one rank-one core, and one SWAP core. These cores relate to the ordered cross-ratio λ = δ/(δ-1) of MDS configurations. Homogeneous brickwork circuits built from them separate into five transport phases with algebraic codimensions 0 to 4 in Sp(4,q). The one-site Weyl edge channels fix the local-masking distances, giving perfect-tensor circuits d1(t)=4t and d2(t)=4t-2. This implies short quantum messages are hidden from every one- or two-qudit output even if entangled with a reference, yet recoverable exactly from the full output. A sympathetic reader cares because the work supplies algebraic constructions and precise distances for local information hiding in finite-dimensional quantum circuits that is globally reversible.

Core claim

Under ordered one-qudit Clifford equivalence the dual-unitary locus contains q-2 perfect-tensor cores, one rank-one core and one SWAP core. The perfect cores are indexed by δ=det B=det C and linked to the ordered cross-ratio λ=δ/(δ-1) of the associated [4,2,3]_q MDS configuration. Homogeneous repetition of these cores produces five transport phases whose algebraic codimensions in Sp(4,q) are 0,1,2,3,4. The one-site Weyl edge channels determine the exact local-masking distances attained by the circuits. Perfect-tensor circuits reach d1(t)=4t and d2(t)=4t-2 while delayed erasers reach d1(t)=4t-2 and d2(t)=4t-4 for t≥2. Consequently sufficiently short quantum messages are completely hidden from

What carries the argument

The one-site Weyl edge channels, which determine the exact local-masking distances for the transport phases of the homogeneous circuits.

If this is right

  • Perfect-tensor circuits attain d1(t)=4t and d2(t)=4t-2.
  • Delayed erasers attain d1(t)=4t-2 and d2(t)=4t-4 for t≥2.
  • Sufficiently short quantum messages are hidden from every one- or two-qudit output subsystem even when entangled with a reference.
  • Messages remain exactly recoverable from the full output.
  • For q=3 the construction from inverse SUM gates yields residual leakage below 2×10^{-16}.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The parametrization by the cross-ratio λ points to a possible geometric foundation for maximal masking in finite-field systems.
  • The codimension-based phases may generalize to predict information transport in non-homogeneous or higher-dimensional dual-unitary circuits.
  • The classification provides a complete list of inequivalent gates that can be used to construct circuits with controlled local accessibility.

Load-bearing premise

The one-site Weyl edge channels determine the exact local-masking distances for the different transport phases separated by homogeneous repetition of the classified cores.

What would settle it

An exhaustive search of Weyl supports for t=4 in a perfect-tensor circuit that finds d1(t) different from 4t would falsify the distance formula.

read the original abstract

We classify two-qudit finite-field Clifford dual-unitary gates and apply the classification to exact local masking and operator transport in homogeneous brickwork circuits. Under ordered one-qudit Clifford equivalence, the dual-unitary locus contains $q-2$ perfect-tensor cores, one rank-one core, and one SWAP core. The perfect cores are indexed by \[ \delta=\det B=\det C, \] and are related to the ordered cross-ratio $\lambda$ of the associated $[4,2,3]_q$ MDS configuration through \[ \lambda=\frac{\delta}{\delta-1}. \] Homogeneous repetition separates these cores into five transport phases whose algebraic codimensions in $\operatorname{Sp}(4,q)$ are $0,1,2,3,4$. The one-site Weyl edge channels determine exact local-masking distances. Perfect-tensor circuits attain \[ d_1(t)=4t, \qquad d_2(t)=4t-2, \] whereas delayed erasers satisfy \[ d_1(t)=4t-2, \qquad d_2(t)=4t-4 \] for $t\geq 2$. Consequently, sufficiently short quantum messages are completely hidden from every one- or two-qudit output subsystem, even when the input is entangled with a reference, while remaining exactly recoverable from the full output. For $q=3$, we construct an explicit perfect-tensor Clifford gate from two inverse SUM gates. Exhaustive Weyl-support searches for $t=1,2,3$ reproduce the predicted masking distances, and a one-period Choi-channel calculation for a four-qutrit periodic circuit gives numerical residual leakage below $2\times 10^{-16}$. Under the coherent perturbation considered here, local leakage is linear in the perturbation strength, whereas the infidelity of recovery using the ideal inverse is quadratic near the perfect point.

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

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper classifies two-qudit finite-field Clifford dual-unitary gates under ordered one-qudit Clifford equivalence into q-2 perfect-tensor cores indexed by δ=det B=det C (related to the ordered cross-ratio λ=δ/(δ-1)), one rank-one core, and one SWAP core. Homogeneous repetition of these cores separates them into five transport phases with algebraic codimensions 0–4 in Sp(4,q). The one-site Weyl edge channels are asserted to fix exact local-masking distances, yielding d1(t)=4t and d2(t)=4t-2 for perfect-tensor circuits versus d1(t)=4t-2 and d2(t)=4t-4 (t≥2) for delayed erasers. An explicit q=3 construction from inverse SUM gates is supplied, together with exhaustive Weyl-support searches for t=1,2,3 and a Choi-channel numerical check showing residual leakage below 2×10^{-16}.

Significance. If the classification and the edge-channel determination of the masking distances hold in general, the work supplies a precise algebraic framework for operator transport and exact local masking in finite-field Clifford dual-unitary circuits. Notable strengths include the explicit gate construction for q=3, the exhaustive small-t Weyl-support searches that reproduce the predicted distances, and the high-precision Choi-channel verification (residual <2×10^{-16}) that directly corroborates the claims for the tested cases. These elements provide concrete, reproducible support for the central assertions about perfect hiding of short messages from one- or two-qudit subsystems.

minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that the one-site Weyl edge channels determine the exact distances but does not indicate the section or equation where the general derivation from the classified cores to d1(t), d2(t) is carried out; adding an explicit pointer would improve traceability.
  2. The final sentence refers to 'the coherent perturbation considered here' and the linear/quadratic scaling of leakage and infidelity; a short definition or reference to the specific perturbation model in the main text would clarify the scope of this observation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading, positive assessment of the classification and masking-distance results, and the recommendation of minor revision. No major comments appear in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper's central results follow from an algebraic classification of two-qudit Clifford dual-unitary gates over finite fields, explicit indexing of perfect-tensor cores by determinant δ and cross-ratio λ, separation into transport phases by codimension in Sp(4,q), and direct computation of local-masking distances d1(t), d2(t) from one-site Weyl edge channels. These steps are self-contained: the distances are derived from the classified cores rather than fitted to data or defined in terms of themselves. Explicit q=3 constructions, exhaustive Weyl-support enumeration for t=1,2,3, and Choi-channel numerics (residual <2e-16) provide independent verification without reducing to self-citation chains or ansatzes smuggled from prior work. No load-bearing step equates a claimed prediction to its own input by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work relies entirely on standard algebraic structures from finite geometry and quantum information without introducing free parameters, ad hoc axioms, or new entities.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Finite fields admit a well-defined symplectic group Sp(4,q) and Weyl operators for classifying Clifford gates.
    Invoked to define the dual-unitary locus and codimensions of transport phases.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5877 in / 1560 out tokens · 59219 ms · 2026-07-02T18:26:02.771619+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Exact correlation functions for dual-unitary lattice models in 1 + 1 dimensions.Phys

    Bruno Bertini, Pavel Kos, and Tomaˇ z Prosen. Exact correlation functions for dual-unitary lattice models in 1 + 1 dimensions.Phys. Rev. Lett., 123:210601, Nov 2019. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.210601. URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.210601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.123.210601 2019

  2. [2]

    Claeys and Austen Lamacraft

    Pieter W. Claeys and Austen Lamacraft. Maximum velocity quantum circuits.Phys. Rev. Res., 2: 033032, Jul 2020. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.033032. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevResearch.2.033032

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.2.033032 2020

  3. [3]

    Correlations in perturbed dual-unitary circuits: Efficient path-integral formula.Phys

    Pavel Kos, Bruno Bertini, and Tomaˇ z Prosen. Correlations in perturbed dual-unitary circuits: Efficient path-integral formula.Phys. Rev. X, 11:011022, Feb 2021. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.11.011022. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevX.11.011022

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.11.011022 2021

  4. [4]

    Hierarchical generalization of dual unitarity.Quantum, 8: 1260, February 2024

    Xie-Hang Yu, Zhiyuan Wang, and Pavel Kos. Hierarchical generalization of dual unitarity.Quantum, 8: 1260, February 2024. ISSN 2521-327X. doi: 10.22331/q-2024-02-20-1260. URL https://doi.org/10. 22331/q-2024-02-20-1260

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2024-02-20-1260 2024

  5. [5]

    Stabilizer states and clifford operations for systems of arbitrary dimensions and modular arithmetic.Phys

    Erik Hostens, Jeroen Dehaene, and Bart De Moor. Stabilizer states and clifford operations for systems of arbitrary dimensions and modular arithmetic.Phys. Rev. A, 71:042315, Apr 2005. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevA.71.042315. URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.71.042315

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.71.042315 2005

  6. [6]

    Ketkar, A

    A. Ketkar, A. Klappenecker, S. Kumar, and P.K. Sarvepalli. Nonbinary stabilizer codes over finite fields. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 52(11):4892–4914, 2006. doi: 10.1109/TIT.2006.883612

    work page doi:10.1109/tit.2006.883612 2006

  7. [7]

    A Review of Galois Qudits

    Adam Wills. A review of galois qudits, 2026. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2605.18981

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  8. [8]

    Schlingemann, Holger Vogts, and Reinhard F

    Dirk-M. Schlingemann, Holger Vogts, and Reinhard F. Werner. On the structure of clifford quantum cellular automata.Journal of Mathematical Physics, 49(11):112104, 11 2008. ISSN 0022-2488. doi: 10.1063/1.3005565. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1063/1.3005565

    work page doi:10.1063/1.3005565 2008

  9. [9]

    Sommers, David A

    Grace M. Sommers, David A. Huse, and Michael J. Gullans. Crystalline quantum circuits.PRX Quantum, 4:030313, Jul 2023. doi: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.030313. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.030313

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.4.030313 2023

  10. [10]

    Jiangtian Yao and Pieter W. Claeys. Temporal entanglement barriers in dual-unitary clifford circuits with measurements.Phys. Rev. Res., 6:043077, Oct 2024. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.6.043077. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.6.043077

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.6.043077 2024

  11. [11]

    Claeys, and Jiangtian Yao

    Mircea Bejan, Pieter W. Claeys, and Jiangtian Yao. Magic spreading under unitary clifford dynamics,

  12. [12]

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2511.21487

    work page arXiv

  13. [13]

    Fundamental charges for dual-unitary circuits

    Tom Holden-Dye, Lluis Masanes, and Arijeet Pal. Fundamental charges for dual-unitary circuits. Quantum, 9:1615, January 2025. ISSN 2521-327X. doi: 10.22331/q-2025-01-30-1615. URL https: //doi.org/10.22331/q-2025-01-30-1615. 36

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2025-01-30-1615 2025

  14. [14]

    DiVincenzo, D.W

    D.P. DiVincenzo, D.W. Leung, and B.M. Terhal. Quantum data hiding.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 48(3):580–598, 2002. doi: 10.1109/18.985948

    work page doi:10.1109/18.985948 2002

  15. [15]

    Latorre, Arnau Riera, and Karol ˙Zyczkowski

    Dardo Goyeneche, Daniel Alsina, Jos´ e I. Latorre, Arnau Riera, and Karol ˙Zyczkowski. Absolutely maximally entangled states, combinatorial designs, and multiunitary matrices.Phys. Rev. A, 92:032316, Sep 2015. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.92.032316. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA. 92.032316

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.92.032316 2015

  16. [16]

    Aravinda, and Arul Lakshminarayan

    Suhail Ahmad Rather, S. Aravinda, and Arul Lakshminarayan. Creating ensembles of dual unitary and maximally entangling quantum evolutions.Phys. Rev. Lett., 125:070501, Aug 2020. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.125.070501. URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.070501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.125.070501 2020

  17. [17]

    Aravinda, and Arul Lakshminarayan

    Suhail Ahmad Rather, S. Aravinda, and Arul Lakshminarayan. Construction and local equivalence of dual-unitary operators: From dynamical maps to quantum combinatorial designs.PRX Quantum, 3: 040331, Dec 2022. doi: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.3.040331. URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PRXQuantum.3.040331

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.3.040331 2022

  18. [18]

    Oxford University Press, 01 1998

    J W P Hirschfeld.Projective Geometries over Finite Fields. Oxford University Press, 01 1998. ISBN 9780198502951. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780198502951.001.0001. URL https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/ 9780198502951.001.0001

    work page doi:10.1093/oso/9780198502951.001.0001 1998

  19. [19]

    Absolutely maximally entangled pure states of multipartite quantum systems.Reports on Progress in Physics, 89(5):057601, may 2026

    Grzegorz Rajchel-Mieldzio´ c, Rafa l Bistro´ n, Albert Rico, Arul Lakshminarayan, and Karol˙Zyczkowski. Absolutely maximally entangled pure states of multipartite quantum systems.Reports on Progress in Physics, 89(5):057601, may 2026. doi: 10.1088/1361-6633/ae672a. URL https://doi.org/10.1088/ 1361-6633/ae672a

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6633/ae672a 2026

  20. [20]

    Optimal quantum error correcting codes from absolutely maximally entangled states.Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 51(7):075301, jan 2018

    Zahra Raissi, Christian Gogolin, Arnau Riera, and Antonio Ac´ ın. Optimal quantum error correcting codes from absolutely maximally entangled states.Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 51(7):075301, jan 2018. doi: 10.1088/1751-8121/aaa151. URL https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/ aaa151

    work page doi:10.1088/1751-8121/aaa151 2018

  21. [21]

    Absolute maximal entanglement and quantum secret sharing.Phys

    Wolfram Helwig, Wei Cui, Jos´ e Ignacio Latorre, Arnau Riera, and Hoi-Kwong Lo. Absolute maximal entanglement and quantum secret sharing.Phys. Rev. A, 86:052335, Nov 2012. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA. 86.052335. URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.86.052335

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva 2012

  22. [22]

    A. J. Scott. Multipartite entanglement, quantum-error-correcting codes, and entangling power of quantum evolutions.Phys. Rev. A, 69:052330, May 2004. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.69.052330. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.69.052330

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.69.052330 2004

  23. [23]

    Masking quantum information is impossible.Phys

    Kavan Modi, Arun Kumar Pati, Aditi Sen(De), and Ujjwal Sen. Masking quantum information is impossible.Phys. Rev. Lett., 120:230501, Jun 2018. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.230501. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.230501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.230501 2018

  24. [24]

    Masking quantum information in multipartite scenario.Phys

    Mao-Sheng Li and Yan-Ling Wang. Masking quantum information in multipartite scenario.Phys. Rev. A, 98:062306, Dec 2018. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.98.062306. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevA.98.062306

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.98.062306 2018

  25. [25]

    k-uniform quantum information masking.Phys

    Fei Shi, Mao-Sheng Li, Lin Chen, and Xiande Zhang. k-uniform quantum information masking.Phys. Rev. A, 104:032601, Sep 2021. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.104.032601. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevA.104.032601

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.104.032601 2021

  26. [26]

    Higuchi and A

    A. Higuchi and A. Sudbery. How entangled can two couples get?Physics Letters A, 273(4):213– 217, 2000. ISSN 0375-9601. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0375-9601(00)00480-1. URL https://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0375960100004801

    work page doi:10.1016/s0375-9601(00)00480-1 2000

  27. [27]

    On two maximally entangled couples.Quantum Science and Technology, 11(1):015025, dec 2025

    Felix Huber and Jens Siewert. On two maximally entangled couples.Quantum Science and Technology, 11(1):015025, dec 2025. doi: 10.1088/2058-9565/ae23f4. URL https://doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/ ae23f4. 37

    work page doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ae23f4 2025

  28. [28]

    Multiqubit clifford groups are unitary 3-designs.Phys

    Huangjun Zhu. Multiqubit clifford groups are unitary 3-designs.Phys. Rev. A, 96:062336, Dec 2017. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.96.062336. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.96.062336

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.96.062336 2017

  29. [29]

    Heldermann Berlin, 1992

    Donald E Taylor.The geometry of the classical groups, volume 9. Heldermann Berlin, 1992

    1992

  30. [30]

    Holographic quantum error- correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspondence.Journal of High Energy Physics, 2015(6):1–55, 2015

    Fernando Pastawski, Beni Yoshida, Daniel Harlow, and John Preskill. Holographic quantum error- correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspondence.Journal of High Energy Physics, 2015(6):1–55, 2015. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2015)149

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2015)149 2015

  31. [31]

    Entanglement in the stabilizer formalism

    David Fattal, Toby S. Cubitt, Yoshihisa Yamamoto, Sergey Bravyi, and Isaac L. Chuang. Entanglement in the stabilizer formalism, 2004. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0406168

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  32. [32]

    Cambridge university press, 2018

    John Watrous.The theory of quantum information. Cambridge university press, 2018

    2018

  33. [33]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

    James E Humphreys.Linear algebraic groups. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

    2012

  34. [34]

    Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1988

    Winfried Bruns and Udo Vetter.Determinantal Rings, volume 1327 ofLecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1988. ISBN 3-540-19468-1

    1988

  35. [35]

    How to share a quantum secret.Phys

    Richard Cleve, Daniel Gottesman, and Hoi-Kwong Lo. How to share a quantum secret.Phys. Rev. Lett., 83:648–651, Jul 1999. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.648. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.83.648

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.83.648 1999

  36. [36]

    Description of a quantum convolutional code.Phys

    Harold Ollivier and Jean-Pierre Tillich. Description of a quantum convolutional code.Phys. Rev. Lett., 91:177902, Oct 2003. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.177902. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.177902

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.91.177902 2003

  37. [37]

    Stabilizer formalism for operator quantum error correction.Phys

    David Poulin. Stabilizer formalism for operator quantum error correction.Phys. Rev. Lett., 95:230504, Dec

  38. [38]

    URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett

    doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.230504. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 95.230504

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.95.230504

  39. [39]

    Gluesing-Luerssen, J

    H. Gluesing-Luerssen, J. Rosenthal, and R. Smarandache. Strongly-mds convolutional codes.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 52(2):584–598, 2006. doi: 10.1109/TIT.2005.862100

    work page doi:10.1109/tit.2005.862100 2006

  40. [40]

    Construction and performance of quantum burst error correction codes for correlated errors

    Jihao Fan, Min–Hsiu Hsieh, Hanwu Chen, He Chen, and Yonghui Li. Construction and performance of quantum burst error correction codes for correlated errors. In2018 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT), pages 2336–2340, 2018. doi: 10.1109/ISIT.2018.8437493

    work page doi:10.1109/isit.2018.8437493 2018

  41. [41]

    A simple formula for the average gate fidelity of a quantum dynamical operation

    Michael A Nielsen. A simple formula for the average gate fidelity of a quantum dynamical operation. Physics Letters A, 303(4):249–252, 2002. ISSN 0375-9601. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0375-9601(02) 01272-0. URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0375960102012720

    work page doi:10.1016/s0375-9601(02 2002

  42. [42]

    Probability inequalities for sums of bounded random variables.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58(301):13–30, 1963

    Wassily Hoeffding. Probability inequalities for sums of bounded random variables.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58(301):13–30, 1963. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1963.10500830. URL https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1963.10500830. 38

    work page doi:10.1080/01621459.1963.10500830 1963