Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 44 references

Spectral Topology and Universal Krylov Dynamics

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that the global topology of the spectral measure—how many bands it has, their filling fractions, and how they merge—controls Krylov dynamics beyond the leading growth law: gapped spectra give quasiperiodic Lanczos…

desk verdict Solid advance in Krylov complexity: the frequency-from-support and SYK offset results are real, but the n^{-1/3} gap-closing transition is a clearly labeled conjecture, not a demonstrated Krylov phenomenon. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.07258 v1 pith:LEICU62I submitted 2026-08-07 hep-th math-phmath.MP

Jeff Murugan , Hendrik J. R. Van Zyl , Masataka Watanabe This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thmath-phmath.MP
keywords KrylovcomplexityLanczoscoefficientsspectraltopologyRiemann–HilbertproblemPainlevéIIquasiperiodicoscillationsFreudgrowthlawSYKmodel
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper tries to establish that the global topology of a spectrum—how many bands it has, how they are filled, and what happens when they merge—controls the asymptotic Lanczos sequence that drives operator growth in Krylov space, on top of what spectral tails alone determine. The central claim is that a spectral gap makes the Lanczos coefficients quasiperiodic, with an oscillation frequency fixed only by the filling fraction of the bands, and that when a gap closes the sequence relaxes anomalously slowly, with the crossover governed by the Hastings–McLeod solution of Painlevé II. If true, this organizes operator growth into a four-level hierarchy: the tail exponent fixes the leading growth law, the topology of the support fixes whether and how the coefficients oscillate, local endpoint data fixes subleading corrections, and the local structure at a transition fixes its critical exponent. The paper also shows that in the conformal SYK model the operator scaling dimension is invisible in the leading slope but is extracted from the subleading offset of the Lanczos sequence.

What carries the argument

The engine is the dictionary between Krylov dynamics and orthogonal polynomials: the Lanczos coefficients are the Jacobi recurrence coefficients of the spectral measure, and they sit in the first subleading coefficient of the large-$z$ expansion of a Fokas–Its–Kitaev Riemann–Hilbert problem, via $\beta_n=(Y_{1,n})_{12}(Y_{1,n})_{21}$ and $b_n=\sqrt{\beta_n}$. Deift–Zhou nonlinear steepest descent then reduces large-$n$ asymptotics to the equilibrium measure of the weight and to local parametrices at its edges. For gapped spectra the global parametrix is a $\theta$ function on the elliptic (genus-one) spectral curve whose Abel-map argument carries an irremovable phase $n\Omega$; this produces the quasiperiodic Lanczos formula. At a gap closing the curve degenerates to genus zero, the $\theta$ function collapses, and the local parametrix becomes the Lax pair of Painlevé II with the Hastings–McLeod solution $q(s)$ controlling the correction amplitude.

What would settle it

Compute the Lanczos coefficients for a lattice model whose two bands are tuned to touch with the density vanishing as $(\omega-\omega_c)^2$: at criticality the paper predicts a staggered correction $b_n=b_\infty(1+(-1)^n d_1 q(0)/n^{1/3})$, whereas the generic single-cut/Bessel prediction is $O(n^{-2})$. A cheaper check is the SSH chain at $t_1=t_2$, where the paper itself predicts no $n^{-1/3}$ slowdown because the density is nonzero at the touch point.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery, stated on the paper's own terms, is that the geometry of the spectral measure is a dynamical invariant of Krylov growth. For stretched-exponential tails $\rho(\omega)\sim|\omega|^\gamma e^{-c|\omega|^\beta}$, the Lanczos coefficients obey the Freud growth law $b_n\sim n^{1/\beta}$, with the prefactor fixed by the equilibrium measure and subleading corrections fixed by endpoint data; the operator growth hypothesis's linear growth is the $\beta=1$ member of this family. For a two-band (gapped) measure, the coefficients do not converge: $b_n=\bar b+\tilde b\cos(2\pi n\Omega+\varphi_0)+O(e^{-cn})$, where $\Omega$ is the mass of the first band, a property of the support alone, verified in the SSH chain ($\Omega=1/2$) and in its next-nearest-neighbour deformation ($\Omega=0.3700$ predicted from band edges alone). At the gap-closing transition, provided the density has a double zero at the merge point, the even-odd staggering is governed by the Hastings–McLeod solution of Painlevé II and decays as $n^{-1/3}$, interpolating between the gapped and merged phases; this is called a Krylov phase transition. In the conformal SYK limit the measure is Meixner–Pollaczek, giving $b_n=\pi T\sqrt{n(n+2/q-1)}$, so the leading rate $\alpha=\pi T$ is $q$-independent while the subleading offset $b_0=\pi T(\Delta-\tfrac12)$ encodes the scaling dimension $\Delta=1/q$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that at a band-touching transition the spectral density acquires a double zero at the merge point; if the density instead remains strictly positive there, as it does in the SSH chain, the Painlevé II mechanism and its $n^{-1/3}$ exponent do not apply.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any system whose spectral measure has two or more separated bands will show quasiperiodic Lanczos coefficients rather than convergence, with each gap contributing one frequency equal to the filling fraction of the corresponding band, up to the $\Omega\leftrightarrow 1-\Omega$ symmetry.
  • When two bands merge with the density vanishing quadratically at the touching point, the Krylov sequence undergoes a genuine phase transition: the even-odd staggering of $b_n$ decays as $n^{-1/3}$, much slower than the $O(n^{-2})$ relaxation of a generic single-cut measure.
  • In conformal SYK, the operator scaling dimension $\Delta=1/q$ does not affect the leading slope $\alpha=\pi T$, but it is recovered from the subleading offset $b_0=\pi T(\Delta-\tfrac12)$; this is a concrete example of information invisible to tail-based arguments.
  • The tail-based classification of operator growth is refined into a four-level hierarchy (tail exponent, spectral topology, local endpoint data, critical structure), so two systems with the same leading growth rate need not be asymptotically equivalent.
  • The paper conjectures a cross-class law for the universal $1/n$ correction to the Freud growth law, verified in the $\beta=1,2,4$ exactly solvable families.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: if the oscillation frequency is genuinely support-only, then a long Lanczos sequence measured from a local seed in any band insulator should let one read off the band filling fractions directly from the beat pattern, without diagonalizing the Hamiltonian—a testable diagnostic for cold-atom or photonic SSH-type lattices.
  • Editorial inference: the paper leaves open a lattice realization of the double-zero gap closing; tuning a dimerized chain so that the density vanishes at the touch point (rather than staying nonzero as in SSH) and checking for the $(-1)^n/n^{1/3}$ staggering would directly test the Painlevé II mechanism.
  • Editorial inference: for an asymmetric merge with $\Omega_c\neq 1/2$, the same $n^{-1/3}$ scale with modulation at frequency $\Omega_c$ rather than period two is a natural extension, but the paper explicitly does not claim the local Painlevé II model survives there.
  • Editorial inference: the claims about Krylov complexity $K(t)$ itself—ballistic growth with a beating envelope and a prolonged transient at criticality—are semiclassical inferences from the coefficient asymptotics; confirming them requires a controlled joint large-$(n,t)$ steepest-descent analysis of the Krylov wavefunction.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a Riemann-Hilbert / orthogonal-polynomial framework for Krylov (Lanczos) dynamics and claims a hierarchy of universality classes organized by the topology of the spectral measure. For single-cut measures it recovers Freud-type growth laws from equilibrium measures and endpoint data. For gapped (two-cut) measures it derives quasiperiodic Lanczos coefficients whose frequency is fixed by the band filling fraction alone, and verifies this against numerical Lanczos data for the SSH chain and a next-nearest-neighbour deformation. At gap closing it argues for a Painlevé II (Hastings-McLeod) crossover with n^{-1/3} relaxation when the equilibrium density acquires a double zero at the merging point. Finally, it derives exact Lanczos coefficients for the conformal SYK spectral measure and shows the operator dimension enters through the subleading offset b_0 = πT(Δ - 1/2). The paper is careful to separate proven applications of known orthogonal-polynomial theorems from conjectures, and it explicitly flags limitations in Sections 6.4, 7.2, and 8.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper gives a genuinely finer classification of operator growth than the tail-based exponent alone, with concrete, checkable signatures: quasiperiodic Lanczos oscillations at a support-determined frequency, a subleading constant offset encoding the spectral prefactor, and a critical slowing-down mechanism at spectral-merging transitions. The SSH and deformed-SSH numerical tests are convincing as checks of the frequency prediction, since the frequency is computed from the band edges without fitting. The SYK result (7.22) is an exact, elementary consequence of the Meixner-Pollaczek recurrence and correctly identifies where the scaling dimension appears in the Lanczos data. The authors also deserve credit for being explicit about which parts are rigorous applications of known theorems (single-cut steepest descent, theta-function parametrix, Painlevé II double scaling) and which are conjectural (cross-class law (7.19), universality of b_0 beyond the MP family).

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract, §6.1, §6.4] The headline claim that a gap closing is realized as a Krylov phase transition with n^{-1/3} relaxation rests entirely on the double-zero condition (6.4). The argument in §6.1 that 'the generic possibility is a double zero' does not prove that a zero exists: positivity of ρ_eq only forces an interior zero, if present, to be of even order. The degree-count identity h_{1-cut}(z) = (z-ω_c)h_{2-cut}(z) in (6.5) assumes the very vanishing of h_{2-cut} at ω_c that the argument is meant to establish. More importantly, §6.4 demonstrates that the only concrete lattice example in the paper, the SSH chain, does not satisfy (6.4): the density remains nonzero at the merge point and the relaxation is O(n^{-2}) (Bessel), not O(n^{-1/3}). The paper explicitly declines to construct a model realizing (6.4) ('Constructing such a family ... is a natural next step which we do not pursue here', end of §6.4). Thus, as the manuscript stands, the n^{-1/3} Painlevé II crossover is an unconfirmed special-case prediction rather than a demonstrated phenomenon. The abstract and §6.5 should either be tempered to say this explicitly, or the authors should provide a concrete lattice Hamiltonian whose equilibrium density acquires a double zero and verify the n^{-1/3} scaling numerically.
  2. [§5.3, Eq. (5.11)] The statement that the frequency Ω is fixed by the support alone is stated in (5.11) and the surrounding text as a consequence of the theta-function parametrix. However, the parametrix derivation in §5.2 is for the equilibrium measure in the two settings of §5.1, and the extension to arbitrary Szegő-class measures on a multi-interval support relies on the cited theorem of Widom [25] rather than on the paper's own derivation. For setting (i) (varying weights), Ω depends on the potential V through the equilibrium problem, so the support-only claim is not universal. The paper does restrict to setting (ii) in §5.3, but the distinction should be made already where (5.11) is first introduced, to avoid the impression that the frequency is always a pure support invariant.
  3. [§7.2, Eq. (7.19)] The cross-class law (7.19) is conjectural, as the authors state, but the text uses it as a key ingredient in the 'refined universality classification' of §7.3. The verification in three families (β=1,2,4) is a useful check, but two of the three families involve the same algebraic mechanism (an interior singularity of the weight), and the claimed amplitude A_osc = -(β-1)γ/(2β) is itself only a conjecture with two competing explanations in the β=1 case. This should be flagged more prominently in the classification section so that a reader does not mistake a conjecture for an established theorem.
  4. [§6.3, Eq. (6.16)] The interpolation formula (6.16) is derived from the Painlevé II parametrix with fixed constants c_0, c_1 in (6.11) expressed in terms of κ. The matched asymptotic limits s→-∞ and s→+∞ are sensible and reproduce the expected staggering and its exponential suppression. However, the alternating factor (-1)^n is inserted in (C.25) by asserting that the prefactor E_n^{(crit)} inherits the phase from the degenerating theta function, with the comment that for asymmetric merges the modulation would occur at frequency Ω_c. Since the paper does not verify the asymmetric case, the general statement in the table of §6.3 ('Gap closing O(n^{-1/3}), staggered') should be restricted to the symmetric merge Ω_c = 1/2 that is actually analyzed.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§4.3] Typo: 'what remaines' should be 'what remains'.
  2. [§5.4, Fig. 2 caption] The captions of Figures 2 and 3 describe the numerical data but do not state the number of moments used or the discretization parameters beyond what is in the text; a sentence stating the convergence criterion would help reproducibility.
  3. [§4.5, Eq. (4.32)] The expansion (4.32) writes dμ_L with a 1/√L term that is then said to be absent by parity, but the text does not specify the parity of the cumulants beyond the statement that an odd cumulant shifts a_n. A brief definition of 'odd cumulant' in this context would improve clarity.
  4. [§7.1, Eq. (7.3)] The Mhaskar-Rakhmanov-Saff formula (7.3) is stated with an unexplained factor of 1/2 on the left-hand side; the notation a_β/2 is confusing since a_β is the endpoint of the support. Please define a_β and clarify that (7.3) gives the endpoint, not its half.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the derivation chain rests on external Riemann-Hilbert and orthogonal-polynomial theorems; the only assumption-dependent claim (Painleve-II gap closing) is explicitly conditional, and the SYK and SSH checks use exact classical recurrences rather than self-derived targets.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are applications of independent external results, not reductions to their own inputs. The single-cut Freud growth laws and endpoint corrections follow from Deift-Zhou steepest descent together with the proved Freud-conjecture theorems (refs. [22,24,35,36]); the multi-cut quasiperiodic frequency follows from the theta-function parametrix of [26] and Widom's almost-periodicity theorem [25]; and the Painleve-II gap-closing crossover is imported from Bleher-Its and Claeys-Kuijlaars [31,32]. The SYK subleading offset b0 = pi T (Delta - 1/2) is the exact classical Meixner-Pollaczek recurrence [39], explicitly acknowledged as such, so it is a faithful benchmark use rather than a conclusion derived from the target claim. In the numerical verification of the quasiperiodic frequency in the deformed SSH chain, the paper fixes only the frequency from the harmonic measure of the support and explicitly fits the mean, amplitude, and phase, correctly identifying these as non-topological; this is not a fitted input being called a prediction. The double-zero condition (6.4) that produces the n^{-1/3} Painleve-II scaling is stated as an assumption with an argued genericity heuristic, not as a proven generic fact, and the paper itself flags in Section 6.4 that the SSH gap closing is a Bessel-type, non-critical transition and that constructing a lattice family realizing (6.4) is not pursued. This is an unverified assumption and a limitation, but not a circular step. The conjectural cross-class law (7.19) is explicitly labelled conjectural in Sections 7.2 and 8. The authors' prior work [19,43,44] is cited only tangentially and is not load-bearing for any of the paper's predictions. No self-citation chain or definitional equivalence forces the results; the derivation is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are used in the derivations themselves; the only fitted quantities are the mean, amplitude, and phase in the numerical verification of the two-cut formula, which the paper openly excludes from the support-only prediction. The axioms are standard or explicitly stated modeling assumptions; the double-zero condition is the key ad hoc assumption delimiting the Painleve II class.

free parameters (1)
  • two-cut oscillation mean, amplitude, and phase (bar b, tilde b, phi_0) = fitted to numerical Lanczos coefficients in the NNN-SSH comparison (Figure 3)
    The paper predicts the frequency but not these three parameters; they are extracted from the data in the verification of (5.11). The paper explicitly states they are not determined by the support.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Lanczos coefficients of the Krylov problem are the recurrence coefficients of the orthogonal polynomials associated with the spectral measure
    Standard dictionary reviewed in Section 2, equations (2.10)-(2.11).
  • standard math The Deift-Zhou steepest-descent method and the classical theorems for asymptotic recurrence coefficients (Widom, Deift-Kriecherbauer-McLaughlin-Venakides) apply to the measures considered
    Assumed throughout Sections 4-6; technical hypotheses deferred to [23,24].
  • domain assumption The spectral measure is in the Szego class, absolutely continuous and positive on each band of a multi-interval support
    Explicitly assumed in Section 5.1, setting (ii); the harmonic-measure frequency formula (5.11) relies on this.
  • ad hoc to paper At the gap-closing transition analyzed in Section 6, the equilibrium density acquires a double zero at the merge point
    Equation (6.4); this local condition selects the Painleve II parametrix and the n^{-1/3} exponent. The paper notes in Section 6.4 that other gap closings (e.g., SSH) do not satisfy it.
  • standard math The double-scaling limit results of Bleher-Its and Claeys-Kuijlaars for the Painleve II parametrix are valid in the Krylov setting
    Used in Sections 6.2-6.3 and Appendix C; the paper follows [31,32].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spectral Topology and Universal Krylov Dynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LEICU62I

@misc{pith2026260807258,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spectral Topology and Universal Krylov Dynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LEICU62I}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.07258}
}
abstract

The leading asymptotic growth of Lanczos coefficients is controlled by spectral tails and furnishes a coarse classification of Krylov dynamics. We show that the \textit{global topology} of the spectral measure, specifically the number of connected components, the gap structure, and the behaviour at gap-closing transitions, encodes a finer hierarchy of dynamical invariants invisible to tail-based arguments. Using the Riemann-Hilbert formulation of orthogonal polynomials and Deift-Zhou steepest descent, we recover the Freud growth laws $b_n\sim n^{1/\beta}$ for single-cut measures and determine their sub-leading corrections from endpoint data. Gapped spectra produce quasiperiodic Lanczos oscillations at a frequency fixed by the filling fraction of the spectral bands alone, and hence predictable from the band edges. We verify this in the SSH chain and its next-nearest-neighbour deformation. At a gap-closing transition the oscillation amplitude is governed by the Hastings-McLeod solution of Painlev\'e II, decaying as $n^{-1/3}$ at criticality and interpolating between the gapped and merged phases, so that the topology change of the spectral curve is realised as a Krylov phase transition. We also demonstrate that, while in the conformal limit of SYK the operator scaling dimension is invisible in the leading rate $\alpha = \pi T$, it can be extracted from the subleading offset $b_0 = \pi T(\Delta - \frac{1}{2})$. These results establish a refined notion of universality in operator growth, classified by spectral topology rather than spectral tails alone.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [25]

    Widom,Extremal polynomials associated with a system of curves in the complex plane,Advances in Mathematics3(1969) 127

    H. Widom,Extremal polynomials associated with a system of curves in the complex plane,Advances in Mathematics3(1969) 127

    work page 1969

  2. [1]

    Parker, X

    D.E. Parker, X. Cao, A. Avdoshkin, T. Scaffidi and E. Altman,A Universal Operator Growth Hypothesis,Phys. Rev. X9(2019) 041017 [1812.08657]

    arXiv 2019

  3. [2]

    Balasubramanian, P

    V. Balasubramanian, P. Caputa, J.M. Magan and Q. Wu,Quantum chaos and the complexity of spread of states,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 046007 [2202.06957]

    arXiv 2022

  4. [3]

    Nandy, A.S

    P. Nandy, A.S. Matsoukas-Roubeas, P. Mart ´ ınez-Azcona, A. Dymarsky and A. del Campo,Quantum dynamics in Krylov space: Methods and applications,Phys. Rept. 1125-1128(2025) 1 [2405.09628]

    arXiv 2025

  5. [4]

    Rabinovici, A

    E. Rabinovici, A. S´ anchez-Garrido, R. Shir and J. Sonner,Krylov Complexity, 2507.06286

    arXiv

  6. [5]

    Baiguera, V

    S. Baiguera, V. Balasubramanian, P. Caputa, S. Chapman, J. Haferkamp, M.P. Heller et al.,Quantum complexity in gravity, quantum field theory, and quantum information science,2503.10753. – 52 –

    arXiv

  7. [6]

    C. Lanczos,An iteration method for the solution of the eigenvalue problem of linear differential and integral operators,Journal of research of the National Bureau of Standards45(1950) 255

    work page 1950

  8. [7]

    Avdoshkin, A

    A. Avdoshkin, A. Dymarsky and M. Smolkin,Krylov complexity in quantum field theory, and beyond,JHEP06(2024) 066 [2212.14429]

    arXiv 2024

Show all 44 references
  1. [8]

    Hashimoto, K

    K. Hashimoto, K. Murata, N. Tanahashi and R. Watanabe,Krylov complexity and chaos in quantum mechanics,JHEP11(2023) 040 [2305.16669]

    2023 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Erdmenger, S.-K

    J. Erdmenger, S.-K. Jian and Z.-Y. Xian,Universal chaotic dynamics from Krylov space,JHEP08(2023) 176 [2303.12151]

    2023 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Alishahiha, S

    M. Alishahiha, S. Banerjee and M.J. Vasli,Krylov complexity as a probe for chaos, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 749 [2408.10194]

    2025 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Baggioli, K.-B

    M. Baggioli, K.-B. Huh, H.-S. Jeong, K.-Y. Kim and J.F. Pedraza,Krylov complexity as an order parameter for quantum chaotic-integrable transitions,Phys. Rev. Res.7(2025) 023028 [2407.17054]

    2025 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Bhattacharjee, X

    B. Bhattacharjee, X. Cao, P. Nandy and T. Pathak,Krylov complexity in saddle-dominated scrambling,JHEP05(2022) 174 [2203.03534]

    2022 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Maldacena, S.H

    J. Maldacena, S.H. Shenker and D. Stanford,A bound on chaos,JHEP08(2016) 106 [1503.01409]

    2016 arXiv

  7. [14]

    M¨ uck and Y

    W. M¨ uck and Y. Yang,Krylov complexity and orthogonal polynomials,Nucl. Phys. B984(2022) 115948 [2205.12815]

    2022 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Caputa, G

    P. Caputa, G. Di Giulio and T.Q. Loc,Symmetry-Resolved Spread Complexity, 2509.12992

  9. [16]

    Gamayun, M.A

    O. Gamayun, M.A. Mir, O. Lychkovskiy and Z. Ristivojevic,Exactly solvable models for universal operator growth,JHEP07(2025) 256 [2504.03435]

    2025 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Balasubramanian, P

    V. Balasubramanian, P. Caputa and J. Sim´ on,Variations on a theme of Krylov, JHEP04(2026) 172 [2511.03775]

    2026

  11. [18]

    Qu,Lanczos meets orthogonal polynomials,JHEP05(2026) 225 [2512.15857]

    L.-C. Qu,Lanczos meets orthogonal polynomials,JHEP05(2026) 225 [2512.15857]

    2026

  12. [19]

    Graef, J

    E.L. Graef, J. Murugan, H. Nastase and H.J.R. Van Zyl,On the Universality of Probe Complexity inN= 4SYM,2606.21662

    arXiv

  13. [20]

    Deift,Riemann–hilbert problems, 2019

    P. Deift,Riemann–hilbert problems, 2019

    2019

  14. [21]

    Fokas, A.R

    A.S. Fokas, A.R. Its and A.V. Kitaev,The isomonodromy approach to matrix models in2d quantum gravity,Communications in Mathematical Physics147(1992) 395

    1992

  15. [22]

    Deift and X

    P. Deift and X. Zhou,A steepest descent method for oscillatory riemann-hilbert problems. asymptotics for the mkdv equation,Annals of Mathematics137(1993) 295

    1993

  16. [23]

    O. Lunt, T. Kriecherbauer, K.T.-R. McLaughlin and C. von Keyserlingk,Emergent random matrix universality in quantum operator dynamics,Phys. Rev. X16(2026) 011033. – 53 –

    2026

  17. [24]

    Deift,Orthogonal Polynomials and Random Matrices: A Riemann-Hilbert Approach, vol

    P. Deift,Orthogonal Polynomials and Random Matrices: A Riemann-Hilbert Approach, vol. 3 ofCourant Lecture Notes in Mathematics, American Mathematical Society / Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Providence, RI (1999)

    1999

  18. [26]

    Deift, T

    P. Deift, T. Kriecherbauer, K. T-R McLaughlin and S. Venakides,Asymptotics for polynomials orthogonal with respect to vary- ing exponential weights,International Mathematics Research Notices1997(1997) 759 [https://academic.oup.com/imrn/article-pdf/1997/16/759/2123790/1997-16-759.pdf]

    1997

  19. [27]

    W.P. Su, J.R. Schrieffer and A.J. Heeger,Solitons in polyacetylene,Phys. Rev. Lett. 42(1979) 1698

    1979

  20. [28]

    Ashcroft and N.D

    N.W. Ashcroft and N.D. Mermin,Solid State Physics, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, NY (1976)

    1976

  21. [29]

    Rice and E.J

    M.J. Rice and E.J. Mele,Elementary excitations of a linearly conjugated diatomic polymer,Phys. Rev. Lett.49(1982) 1455

    1982

  22. [30]

    Asb´ oth, L

    J.K. Asb´ oth, L. Oroszl´ any and A. P´ alyi,A Short Course on Topological Insulators, vol. 919 ofLecture Notes in Physics, Springer (2016), 10.1007/978-3-319-25607-8

    2016 doi

  23. [31]

    Bleher and A

    P. Bleher and A. Its,Double scaling limit in the random matrix model: The riemann-hilbert approach,Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics56 (2003) 433

    2003

  24. [32]

    Claeys and A.B

    T. Claeys and A.B. Kuijlaars,Universality of the double scaling limit in random matrix models,Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics59(2006) 1573

    2006

  25. [33]

    Mhaskar and E.B

    H.N. Mhaskar and E.B. Saff,Extremal problems for polynomials with exponential weights,Transactions of the American Mathematical Society285(1984) 203

    1984

  26. [34]

    Freud,On the coefficients in the recursion formula of orthogonal polynomials, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy

    G. Freud,On the coefficients in the recursion formula of orthogonal polynomials, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section A: Mathematical and Physical Sciences76(1976) 1

    1976

  27. [35]

    Lubinsky, H.N

    D.S. Lubinsky, H.N. Mhaskar and E.B. Saff,A proof of freud’s conjecture for exponential weights,Constructive Approximation4(1988) 65

    1988

  28. [36]

    Kriecherbauer and K.T.-R

    T. Kriecherbauer and K.T.-R. McLaughlin,Strong asymptotics of polynomials orthogonal with respect to freud weights,International Mathematics Research Notices 1999(1999) 298

    1999

  29. [37]

    Nevai,Asymptotics for orthogonal polynomials associated withexp −x4 ,SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis15(1984) 1177

    P. Nevai,Asymptotics for orthogonal polynomials associated withexp −x4 ,SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis15(1984) 1177

    1984

  30. [38]

    Maldacena and D

    J. Maldacena and D. Stanford,Remarks on the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,Phys. Rev. D94(2016) 106002 [1604.07818]

    2016 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Koekoek, P.A

    R. Koekoek, P.A. Lesky and R.F. Swarttouw,Hypergeometric Orthogonal – 54 – Polynomials and Their q-Analogues, vol. 95, Springer Science & Business Media (2010), 10.1007/978-3-642-05014-5

    2010 doi

  32. [40]

    Chihara,An Introduction to Orthogonal Polynomials, Dover Books on Mathematics, Dover Publications (2011)

    T.S. Chihara,An Introduction to Orthogonal Polynomials, Dover Books on Mathematics, Dover Publications (2011)

    2011

  33. [41]

    Sachdev and J

    S. Sachdev and J. Ye,Gapless spin-fluid ground state in a random quantum heisenberg magnet,Phys. Rev. Lett.70(1993) 3339

    1993

  34. [42]

    A simple model of quantum holography

    A. Kitaev, “A simple model of quantum holography.” Talks given at the KITP Program: Entanglement in Strongly-Correlated Quantum Matter, February and May, 2015

    2015

  35. [43]

    Murugan and H.J.R

    J. Murugan and H.J.R. van Zyl,A Schwinger-Keldysh Formulation of Semiclassical Operator Dynamics,2602.02106

  36. [44]

    Bhattacharyya, S.S

    A. Bhattacharyya, S.S. Haque, J. Murugan, M. Tladi and H.J.R. Van Zyl,Stochastic Krylov Dynamics: Revisiting Operator Growth in Open Quantum Systems, 2604.20619. – 55 –

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.