Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 50 references

Type III von Neumann Algebras are Magical

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that a Type III local von Neumann algebra can appear in the thermodynamic limit only if the embedded states carry unbounded magic, so simulating field-theoretic local algebras requires unlimited non-Clifford resources.

desk verdict New and plausible result connecting bounded magic to absence of Type III algebras; the written proof has one false step, but the paper's own equations supply a two-line fix, so it deserves revision, not rejection. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.12512 v1 pith:IOH3WOGV submitted 2026-08-12 hep-th math-phmath.MPquant-ph

Mudassir Moosa This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thmath-phmath.MPquant-ph MSC 46L1046L3081P6881R15
keywords magicstatesstabilizervonNeumannalgebrasTypeIIIinductivelimitsthermodynamiclimitquantumfieldtheorymin-relativeentropyof
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

Type III von Neumann algebras, the operator algebras assigned to local regions in quantum field theory, admit no non-zero finite projections; the usual density-matrix and trace descriptions of finite systems break down for them. This paper proves that a Type III algebra can emerge from a thermodynamic limit of lattice systems only if the states involved carry unbounded magic, where magic is the fault-tolerant resource counted by non-Clifford gates. Specifically, for any state whose embedded images have min-relative entropy of magic bounded by a finite constant, the limiting local algebra must contain a non-zero finite projection and therefore cannot be Type III. Since local algebras in quantum field theory are Type III, the result implies that simulating continuum field theories requires an unbounded amount of non-Clifford resources, and it explains why magic in critical spin-chain ground states grows with system size.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is the inductive-limit construction, where nested Hilbert spaces $H_N$ and algebras $A_N$ are glued by isometric embeddings into a limiting Hilbert space and a limiting von Neumann algebra $A=(A_{\mathrm{union}})''$. Three ingredients carry the proof: Lemma 1, the flat-spectrum property of stabilizer states, whose reduced density matrices are proportional to projections; weak-$\ast$ compactness of the space of state functionals, which extracts a limiting functional with a non-zero normal part when the approximants keep bounded overlap with a reference state; and the decomposition of positive functionals into normal and singular parts. The crux is showing that the normal part of the limiting functional acts as a trace on a reduced algebra $PAP$, because then its support projection is a non-zero finite projection in $A$ by Lemma 2.

What would settle it

For the infinite-tensor-product example in Ref. [30] with a non-stabilizer tail state $|\lambda\rangle$, $\lambda\notin\{0,1/2,1\}$, compute the sequence $M_{\mathrm{stab}}(\iota_{1,N}(|\psi_1\rangle))$; if it is bounded while the algebra is Type III, Theorem 4 is false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 4. Given a nested sequence of finite lattices with one qubit per site, isometric embeddings that form an inductive-limit Hilbert space, and the local von Neumann algebra $A$ of the right half, suppose that for a starting state $|\psi_1\rangle\in H_1$ the min-relative entropy of magic of its embedded images, $M_N=M_{\mathrm{stab}}(\iota_{1,N}(|\psi_1\rangle))$, is bounded above by $M<\infty$. Then $A$ contains a non-zero finite projection and therefore is not of Type III. The contrapositive is the paper's headline: a Type III local algebra forces $M_N$ to be unbounded, so the thermodynamic limit carries infinite magic. The proof pairs each embedded state with a stabilizer state at overlap at least $e^{-M/2}$, uses the flat-spectrum property of stabilizer reduced states to build a decreasing family of projections, and shows that the normal part of a weak-$\ast$ limit functional is tracial on a reduced algebra, yielding the finite projection.

Load-bearing premise

The proof depends, in Appendix B, Part 3, on the premise that if two state functionals agree on a von Neumann subalgebra, their normal parts must also agree there; that premise is not generally true, and it is needed to show the limiting normal functional is a trace on the reduced algebra and thus that a finite projection exists.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any thermodynamic limit that yields a Type III local algebra must have unbounded magic: for every starting state, the sequence of embedded-state magic values has no finite upper bound.
  • The extensive magic seen numerically in the ground states of the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ Potts chain at criticality is a necessary consequence of the Type III local algebras of the limiting conformal field theory.
  • Quantum simulations of quantum field theories cannot keep a fixed finite budget of non-Clifford gates per site; reproducing the Type III structure of a subregion algebra forces the magic to diverge in the thermodynamic limit.
  • The same conclusion holds for non-local magic, since the argument only needs reduced density matrices proportional to projections, which also holds for stabilizer states decorated by independent local unitaries on the two sides.
  • The theorem is insensitive to the Type III subtype: bounded magic rules out Type III of any kind, but the projection argument cannot distinguish Type III$_{\lambda}$ from Type III$_1$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • I would expect the theorem to extend to any magic measure that is continuous, vanishes exactly on stabilizer states, and pins the overlap with the stabilizer set; the proof only needs flat-spectrum approximants and a quantitative overlap bound.
  • A sharper result may connect the Type III subtype to the rate at which magic diverges: Type III$_1$ algebras, the class relevant to holography, might require a particular growth of $M_N$ that tools like modular flow or asymptotic ratio sets could detect.
  • If the Appendix B normal-part premise fails, the proof could likely be repaired by deriving traciality from the stabilizer structure directly; that repair would also let the argument run for any family of flat-spectrum states, not just stabilizer states.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper argues that Type III von Neumann algebras arising as inductive limits of finite lattice systems require unbounded magic. Concretely, Theorem 4 states that if for some initial state |ψ_1> the min-relative entropy of magic of the embedded states ι_{1,N}(|ψ_1>) is bounded above by M < ∞, then the local von Neumann algebra A contains a non-zero finite projection and therefore is not Type III. The proof passes through a weak-* limit φ of approximating stabilizer states, establishes a non-zero normal part φ^(n) and an SOT-limit projection P, and then claims φ^(n) is tracial on PAP. A support-projection argument converts this trace into a finite projection. The central technical step is Lemma 3(3), proved in Appendix B.

Significance. If Theorem 4 were established, the result would be a clean bridge between magic-resource theory and the Murray-von Neumann classification of local algebras, giving a concrete necessary condition for Type III behavior in thermodynamic limits and a theoretical explanation for the numerical observation that critical spin-chain ground states have unbounded magic. The manuscript is self-contained, has no fitted parameters, and structures the proof around standard tools such as the normal/singular decomposition and Banach-Alaoglu compactness. These are genuine strengths. However, the main result rests on a single key lemma, and the proof of that lemma contains a false inference; the claimed theorem is therefore not established by the manuscript as written.

major comments (2)
  1. [Appendix B, Part 3 (Eqs. (B5)-(B7)).] The proof of traciality of φ^(n) on PAP rests on the assertion that, because φ and φ^{U_N} agree on the finite-dimensional corner [P_N A_N P_N], uniqueness of the normal/singular decomposition forces their normal parts to agree on that corner. This inference is invalid: restriction to a subalgebra does not commute with taking normal parts, and a singular functional on A can restrict to a non-zero normal functional on a finite-dimensional subalgebra (for instance, a singular state on B(H) whose restriction to a matrix block is a fixed normal state). Consequently Eq. (B6), and therefore Eq. (B7), the SOT-limit argument, the claim that φ^(n) is tracial on PAP, and the application to Lemma 2 in Theorem 4 are unsupported. The manuscript supplies no additional argument that the singular part φ^(s) vanishes on the corners [P_N A_N P_N]; the general fact just noted shows that such an argument is necessary and not automatic. Since the finite-projection conclusion of Theorem 4 depends on this step, the central claim is not proved.
  2. [Appendix B, Part 3 (last paragraph).] Even if Eq. (B7) were available for each N, the passage to arbitrary O,U∈PAP requires the existence of sequences [O_N], U_N in [P_N A_N P_N] with U_N unitary and U_N→U, [O_N]→O in SOT. This is asserted but not proved; the natural approximants P_N O_m P_N need not be unitary, and the paper gives no density argument for unitaries in the corners. This is a second gap in the same final step of Lemma 3(3), and it would also need to be repaired before Theorem 4 can be concluded.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Theorem 4 proof.] The sentence 'we deduce from above that φ^(n)(OO′)=φ^(n)(OO′)' contains a typo; the right-hand side should be φ^(n)(O′O).
  2. [Appendix B, Part 2 (Eq. (B4)).] The definition of ρ_N involves a limit over ilde N′; the existence of the limit should be stated explicitly as a convergent subsequence in the finite-dimensional state space of A_N.
  3. [Appendix B, Part 2.] The claim that the projections [P_N] form a decreasing sequence is not justified in the text; a short argument using the support of the restriction of a state to a subalgebra is needed.
  4. [Abstract.] In the abstract, 'or simplymagic' should read 'or simply magic'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: Theorem 4 derives the finite projection from the bounded-magic hypothesis using independent operator-algebra results, and the author's self-citations are confined to non-load-bearing discussion context.

full rationale

The central derivation is not circular. Theorem 4's hypothesis is bounded min-relative entropy of magic for embedded states; the proof uses only the defining relation M_stab(|ψ>) = -log max_{stabilizer |φ>}|<ψ|φ>|^2 to produce stabilizer approximants with overlap δ = e^{-M/2}, then applies Lemma 3. Lemma 3 itself is proved from standard, externally cited ingredients: the stabilizer-state flat-spectrum Lemma 1 is cited to [19], the normal/singular decomposition is cited to Takesaki [27,28], SOT convergence of decreasing projections to [45], and Banach-Alaoglu compactness is a textbook result. No parameter is fitted to data, and no 'prediction' is a renamed input. The author's own prior papers (Refs. [34], [36], [41]) appear only in the Discussion's remarks on Type III_1 factors and are not used in Lemma 3 or Theorem 4, so they are not load-bearing. The one genuine concern in the proof—Appendix B's step (B6)-(B7), where equality of φ and φ^{U_N} on [P_N A_N P_N] is inferred to imply equality of their normal parts on that subalgebra—is a soundness gap (the normal/singular decomposition need not restrict commutatively), not a circular reduction: the theorem's conclusion is not assumed in its hypothesis. Accordingly no circular step is exhibited and the circularity score is 0.

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

The proof relies on standard theorems from operator algebras and stabilizer theory. No numbers are fitted to data and no new entities are postulated. The central derivation gap is not an axiom but a logical step in Appendix B; it is flagged separately.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Takesaki decomposition of positive functionals into normal and singular parts.
    Invoked in Section II B, Eq. (7), and throughout Lemma 3 to define φ^(n) and the support projection.
  • standard math Banach-Alaoglu compactness of the state space in the weak-* topology.
    Used in Section II B and Lemma 3 to extract a converging subsequence of state functionals.
  • standard math Lemma 1 from Ref. [19]: reduced states of stabilizer states are proportional to projections.
    Used in Lemma 3 Part 2 to show the restricted density matrices ρ̃_N have flat spectra.
  • standard math SOT convergence of decreasing sequences of projections in a von Neumann algebra.
    Used in Lemma 3 Part 2 to obtain the limiting projection P, citing Murphy, Thm. 4.1.2.
  • standard math Murray-von Neumann classification: a von Neumann algebra with no non-zero finite projections is Type III.
    Used throughout Section III to translate the existence of a finite projection into a statement about Type III.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Type III von Neumann Algebras are Magical." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IOH3WOGV

@misc{pith2026260812512,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Type III von Neumann Algebras are Magical},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IOH3WOGV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.12512}
}
read the original abstract

The number of non-Clifford gates needed to perform a task, or simply \textit{magic}, is a resource for fault-tolerant quantum computation. Von Neumann algebras provide a formal mathematical structure to describe infinite-dimensional quantum systems, such as those in quantum field theory or quantum statistical mechanics. A particularly important class of von Neumann algebras is called Type III algebras, for which the standard notions of finite-dimensional systems such as density matrices and traces break down. In this work, we argue that Type III von Neumann algebras fundamentally require an infinite amount of magic. Specifically, we consider the thermodynamic limit of finite-dimensional quantum systems, such as lattice systems, and show that if the states in the thermodynamic limit possess only a bounded amount of magic, the resulting local von Neumann algebra cannot be of Type III. Our result has direct implications for the quantum simulations of quantum field theories, for which the algebra of a local subregion is known to be of Type III.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.12512 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. A schematic representation of a nested sequence of lattices Λ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [18]

    Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction,

    D. Gottesman, “Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction,”arXiv:quant-ph/9705052

    arXiv

  2. [1]

    Here, we collect and review some properties of projections that we make use of in proving our main results in Sec

    Projections An operatorP∈B(H) is aprojectionifP=P † =P 2 . Here, we collect and review some properties of projections that we make use of in proving our main results in Sec. III. A projectionP∈ Adefines a von Neumann subalgebra. That is, ifA ⊂B(H) is a von Neumann algebra, thenPAP⊂B(PH) is also a von Neumann algebra [25]. In finite-dimensional algebras, t...

    work page

  3. [2]

    A functionalϕ onAispositiveifϕ(a †a)≥0

    Functionals on von Neumann algebras A functional on a von Neumann algebraAis a linear mapϕ:A→C. A functionalϕ onAispositiveifϕ(a †a)≥0. Furthermore, a functional is called astate functionalif it is positive and normalized, i.e.,∥ϕ∥≡ϕ(I) = 1. The proof of our main theorem in Sec. III will make use of properties of functionals on von Neumann algebras and th...

    work page

  4. [3]

    If the sequence of states is such that the overlap of[|ϕ⟩ N]with a fixed reference state |ψ⟩∈His bounded from below byδ >0for allN, then the normal part ofϕ, denoted byϕ (n), is non-zero

    work page

  5. [4]

    If the states|ϕ⟩ N∈H N are stabilizer states, then the restriction ofϕon[A ˜N]defines a decreasing sequence of projections that converge in the SOT to a projectionP∈A

    work page

  6. [5]

    Furthermore,ϕ (n) satisfiesϕ (n)(O′O) =ϕ (n)(OO′)for any O,O′∈PAP

    If both of the above assumptions are true, then the projectionPis non-zero and ϕ(n)(P) =ϕ (n)(1)<∞. Furthermore,ϕ (n) satisfiesϕ (n)(O′O) =ϕ (n)(OO′)for any O,O′∈PAP. Proof.See Appendix B. As alluded to earlier, we consider embedding maps under which the magic in states remains bounded from above. In particular, if we take an arbitrary state inH N for som...

    work page 2024

  7. [6]

    Simulating quantum field theory with a quantum computer,

    J. Preskill, “Simulating quantum field theory with a quantum computer,”PoS LA TTICE2018(2018) 024,arXiv:1811.10085 [hep-lat]. 20

    arXiv 2018

  8. [7]

    Quantum Simulation for High-Energy Physics,

    C. W. Baueret al., “Quantum Simulation for High-Energy Physics,”PRX Quantum4 (2023) no. 2, 027001,arXiv:2204.03381 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2023

Show all 50 references
  1. [8]

    The Heisenberg representation of quantum computers,

    D. Gottesman, “The Heisenberg representation of quantum computers,” in22nd International Colloquium on Group Theoretical Methods in Physics, pp. 32–43. 7, 1998. arXiv:quant-ph/9807006

    1998 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Universal quantum computation with ideal Clifford gates and noisy ancillas,

    S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, “Universal quantum computation with ideal Clifford gates and noisy ancillas,”Phys. Rev. A71(2005) no. 2, 022316,arXiv:quant-ph/0403025

    2005 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Conformal field theories are magical,

    C. D. White, C. Cao, and B. Swingle, “Conformal field theories are magical,”Phys. Rev. B 103(2021) no. 7, 075145,arXiv:2007.01303 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Operator Content of Two-Dimensional Conformally Invariant Theories,

    J. L. Cardy, “Operator Content of Two-Dimensional Conformally Invariant Theories,”Nucl. Phys. B270(1986) 186–204

    1986

  5. [12]

    Operator Content of the Three States Potts Quantum Chain,

    G. von Gehlen and V. Rittenberg, “Operator Content of the Three States Potts Quantum Chain,”J. Phys. A19(1986) L625

    1986

  6. [13]

    Non-trivial area operators require non-local magic,

    C. Cao, “Non-trivial area operators require non-local magic,”JHEP11(2024) 105, arXiv:2306.14996 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Gravitational Backreaction is Magical,

    C. Cao, G. Cheng, A. Hamma, L. Leone, W. Munizzi, and S. F. E. Oliviero, “Gravitational Backreaction is Magical,”PRX Quantum6(2025) no. 4, 040375,arXiv:2403.07056 [hep-th]

    2025

  8. [15]

    State-dependent geometries from magic-enriched quantum codes,

    C. Cao, G. Cheng, K. Karthikeyan, C. Li, and J. Preskill, “State-dependent geometries from magic-enriched quantum codes,”arXiv:2603.13475 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  9. [16]

    The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,

    J. M. Maldacena, “The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 231–252,arXiv:hep-th/9711200

    1998 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Holographic quantum error-correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspondence,

    F. Pastawski, B. Yoshida, D. Harlow, and J. Preskill, “Holographic quantum error-correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspondence,”JHEP06(2015) 149, arXiv:1503.06237 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Code properties from holographic geometries,

    F. Pastawski and J. Preskill, “Code properties from holographic geometries,”Phys. Rev. X7 (2017) no. 2, 021022,arXiv:1612.00017 [quant-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  12. [20]

    The Ryu–Takayanagi Formula from Quantum Error Correction,

    D. Harlow, “The Ryu–Takayanagi Formula from Quantum Error Correction,”Commun. Math. Phys.354(2017) no. 3, 865–912,arXiv:1607.03901 [hep-th]. 21

    2017 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Haag,Local Quantum Physics

    R. Haag,Local Quantum Physics. Theoretical and Mathematical Physics. Springer, Berlin, 1996

    1996

  14. [22]

    Notes on the type classification of von Neumann algebras,

    J. Sorce, “Notes on the type classification of von Neumann algebras,”Rev. Math. Phys.36 (2024) no. 02, 2430002,arXiv:2302.01958 [hep-th]

    2024

  15. [23]

    Universality of Magic in Local Quantum Field Theory,

    V. Benedetti, A. Dabholkar, and M. Dalmonte, “Universality of Magic in Local Quantum Field Theory,”arXiv:2607.16403 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    Entanglement in the stabilizer formalism,

    D. Fattal, T. S. Cubitt, Y. Yamamoto, S. Bravyi, and I. L. Chuang, “Entanglement in the stabilizer formalism,”arXiv:quant-ph/0406168

    arXiv

  17. [25]

    The resource theory of stabilizer quantum computation,

    J. Emerson, D. Gottesman, S. A. H. Mousavian, and V. Veitch, “The resource theory of stabilizer quantum computation,”New J. Phys.16(2014) no. 1, 013009,arXiv:1307.7171 [quant-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Application of a Resource Theory for Magic States to Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computing,

    M. Howard and E. T. Campbell, “Application of a Resource Theory for Magic States to Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computing,”Phys. Rev. Lett.118(2017) no. 9, 090501, arXiv:1609.07488 [quant-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Stabilizer R´ enyi Entropy,

    L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, and A. Hamma, “Stabilizer R´ enyi Entropy,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 128(2022) no. 5, 050402,arXiv:2106.12587 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Simulation of quantum circuits by low-rank stabilizer decompositions,

    S. Bravyi, D. Browne, P. Calpin, E. Campbell, D. Gosset, and M. Howard, “Simulation of quantum circuits by low-rank stabilizer decompositions,”Quantum3(2019) 181, arXiv:1808.00128 [quant-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Many-Body Quantum Magic,

    Z.-W. Liu and A. Winter, “Many-Body Quantum Magic,”PRX Quantum3(2022) no. 2, 020333,arXiv:2010.13817 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Takesaki,Theory of Operator Algebras I

    M. Takesaki,Theory of Operator Algebras I. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1979

    1979

  23. [31]

    Bratteli and D

    O. Bratteli and D. W. Robinson,Operator Algebras and Quantum Statistical Mechanics 1: C*- and W*-Algebras, Symmetry Groups, Decomposition of States. Theoretical and Mathematical Physics. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, 2nd ed., 1987

    1987

  24. [32]

    On the conjugate space of operator algebra,

    M. Takesaki, “On the conjugate space of operator algebra,”Tohoku Mathematical Journal, Second Series10(1958) no. 2, 194–203.https://doi.org/10.2748/tmj/1178244713

    1958

  25. [33]

    R. V. Kadison and J. R. Ringrose,Fundamentals of the Theory of Operator Algebras. Volume II: Advanced Theory. Graduate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society. 22

  26. [34]

    On infinite tensor networks, complementary recovery and type II factors,

    W. Chemissany, E. Gesteau, A. Jahn, D. Murphy, and L. Shaposhnik, “On infinite tensor networks, complementary recovery and type II factors,”J. Phys. A58(2025) no. 43, 435301,arXiv:2504.00096 [hep-th]

    2025

  27. [35]

    Representations of uniformly hyperfinite algebras and their associated von Neumann rings,

    R. T. Powers, “Representations of uniformly hyperfinite algebras and their associated von Neumann rings,”Annals of Mathematics86(1967) no. 1, 138–171

    1967

  28. [36]

    A classification of factors,

    H. Araki and E. J. Woods, “A classification of factors,”Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Kyoto University. Ser. A4(1968) no. 1, 51–130

    1968

  29. [37]

    Anosov actions on noncommutative algebras,

    G. G. Emch, H. Narnhofer, W. E. Thirring, and G. L. Sewell, “Anosov actions on noncommutative algebras,”J. Math. Phys.35(1994) 5582–5599

    1994

  30. [38]

    Ergodic states on type III1 factors and ergodic actions,

    A. Marrakchi and S. Vaes, “Ergodic states on type III1 factors and ergodic actions,”J. Reine Angew. Math.2024(2024) no. 809, 247–260,arXiv:2305.14217 [math.OA]

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Local Poincar´ e algebra from quantum chaos,

    S. Ouseph, K. Furuya, N. Lashkari, K. L. Leung, and M. Moosa, “Local Poincar´ e algebra from quantum chaos,”JHEP01(2024) 112,arXiv:2310.13736 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Emergent spacetime and the ergodic hierarchy,

    E. Gesteau, “Emergent spacetime and the ergodic hierarchy,”Phys. Rev. D110(2024) no. 10, 106005,arXiv:2310.13733 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Information loss, mixing and emergent type III 1 factors,

    K. Furuya, N. Lashkari, M. Moosa, and S. Ouseph, “Information loss, mixing and emergent type III 1 factors,”JHEP08(2023) 111,arXiv:2305.16028 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    A modular toolkit for bulk reconstruction,

    T. Faulkner, M. Li, and H. Wang, “A modular toolkit for bulk reconstruction,”JHEP04 (2019) 119,arXiv:1806.10560 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Holographic Order from Modular Chaos,

    J. De Boer and L. Lamprou, “Holographic Order from Modular Chaos,”JHEP06(2020) 024,arXiv:1912.02810 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Emergent Times in Holographic Duality,

    S. A. W. Leutheusser and H. Liu, “Emergent Times in Holographic Duality,”Phys. Rev. D 108(2023) no. 8, 086020,arXiv:2112.12156 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Causal connectability between quantum systems and the black hole interior in holographic duality,

    S. Leutheusser and H. Liu, “Causal connectability between quantum systems and the black hole interior in holographic duality,”Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no. 8, 086019, arXiv:2110.05497 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Modular intersections, time interval algebras and emergent AdS 2,

    N. Lashkari, K. L. Leung, M. Moosa, and S. Ouseph, “Modular intersections, time interval algebras and emergent AdS 2,”JHEP10(2025) 153,arXiv:2412.19882 [hep-th]

    2025

  39. [47]

    Gravity and the crossed product,

    E. Witten, “Gravity and the crossed product,”JHEP10(2022) 008,arXiv:2112.12828 [hep-th]. 23

    2022 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Large N algebras and generalized entropy,

    V. Chandrasekaran, G. Penington, and E. Witten, “Large N algebras and generalized entropy,”JHEP04(2023) 009,arXiv:2209.10454 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Une classification des facteurs de type III,

    A. Connes, “Une classification des facteurs de type III,”Annales scientifiques de l’ ´Ecole Normale Sup´ erieure6(1973) no. 2, 133–252.http://eudml.org/doc/81916

    1973

  42. [50]

    C*-Algebras and Operator Theory,

    G. J. Murphy, “C*-Algebras and Operator Theory,” 1990. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:117040777. 24

    1990

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.