MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405736924 · doi:10.1103/physrevx.14.041068

Saturation and Recurrence of Quantum Complexity in Random Local Quantum Dynamics

2024· article· en· W4405736924 on OpenAlexafffund
Michał Oszmaniec, Marcin Kotowski, Michał Horodecki, Nicholas Hunter-Jones

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review X · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum many-body systems
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersSimons Institute for the Theory of Computing, University of California BerkeleyMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesNarodowym Centrum NaukiGovernment of CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaNarodowe Centrum NaukiFundacja na rzecz Nauki PolskiejAspen Center for PhysicsU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsStatistical physicsQuantumQuantum circuitQuantum algorithmHamiltonian (control theory)Open quantum systemPhysicsQuantum mechanicsMathematicsQuantum error correctionMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum complexity is a measure of the minimal number of elementary operations required to approximately prepare a given state or unitary channel. Recently, this concept has found applications beyond quantum computing—in studying the dynamics of quantum many-body systems and the long-time properties of anti–de Sitter black holes. In this context, Brown and Susskind [] conjectured that the complexity of a chaotic quantum system grows linearly in time up to times exponential in the system size, saturating at a maximal value, and remaining maximally complex until undergoing recurrences at doubly exponential times. In this work, we prove the saturation and recurrence of complexity in two models of chaotic time evolutions based on (i) random local quantum circuits and (ii) stochastic local Hamiltonian evolution. Our results advance an understanding of the long-time behavior of chaotic quantum systems and could shed light on the physics of black-hole interiors. From a technical perspective, our results are based on establishing new quantitative connections between the Haar measure and high-degree approximate designs, as well as the fact that random quantum circuits of sufficiently high depth converge to approximate designs. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review XSame topicQuantum many-body systemsFrench-language works237,207