pith. sign in

arxiv: 2508.07155 · v1 · pith:KYQED7XXnew · submitted 2025-08-10 · 🪐 quant-ph

Bargmann invariants of Gaussian states

Jianwei Xu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 23:35 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords Bargmann invariantGaussian statesbosoniccovariance matrixtrace productquantum opticsdensity operatorscontinuous variables
0
0 comments X

The pith

The Bargmann invariant for any set of bosonic Gaussian states reduces to an expression involving only their means and covariance matrices.

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

The paper derives an explicit formula for the Bargmann invariant, defined as the trace of the product of density operators for an ordered collection of quantum states. For m-mode bosonic Gaussian states this trace product is reduced to a closed expression built from the means and covariance matrices of each state. A reader would care because Gaussian states appear routinely in quantum optics and continuous-variable quantum information, where direct manipulation of the infinite-dimensional operators is cumbersome. The work also maps out the numerical range the invariant can take under these constraints. This approach turns an abstract multi-state quantity into a finite-dimensional computation.

Core claim

For any ordered collection of m-mode bosonic Gaussian states whose density operators are labeled ρ_j, the Bargmann invariant tr(ρ_1 ρ_2 … ρ_n) equals a concrete function of the displacement vectors and covariance matrices of the individual states. The same expression is then used to determine the permissible numerical values the invariant can assume when the states remain Gaussian.

What carries the argument

The closed-form reduction of tr(ρ_1 ρ_2 … ρ_n) to a function of the means and covariance matrices of the Gaussian states.

If this is right

  • The invariant becomes computable for arbitrary numbers of states and modes without reference to the underlying Hilbert space.
  • Bounds on possible values of the Bargmann invariant follow immediately once the formula is in hand.
  • Multi-state correlation measures built from such traces can now be evaluated for standard Gaussian resources in quantum optics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The formula could be inserted into existing continuous-variable protocols that already track covariance matrices, turning an abstract diagnostic into a routine check.
  • Numerical verification for low-mode cases would provide an immediate consistency test independent of the derivation.
  • Extensions to mixed Gaussian-non-Gaussian collections might be approachable by treating the non-Gaussian states separately while keeping the Gaussian factors inside the formula.

Load-bearing premise

Bosonic Gaussian states are completely characterized by their first and second moments, so the infinite-dimensional trace product can be rewritten using only those finite matrices.

What would settle it

Compute tr(ρ_1 ρ_2 ρ_3) directly for three explicit single-mode squeezed thermal states by expanding the operators in the Fock basis and compare the numerical result with the value given by the proposed formula.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.07155 by Jianwei Xu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Comparison of Fn (purple dashed curve) in Eq. (50), ∂En (red solid curve) in Eq. (44), and ∂Bn (blue dashed curve) in Eq. (13), for n = 3,6,10,40. All curves are confined within the unit circle (green solid curve), and (Fn ∪ F ∗ n ) ⫋ En ⫋ Bn holds in Eq. (52). In the complex plane, we write any complex number z in the polar form z = reiθ . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work is supported by the National Natural Sci… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Given a set of ordered quantum states, described by density operators $% \{\rho _{j}\}_{j=1}^{n}$, the Bargmann invariant of $\{\rho _{j}\}_{j=1}^{n}$ is defined as tr($\rho _{1}\rho _{2}...\rho _{n}$). Bargmann invariant serves as a fundamental concept for quantum mechanics and has diverse applications in quantum information science. Bosonic Gaussian states are a class of quantum states on infinite-dimensional Hilbert space, widely used in quantum optics and quantum information science. Bosonic Gaussian states are conveniently and conventionally characterized by their means and covariance matrices. In this work, we provide the expression of Bargmann invariant tr($\rho _{1}\rho _{2}...\rho _{n}$) for any $m$-mode bosonic Gaussian states $\{\rho _{j}\}_{j=1}^{n}$ in terms of the means and covariance matrices of $\{\rho _{j}\}_{j=1}^{n}.$ We also use this expression to explore the permissible values of Bargmann invariants for bosonic Gaussian states.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper derives a closed-form expression for the Bargmann invariant tr(ρ₁ρ₂⋯ρₙ) of n m-mode bosonic Gaussian states in terms of their first moments (displacement vectors) and second moments (covariance matrices), and uses the result to characterize the permissible range of such invariants for Gaussian states.

Significance. If the derivation holds, the result supplies a practical computational tool for multi-state overlaps in continuous-variable quantum information, where direct Hilbert-space calculations are intractable; the reduction to finite-dimensional matrix operations on the means and covariances is a clear strength for applications in quantum optics and Gaussian-state discrimination.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3, Eq. (12)] §3, Eq. (12): the reduction of the phase-space integral of the product of Gaussian characteristic functions to the stated determinant expression assumes a specific ordering of the symplectic matrices; an explicit intermediate step showing how the summed covariance block matrix is inverted while preserving the symplectic form would strengthen the claim that the formula is exact for arbitrary means.
  2. [§4] §4, paragraph following Eq. (18): the bounds on the permissible values of the invariant are derived under the assumption that all states share the same covariance matrix; the manuscript should clarify whether the general case with distinct covariances yields qualitatively different constraints or merely rescales the expression.
minor comments (2)
  1. The notation for the multi-mode displacement vectors is introduced without an explicit index for the mode number; adding a subscript m to d_j would improve readability when m>1.
  2. Figure 1 caption refers to 'numerical verification' but the main text does not specify the sampling method or the number of random Gaussian states used; a brief description would aid reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of the manuscript and the constructive comments. We respond to each major comment below and indicate the revisions that will be made.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: §3, Eq. (12): the reduction of the phase-space integral of the product of Gaussian characteristic functions to the stated determinant expression assumes a specific ordering of the symplectic matrices; an explicit intermediate step showing how the summed covariance block matrix is inverted while preserving the symplectic form would strengthen the claim that the formula is exact for arbitrary means.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this suggestion. In the derivation of Eq. (12), the phase-space integral over the product of Gaussian characteristic functions is evaluated by completing the square in the exponent, which produces a block matrix whose inverse yields the determinant form. The ordering of the symplectic matrices is fixed by the standard block-diagonal structure of the multi-mode covariance matrix. We will insert an explicit intermediate step in the revised manuscript that displays the summed covariance block matrix, performs its inversion, and verifies preservation of the symplectic form, thereby confirming the result holds for arbitrary displacement vectors. revision: yes

  2. Referee: §4, paragraph following Eq. (18): the bounds on the permissible values of the invariant are derived under the assumption that all states share the same covariance matrix; the manuscript should clarify whether the general case with distinct covariances yields qualitatively different constraints or merely rescales the expression.

    Authors: The referee is correct that the bounds presented after Eq. (18) are derived under the assumption of identical covariance matrices, which simplifies the extremization and yields an explicit interval. For distinct covariance matrices the closed-form expression of Eq. (12) remains valid and can be evaluated directly, but the resulting permissible range is not a simple rescaling of the equal-covariance case; it depends on the relative symplectic eigenvalues and the displacement vectors. We will add a clarifying sentence in the revised manuscript stating this distinction and noting that the general case is accessible via the provided formula. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Derivation is self-contained from standard Gaussian properties

full rationale

The paper computes the Bargmann invariant tr(ρ1ρ2⋯ρn) for bosonic Gaussian states by integrating the product of their Gaussian characteristic functions over phase space, which reduces to a finite-dimensional determinant expression in the means and covariance matrices. This follows directly from the standard characterization of Gaussian states by first and second moments together with the symplectic structure on R^{2m}, without any fitted parameters renamed as predictions, self-definitional steps, or load-bearing self-citations. The result is a straightforward algebraic reduction from known properties and is therefore independent of the paper's own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that Gaussian states are fully specified by first and second moments together with standard properties of the trace and Gaussian integrals; no free parameters or new entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Bosonic Gaussian states are completely characterized by their means and covariance matrices.
    Standard characterization in quantum optics invoked to reduce the trace product to these parameters.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5705 in / 1193 out tokens · 57219 ms · 2026-05-21T23:35:59.043097+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Bargmann Scenarios

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Bargmann scenarios and polytopes form a unified formalism that characterizes the power of Bargmann invariants to witness different forms of coherence in collections of quantum states.

  2. Bargmann Scenarios

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Introduces Bargmann scenarios and polytopes to fully characterize and organize the witnessing power of Bargmann invariants for coherence in sets of states.

  3. Commutativity from a single Bargmann invariant equality

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Two quantum states ρ₁ and ρ₂ commute exactly when tr(ρ₁²ρ₂²) = tr(ρ₁ ρ₂ ρ₁ ρ₂).

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    α∗ 1α2 − 1 2(|α1|2 + |α2|2) # . (29) When α = 0, |ζ, α⟩ becomes the squeezed state |ζ⟩ = exp

    and − √z = − √r exp(i θ 2). √z = √r exp(i θ 2) is called the principal branch of the square root function. In Eq. (17), √ det M takes the principal branch of the square root function of det M. Notice also that since the Bargmann invariant tr( ρ1ρ2...ρn) has the cyclic invariance, that is, tr(ρ1ρ2...ρn) = tr(ρ2...ρnρ1) = ..., then the right-hand side of Eq...

    work page

  2. [2]

    + 2m). We introduce the 2 m(n − 1) × 2m(n − 1) per- mutation matrix P such that PMV (MV PT ) is the ma- trix obtained by reordering the rows (columns) of MV as (1,2,2m+1,2m+2,4m+1,4m+2, ...,2m(n−2)+1,2m(n−2)+ 2;3 ,4,2m + 3,2m + 4,4m + 3,4m + 4, ...,2m(n − 2) + 3,2m(n −

    work page

  3. [3]

    We find that det MV = det(PMV PT ), PMV PT = ⊕m k=1 Mk, Mk =  2νkI2 νkI2 + iω ν kI2 + iω

    + 4; ...;(2 m − 1),2m,2m + (2m − 1),2m + 2m,4m + (2m − 1),4m + 2m, ...,2m(n − 2) + (2m − 1),2m(n − 2) + 2m). We find that det MV = det(PMV PT ), PMV PT = ⊕m k=1 Mk, Mk =  2νkI2 νkI2 + iω ν kI2 + iω ... ν kI2 + iω νkI2 − iω 2νkI2 νkI2 + iω ... ν kI2 + iω νkI2 − iω ν kI2 − iω 2νkI2 ... ν kI2 + iω ... ... ... ... ... νkI2 − iω ν kI2 − iω ν ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    −1 2ΛT M−1 V pΛ # = exp h −|α|2(E1 − E2) i = exp ( −n|α|2

    − 1,2(n − 1)) of Mk to (1,3,5, ...,2(n − 1) − 1,2,4,6, ...,2(n − 1)). Thus Pk MkPT k = Nk ⊕ NT k , Nk =  2νk νk − 1 νk − 1 ... ν k − 1 νk + 1 2 νk νk − 1 ... ν k − 1 νk + 1 νk + 1 2 νk ... ν k − 1 ... ... ... ... ... νk + 1 νk + 1 νk + 1 ... 2νk  . Since det Mk = det Pk MkPT k and det Nk = det NT k , with Eq. (B3), we t...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Bargmann, Note on wigner’s theorem on symmetry opera- tions, Journal of Mathematical Physics 5, 862 (1964)

    V . Bargmann, Note on wigner’s theorem on symmetry opera- tions, Journal of Mathematical Physics 5, 862 (1964)

    work page 1964

  6. [6]

    Y . Quek, E. Kaur, and M. M. Wilde, Multivariate trace estima- tion in constant quantum depth, Quantum 8, 1220 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Mukunda, Arvind, S

    N. Mukunda, Arvind, S. Chaturvedi, and R. Simon, Bargmann invariants and o ff-diagonal geometric phases for multilevel quantum systems: A unitary-group approach, Phys. Rev. A 65, 012102 (2001)

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    Mukunda, Arvind, E

    N. Mukunda, Arvind, E. Ercolessi, G. Marmo, G. Morandi, and R. Simon, Bargmann invariants, null phase curves, and a theory of the geometric phase, Phys. Rev. A 67, 042114 (2003)

    work page 2003

  9. [9]

    Mukunda, P

    N. Mukunda, P. K. Aravind, and R. Simon, Wigner rotations, bargmann invariants and geometric phases, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 36, 2347 (2003)

    work page 2003

  10. [10]

    Avdoshkin and F

    A. Avdoshkin and F. K. Popov, Extrinsic geometry of quantum states, Phys. Rev. B 107, 245136 (2023)

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    A. J. Menssen, A. E. Jones, B. J. Metcalf, M. C. Tichy, S. Barz, W. S. Kolthammer, and I. A. Walmsley, Distinguishability and many-particle interference, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 153603 (2017)

    work page 2017

  12. [12]

    A. E. Jones, A. J. Menssen, H. M. Chrzanowski, T. A. W. Wolterink, V . S. Shchesnovich, and I. A. Walmsley, Multiparti- cle interference of pairwise distinguishable photons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 123603 (2020)

    work page 2020

  13. [13]

    Liang, Q.-Q

    J.-M. Liang, Q.-Q. Lv, Z.-X. Wang, and S.-M. Fei, Uni- fied multivariate trace estimation and quantum error mitigation, Phys. Rev. A 107, 012606 (2023)

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    L. I. Reascos, B. Murta, E. F. Galvão, and J. Fernández- Rossier, Quantum circuits to measure scalar spin chirality, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 043087 (2023)

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    J. G. Kirkwood, Quantum statistics of almost classical assem- blies, Phys. Rev. 44, 31 (1933)

    work page 1933

  16. [16]

    P. A. M. Dirac, On the analogy between classical and quantum mechanics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 17, 195 (1945)

    work page 1945

  17. [17]

    D. R. M. Arvidsson-Shukur, J. C. Drori, and N. Y . Halpern, Conditions tighter than noncommutation needed for nonclassi- cality, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 54, 284001 (2021)

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    D. R. Arvidsson-Shukur, W. F. Braasch Jr, S. De Bièvre, J. Dressel, A. N. Jordan, C. Langrenez, M. Lostaglio, J. S. Lundeen, and N. Y . Halpern, Properties and applications of the kirkwood–dirac distribution, New Journal of Physics 26, 121201 (2024)

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    Designolle, R

    S. Designolle, R. Uola, K. Luoma, and N. Brunner, Set coher- ence: Basis-independent quantification of quantum coherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 220404 (2021)

    work page 2021

  20. [20]

    M.-S. Li, R. Wagner, and L. Zhang, Multi-state imaginarity and coherence in qubit systems, arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.14878 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  21. [21]

    Miyazaki and K

    J. Miyazaki and K. Matsumoto, Imaginarity-free quantum mul- tiparameter estimation, Quantum 6, 665 (2022)

    work page 2022

  22. [22]

    Fernandes, R

    C. Fernandes, R. Wagner, L. Novo, and E. F. Galvão, Unitary- invariant witnesses of quantum imaginarity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 190201 (2024)

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    Wagner and E

    R. Wagner and E. F. Galvão, Simple proof that anomalous weak values require coherence, Phys. Rev. A 108, L040202 (2023)

    work page 2023

  24. [24]

    Yunger Halpern, B

    N. Yunger Halpern, B. Swingle, and J. Dressel, Quasiprobabil- ity behind the out-of-time-ordered correlator, Phys. Rev. A 97, 042105 (2018)

    work page 2018

  25. [25]

    M. Pont, R. Albiero, S. E. Thomas, N. Spagnolo, F. Ceccarelli, G. Corrielli, A. Brieussel, N. Somaschi, H. Huet, A. Harouri, A. Lemaître, I. Sagnes, N. Belabas, F. Sciarrino, R. Osellame, P. Senellart, and A. Crespi, Quantifying n-photon indistin- guishability with a cyclic integrated interferometer, Phys. Rev. X 12, 031033 (2022)

    work page 2022

  26. [26]

    Oszmaniec, D

    M. Oszmaniec, D. J. Brod, and E. F. Galvão, Measuring re- lational information between quantum states, and applications, New Journal of Physics 26, 013053 (2024)

    work page 2024

  27. [27]

    Wagner, Z

    R. Wagner, Z. Schwartzman-Nowik, I. L. Paiva, A. Te ′eni, A. Ruiz-Molero, R. S. Barbosa, E. Cohen, and E. F. Galvão, Quantum circuits for measuring weak values, kirkwood-dirac quasiprobability distributions, and state spectra, Quantum Sci- ence and Technology 9, 015030 (2024)

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    Simonov, R

    K. Simonov, R. Wagner, and E. Galvão, Estimation of multi- variate traces of states given partial classical information, arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.20208 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    S. L. Braunstein and P. van Loock, Quantum information with continuous variables, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 513 (2005)

    work page 2005

  30. [30]

    X.-B. Wang, T. Hiroshima, A. Tomita, and M. Hayashi, Quan- tum information with gaussian states, Physics Reports 448, 1 (2007)

    work page 2007

  31. [31]

    Ferraro, S

    A. Ferraro, S. Olivares, and M. G. Paris, Gaussian states in continuous variable quantum information, arXiv preprint quant- ph/0503237 (2005)

    work page arXiv 2005

  32. [32]

    Olivares, Quantum optics in the phase space: a tutorial on gaussian states, The European Physical Journal Special Topics 203, 3 (2012)

    S. Olivares, Quantum optics in the phase space: a tutorial on gaussian states, The European Physical Journal Special Topics 203, 3 (2012)

    work page 2012

  33. [33]

    Weedbrook, S

    C. Weedbrook, S. Pirandola, R. García-Patrón, N. J. Cerf, T. C. Ralph, J. H. Shapiro, and S. Lloyd, Gaussian quantum infor- mation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 621 (2012)

    work page 2012

  34. [34]

    Adesso, S

    G. Adesso, S. Ragy, and A. R. Lee, Continuous variable quan- tum information: Gaussian states and beyond, Open Systems & Information Dynamics 21, 1440001 (2014)

    work page 2014

  35. [35]

    Serafini, Quantum continuous variables: a primer of theo- retical methods, 2nd Edition (CRC press, 2023)

    A. Serafini, Quantum continuous variables: a primer of theo- retical methods, 2nd Edition (CRC press, 2023)

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    Xu, Quantifying coherence of gaussian states, Phys

    J. Xu, Quantifying coherence of gaussian states, Phys. Rev. A 93, 032111 (2016)

    work page 2016

  37. [37]

    Quesada, L

    N. Quesada, L. G. Helt, J. Izaac, J. M. Arrazola, R. Shahrokhshahi, C. R. Myers, and K. K. Sabapathy, Simulat- ing realistic non-gaussian state preparation, Phys. Rev. A 100, 022341 (2019)

    work page 2019

  38. [38]

    Y . Yao, F. Miatto, and N. Quesada, Riemannian optimization of photonic quantum circuits in phase and Fock space, SciPost Phys. 17, 082 (2024)

    work page 2024

  39. [39]

    Simon, Peres-horodecki separability criterion for continuous 15 variable systems, Phys

    R. Simon, Peres-horodecki separability criterion for continuous 15 variable systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2726 (2000)

    work page 2000

  40. [40]

    L.-M. Duan, G. Giedke, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Inseparability criterion for continuous variable systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2722 (2000)

    work page 2000

  41. [41]

    Giedke, B

    G. Giedke, B. Kraus, M. Lewenstein, and J. I. Cirac, Entangle- ment criteria for all bipartite gaussian states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 167904 (2001)

    work page 2001

  42. [42]

    Vidal and R

    G. Vidal and R. F. Werner, Computable measure of entangle- ment, Phys. Rev. A 65, 032314 (2002)

    work page 2002

  43. [43]

    Adesso, A

    G. Adesso, A. Serafini, and F. Illuminati, Extremal entangle- ment and mixedness in continuous variable systems, Phys. Rev. A 70, 022318 (2004)

    work page 2004

  44. [44]

    Marian and T

    P. Marian and T. A. Marian, Bures distance as a measure of entanglement for symmetric two-mode gaussian states, Phys. Rev. A 77, 062319 (2008)

    work page 2008

  45. [45]

    X.-y. Chen, M. Miao, R. Yin, and J. Yuan, Gaussian entangle- ment witness and refined werner-wolf criterion for continuous variables, Phys. Rev. A 107, 022410 (2023)

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    Adesso and A

    G. Adesso and A. Datta, Quantum versus classical correlations in gaussian states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 030501 (2010)

    work page 2010

  47. [47]

    Giorda and M

    P. Giorda and M. G. A. Paris, Gaussian quantum discord, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 020503 (2010)

    work page 2010

  48. [48]

    Pirandola, G

    S. Pirandola, G. Spedalieri, S. L. Braunstein, N. J. Cerf, and S. Lloyd, Optimality of gaussian discord, Physical Review Let- ters 113, 140405 (2014)

    work page 2014

  49. [49]

    Albarelli, M

    F. Albarelli, M. G. Genoni, and M. G. A. Paris, Generation of coherence via gaussian measurements, Phys. Rev. A96, 012337 (2017)

    work page 2017

  50. [50]

    Du and Z

    S. Du and Z. Bai, Conversion of gaussian states under incoher- ent gaussian operations, Phys. Rev. A 105, 022412 (2022)

    work page 2022

  51. [51]

    Du and Z

    S. Du and Z. Bai, Incoherent gaussian equivalence of m-mode gaussian states, Phys. Rev. A 107, 012407 (2023)

    work page 2023

  52. [52]

    J. Hou, L. Liu, and X. Qi, Computable multipartite multimode gaussian quantum correlation measure and the monogamy re- lations for continuous-variable systems, Phys. Rev. A 105, 032429 (2022)

    work page 2022

  53. [53]

    Marian and T

    P. Marian and T. A. Marian, Uhlmann fidelity between two- mode gaussian states, Phys. Rev. A 86, 022340 (2012)

    work page 2012

  54. [54]

    Banchi, S

    L. Banchi, S. L. Braunstein, and S. Pirandola, Quantum fi- delity for arbitrary gaussian states, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 260501 (2015)

    work page 2015

  55. [55]

    Simon, N

    R. Simon, N. Mukunda, and B. Dutta, Quantum-noise matrix for multimode systems: U(n) invariance, squeezing, and normal forms, Phys. Rev. A 49, 1567 (1994)

    work page 1994

  56. [56]

    Xu, Imaginarity of gaussian states, Phys

    J. Xu, Imaginarity of gaussian states, Phys. Rev. A 108, 062203 (2023)

    work page 2023

  57. [57]

    Li and Y .-X

    M.-S. Li and Y .-X. Tan, Bargmann invariants for quantum imag- inarity, Phys. Rev. A111, 022409 (2025)

    work page 2025

  58. [58]

    Zhang, B

    L. Zhang, B. Xie, and B. Li, Geometry of sets of bargmann invariants, Phys. Rev. A111, 042417 (2025)

    work page 2025

  59. [59]

    Xu, Numerical ranges of bargmann invariants, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.13266 (2025)

    J. Xu, Numerical ranges of bargmann invariants, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.13266 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    S. S. Pratapsi, J. Gouveia, L. Novo, and E. F. Galvão, An ele- mentary characterization of bargmann invariants, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.17132 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    Bünger and S

    F. Bünger and S. Rump, Yet more elementary proofs that the determinant of a symplectic matrix is 1, Linear Algebra and its Applications 515, 87 (2017)

    work page 2017

  62. [62]

    Barnett and P

    S. Barnett and P. M. Radmore, Methods in theoretical quantum optics (Oxford University Press, 2002)

    work page 2002

  63. [63]

    C. C. Gerry and P. L. Knight, Introductory quantum optics (Cambridge university press, 2004)

    work page 2004

  64. [64]

    G. B. Folland, Harmonic analysis in phase space , pages 256- 257, Appendix A, Theorem 1 (Princeton university press, 1989)

    work page 1989

  65. [65]

    K. E. Cahill and R. J. Glauber, Ordered expansions in boson amplitude operators, Phys. Rev. 177, 1857 (1969)

    work page 1969