Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 50 references

Thermal and chemical response from entanglement entropy

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that in the large-region limit the size-derivative of entanglement entropy approaches the thermal entropy density, so entanglement variations can be used to read off thermodynamic response and equation-of-state data.

desk verdict The finite-density lattice demonstration is a genuine step, but the central Maxwell relation (Eq. 12) has a sign error that the Fig. 3 data actually contradict—fixable, but it has to be resolved before the formal claims as written can stand. read the letter →

arxiv 2603.07635 v2 pith:VYMEUBSA submitted 2026-03-08 hep-th cond-mat.stat-mechhep-lathep-phquant-ph

Niko Jokela , Aatu Rajala , Tobias Rindlisbacher This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thcond-mat.stat-mechhep-lathep-phquant-ph
keywords entanglemententropythermalRényifinitechemicalpotentialMaxwellrelationO(4)modellatticefieldtheoryequationofstate
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

The paper aims to establish a precise, nonperturbative link between entanglement entropy and bulk thermodynamics: for a slab-shaped entangling region much wider than any correlation length, the derivative of entanglement entropy with respect to the slab width approaches the thermal entropy density, independent of microscopic details. The same statement holds for Rényi entropies of any integer order, with the thermal entropy replaced by a discrete step-scaling approximation in temperature. At finite chemical potential, these relations imply a generalized Maxwell relation linking mixed derivatives of entanglement entropy to the temperature derivative of the charge density. The paper demonstrates these relations nonperturbatively in the three-dimensional O(4) model at finite density, using a dual-variable worm algorithm to compute Rényi entropies and charge densities, and conjectures that they are generic features of continuum quantum field theories. If the conjecture is correct, entanglement measurements provide a route to directly extracting equation-of-state information.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is the replica method for entanglement entropy, expressed as a limit of replicated partition functions. The pivotal input is an identity (Eq. 9), imported from earlier work, stating that for ξ≪ℓ≪L the ℓ-derivative of the replicated free energy satisfies (1/V⊥) ∂_ℓ log Z̃(ℓ,r) → −[ω(rβ, μ) − r ω(β, μ)], where ω is the dimensionless grand-canonical free-energy density. Combining this with the definition of S_EE as the r→1 derivative of log tr ρ^r_A yields the thermal entropy result. For numerical access, the paper uses the boundary-deformation method to compute the ℓ-derivative of the second Rényi entropy H_2 as a log-ratio of replicated partition functions, circumventin

What would settle it

These relations can be tested in solvable models by computing, for a free scalar or free fermion at finite temperature in 2+1 dimensions, the direct entanglement-spectrum derivative ∂_ℓ S_EE for slabs with ℓ≫ξ and checking whether (∂_ℓ S_EE)/V⊥ approaches s(T); if the ratio deviates, the identity (10) fails. Alternatively, compute the Rényi step-scaling relation (18) at r=3 and r=4 on the same O(4) lattices and check whether s_r converges to s as r→1, or verify (12) at r→1 using exact diagonalization or tensor-network methods for a finite-density lattice system.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The core claim is the identity (Eq. 10): in the limit where the slab width ℓ and the total spatial extent L both go to infinity with ℓ≪L, the derivative of entanglement entropy with respect to ℓ, divided by the transverse area V⊥, equals the thermal entropy density s(T, μ) at the system's temperature and chemical potential. For the Rényi entropy H_r of integer order r≥2, the same limit gives a discrete approximation s_r(T, μ) to the thermal entropy, constructed as a step-scaling finite-difference in temperature with scaling factor r, which reduces to ordinary entropy as r→1. At finite chemical potential, differentiating with respect to μ produces a generalized Maxwell relation: the mixed der

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on an imported identity (Eq. 9 from earlier work) stating that for large slabs the ℓ-derivative of the replicated free energy equals ω(rβ, μ) − rω(β, μ), together with the assumption that the r→1 limit commutes with the ℓ-derivative; the paper takes the identity as given, and the numerical test checks only the r=2 case at one slab width.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For slab-shaped regions much wider than any correlation length, the growth of entanglement entropy with region size is the thermal entropy density times the added volume, so the UV-divergent area term drops out of size derivatives.
  • At finite chemical potential, entanglement entropy satisfies thermodynamic response relations, including a generalized Maxwell relation linking mixed μ–ℓ derivatives to the temperature derivative of the charge density.
  • Rényi entropies of any integer order give the same physics, with the thermal entropy replaced by a discrete step-scaling approximation in temperature; as r→1 these converge to the exact relations.
  • In the 3D O(4) model, the predicted equality holds within errors for ξ_max/ℓ up to about 0.5–1 depending on temperature, and the entanglement-derived observable clearly resolves the finite-density phase transition.
  • The relation connects entanglement entropy to bulk thermodynamics nonperturbatively, opening a route to extract equation-of-state information from entanglement data.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The derivation relies only on extensivity of the free energy and the slab geometry, so the relations likely extend to other entangling-region shapes and to interacting theories with gauge fields; testing spherical regions in conformal field theories would sharpen this claim.
  • The numerical evidence uses only r=2 and a single slab width; a direct test of the r→1 limit would require a different estimator, and free-field theories could provide an analytic check for all r, which would be a strong test of the conjectured genericity.
  • If the conjecture is correct, entanglement entropy measurements on quantum simulators could serve as a thermometer or densitometer for many-body systems without coupling to a heat bath, though extracting s from a single measurement requires controlling the region-size derivative.
  • The generalized Maxwell relation implies an integrability condition on entanglement data; checking these cross-relations in experiments or simulations could confirm the thermodynamic interpretation without ever computing entropies directly.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper argues that for slab-shaped entangling regions in the large-region limit, the size derivative of entanglement entropy equals the thermal entropy density, and that this relation leads to thermodynamic response identities, including a generalized Maxwell relation coupling chemical potential and charge density. The argument proceeds through the replica construction and uses a previously proposed identity, Eq. (9), to relate size derivatives of the replicated partition function to free-energy differences at scaled temperatures. The authors test an r=2 Rényi version of the relation by lattice simulations of the three-dimensional O(4) model at finite chemical potential, using a dual worm algorithm and a boundary-deformation method. They report agreement up to ξ_max/ℓ ≈ 0.5–1 and conjecture that the relation is generic in continuum QFTs.

Significance. If the central relation is correct, it provides a novel, nonperturbative bridge between entanglement entropy and equilibrium thermodynamics: variations of the entangling region encode equation-of-state data, and the generalized Maxwell relation would be a new universal sum rule. The lattice calculation is technically substantial: it uses a sign-problem-free dual representation, a boundary-deformation algorithm, and an internal-consistency check, and it explicitly tests a finite-density setting where such relations are difficult to access. However, the central identity is imported from a previous paper whose authors include two of the current authors, and the claimed Maxwell relation is written with an internal sign inconsistency. The numerical data appear to support the corrected sign, so the core idea is plausible, but the manuscript as written does not yet establish the headline relation.

major comments (3)
  1. [Eqs. (12), (18), (27)] The generalized Maxwell relation has the wrong sign. From dω_L = -s dT - n dμ, the mixed-partial relation is (∂s/∂μ)_T = +(∂n/∂T)_μ. Since ∂n/∂T = -β² ∂β n, Eq. (12) should read (1/V⊥)∂²S_EE/∂μ∂ℓ = -β² ∂β n. Correspondingly, differentiating Eq. (15) with respect to μ gives +Δ_T^r n, not -Δ_T^r n as in Eq. (18). The numerical implementation in Eq. (27), -2N_t[n(2N_t)-n(N_t)] = +Δ_T^2 n, has the sign required by the corrected relation. Thus Fig. 3 tests the corrected relation and contradicts Eqs. (12) and (18) as written. This internal inconsistency must be fixed before the thermodynamic-response claim can be assessed.
  2. [Eqs. (8)–(10)] The load-bearing input, Eq. (9), is not derived here; the text says 'we now use the argument presented in [12]'. Since [12] shares two of the current authors, the derivation is not independently established in this Letter. Moreover, the commutation of r→1 with ∂_ℓ, assumed below Eq. (8), is nontrivial. If Eq. (9) or the commutation fails at finite μ, the central relations (10), (12), (15), and (18) collapse. A numerical test at r=2 and one lattice spacing cannot by itself control the r→1 continuum limit. The authors should either provide a self-contained derivation of Eq. (9) with explicit hypotheses or clearly label it as an assumption and discuss its validity.
  3. [Eq. (27) and Fig. 3] The nonperturbative evidence is more limited than the text suggests. The simulation tests the r=2 step-scaling relation (27) at a single entangling-region width ℓ=17.5 and at N_s=12, and agreement is shown only for ξ_max/ℓ ≲ 0.5–1, i.e., away from the ξ_max ≪ ℓ limit in which Eq. (9) is supposed to hold. No r→1 extrapolation is attempted, although the headline statement (10) is an r→1 (von Neumann) result. The statement 'strong nonperturbative evidence' should be softened, or systematic checks toward r→1 and larger ℓ should be provided.
minor comments (4)
  1. [After Eq. (10)] The sentence saying the derivative 'can equivalently be understood as a derivative with respect to spatial size of A' is confusing, since ∂_ℓ is already the derivative with respect to the slab width. Clarify what distinction is intended.
  2. [Eq. (20)] The lattice action includes parameters κ, λ, and j, but the simulation parameters state κ=1.2 and j_3=0.2 without giving λ. Please specify λ or state that the linearized model is used.
  3. [Fig. 1] The caption refers to ϕ4, while the text and the main discussion refer to the ϕ0 Goldstone mode. Align the notation.
  4. [Ref. [10]] The companion paper is listed as 'in progress'; for publication, please provide a stable arXiv reference or summary of the relevant derivations that are invoked from it.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Central identity Eq. (10) rests on Eq. (9) imported from the authors' own ref. [12] without derivation here; the r=2 numerical test gives partial independent support, so score 4 rather than higher. A separate sign error in Eq. (12)/(18) is a correctness issue, not circularity.

  1. self citation load bearing [Between Eqs. (8) and (10), Eq. (9)]
    "We now use the argument presented in [12], that for ξ≪ℓ≪L, i.e., if the linear sizes of the entangling region A and its complement B are both much larger than the longest correlation length ξ of the theory, then one has −lim_{ℓ,L→∞, ℓ≪L} 1/V⊥ ∂log Z̃(ℓ,r)/∂ℓ =ω(rβ, µ)−rω(β, µ),(9)"

    Equation (10), the paper's headline claim, is obtained by combining (8) with (9) and (4); the only non-trivial input is (9). The paper does not derive (9); it attributes it to ref. [12], whose authors include N. Jokela and T. Rindlisbacher of the present paper. The r→1/ℓ→∞ limit needed for (10) is not independently verified here: the numerical check (27)/Fig. 3 tests the r=2, finite-ℓ relation (18), not (9) itself. Thus the central derivation is load-bearing on the authors' own prior work, with no independent proof supplied in this paper.

full rationale

The core derivation is not self-contained: Eq. (10) follows from Eq. (9), and Eq. (9) is imported from ref. [12], a paper sharing two of the present authors (Jokela and Rindlisbacher). This is load-bearing self-citation, so the score is not 0-2. However, I cannot exhibit a reduction of Eq. (9) to a definition or a fit; it is a substantive physical statement about the ℓ-derivative of the replicated partition function. Moreover, the numerical test in Eq. (27)/Fig. 3 compares two separately defined lattice quantities—the mixed μ-ℓ derivative of H2 (via ∂ℓ ñ) and the step-scaled charge density 2Nt[n(2Nt)−n(Nt)]—and shows agreement, providing genuine independent evidence for the r=2 finite-ℓ version of the response relation. This prevents the score from being 6-8. I also note, separately from circularity, an internal sign inconsistency: the paper states 'From the Maxwell relation (∂µs)|T = −(∂T n)|µ', but the standard Maxwell relation from Eq. (1) is (∂µs)_T = +(∂T n)_µ. Consequently Eq. (12)'s +β²∂βn and Eq. (18)'s −Δ_T^r n appear to have the wrong sign, while Eq. (27) uses the corrected sign. This is a correctness defect and does not change the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or dynamical entities are introduced; the boundary-deformation method is an algorithmic technique rather than an invented entity. The free parameters are simulation choices. The key axiom is Eq. (9), which carries most of the theoretical weight and is imported from a self-cited prior paper.

free parameters (3)
  • hopping parameter κ = 1.2
    Simulation parameter chosen to place the O(4) model deep in the spontaneously broken phase; not fitted to the target thermodynamic identities, but it defines the lattice regime of the numerical evidence.
  • external source j3 = 0.2
    Chosen to give Goldstone modes a finite mass m0 ≈ 0.5 at μ = 0, ensuring a finite correlation length as required by Eq. (9); not fitted to the target relations.
  • Goldstone mass m0 = ≈ 0.5
    Measured at μ = 0 and used to set the critical chemical potential μc = m0 and the correlation-length scale ξ_max(μ) in Figure 3.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Eq. (9): for ξ ≪ ℓ ≪ L, -lim 1/V⊥ ∂_ℓ log Z̃(ℓ,r) = ω(rβ, μ) - r ω(β, μ)
    Quoted from ref. [12] and used to convert the ℓ-derivative of the replicated free energy into the free-energy difference; not derived in this paper. This is the load-bearing premise for Eqs. (10), (12), (15), and (18).
  • domain assumption The r→1 limit commutes with ∂/∂ℓ
    Stated below Eq. (8): 'we assumed that taking the limit (r→1) commutes with taking the ℓ-derivative.' Without this, the step-scaling Rényi result does not reduce to the S_EE relation.
  • standard math Standard thermodynamic Maxwell relation dω_L = -s dT - n dμ
    Used to convert Eq. (10) into the generalized Maxwell relation (12).
  • standard math Replica representation of Rényi/entanglement entropy
    Eqs. (6)-(7) assume the replica trick defines S_EE; the numerical work uses r=2 and finite differences rather than the analytic-continuation limit r→1.
  • domain assumption Dual flux representation / worm algorithm is an exact rewriting of the O(4) lattice path integral at finite μ
    Taken from refs. [21-23]; used to circumvent the sign problem. Not independently proved in this paper, but well established in the cited literature.
  • domain assumption m_-(μ) = m0 - μ for μ < m0
    Used to compute ξ_max(μ) = 1/m_-(μ) and set the horizontal axis of Figure 3; a standard effective-field/chiral result, not central to the derivation itself.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Thermal and chemical response from entanglement entropy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VYMEUBSA

@misc{pith2026260307635,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Thermal and chemical response from entanglement entropy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VYMEUBSA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2603.07635}
}
read the original abstract

We study entanglement entropy (EE) in interacting quantum field theories (QFTs) at finite density. We argue that, in the limit of large subregions, the derivative of EE with respect to the size of the entangling region approaches the thermal entropy density, independently of microscopic details. We make this relation explicit using slab-shaped subregions, where the limiting behavior can be directly identified. At finite chemical potential, we show that EE satisfies thermodynamic response relations, including a generalized Maxwell relation linking chemical potential and charge density. We provide strong nonperturbative evidence for these statements in the three-dimensional O(4) model, and conjecture that they are generic features of continuum QFTs, establishing a two-way link between entanglement and thermodynamics that opens a route toward extracting the equation-of-state information from entanglement data.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.07635 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Mass spectrum at κ = 1.2, j3 = 0.2 as a function of µ. Note that the ϕ + mass is only accurately determined up to the critical µ ≈ 0.5, since at finite density, ϕ + has overlap with the vacuum and is no longer a well-defined particle state. To test the relation (12), the charge density has to be defined on the lattice in terms of the dual variables. We will explicitly distinguish between the charge density of the un… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. compares the two sides of (27), showing V −1 ⊥ ∂µ∂ℓH2 (bands) and −2 Nt (n(2 Nt) − n(Nt)) (point 0.2 0.5 1 0 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 ξmax(μ)/� j=0, j3=0.2 T/m0=0.408 T/m0=0.34 T/m0=0.292 T/m0=0.255 T/m0=0.227 T/m0=0.204 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. shows the two quantities from relation (26) as a function of µ. For visual clarity, only two repre￾sentative values of Nt are displayed; the remaining val￾ues exhibit the same qualitative behavior. The excellent agreement between the results obtained from ∂ℓH2 and ˜n confirms the internal consistency of the simulation algo￾rithm. In addition, the results clearly resolve the finite￾density phase transition at µc ≈ 0.… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 44 linked inside Pith

  1. [12]

    Jokela, K

    N. Jokela, K. Rummukainen, A. Salami, A. P¨ onni, and T. Rindlisbacher, Progress in the lattice evaluation of en- tanglement entropy of three-dimensional Yang-Mills the- ories and holographic bulk reconstruction, JHEP12, 137, arXiv:2304.08949 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  2. [10]

    Jokela, A

    N. Jokela, A. Rajala, and T. Rindlisbacher, in progress, (2026)

    2026

  3. [1]

    Srednicki, Entropy and area, Phys

    M. Srednicki, Entropy and area, Phys. Rev. Lett.71, 666 (1993), arXiv:hep-th/9303048

    arXiv 1993

  4. [2]

    Eisert, M

    J. Eisert, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio, Area laws for the entanglement entropy - a review, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 277 (2010), arXiv:0808.3773 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2010

  5. [3]

    Casini and M

    H. Casini and M. Huerta, Entanglement entropy in free quantum field theory, J. Phys. A42, 504007 (2009), arXiv:0905.2562 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2009

  6. [4]

    Nishioka, Entanglement entropy: holography and renormalization group, Rev

    T. Nishioka, Entanglement entropy: holography and renormalization group, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 035007 (2018), arXiv:1801.10352 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2018

  7. [5]

    Calabrese and J

    P. Calabrese and J. L. Cardy, Entanglement entropy and quantum field theory, J. Stat. Mech.0406, P06002 (2004), arXiv:hep-th/0405152

    arXiv 2004

  8. [6]

    Swingle and T

    B. Swingle and T. Senthil, Universal crossovers between entanglement entropy and thermal entropy, Phys. Rev. B87, 045123 (2013), arXiv:1112.1069 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv 2013

Show all 50 references
  1. [7]

    Bhattacharya, M

    J. Bhattacharya, M. Nozaki, T. Takayanagi, and T. Uga- jin, Thermodynamical Property of Entanglement En- tropy for Excited States, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 091602 (2013), arXiv:1212.1164 [hep-th]

    2013 arXiv

  2. [8]

    D. D. Blanco, H. Casini, L.-Y. Hung, and R. C. My- ers, Relative Entropy and Holography, JHEP08, 060, arXiv:1305.3182 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  3. [9]

    Belin, L.-Y

    A. Belin, L.-Y. Hung, A. Maloney, S. Matsuura, R. C. Myers, and T. Sierens, Holographic Charged Renyi En- tropies, JHEP12, 059, arXiv:1310.4180 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  4. [11]

    Calabrese and J

    P. Calabrese and J. Cardy, Entanglement entropy and conformal field theory, J. Phys. A42, 504005 (2009), arXiv:0905.4013 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2009 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Nakagawa, A

    Y. Nakagawa, A. Nakamura, S. Motoki, and V. I. Za- kharov, Quantum entanglement in SU(3) lattice Yang- Mills theory at zero and finite temperatures, PoSLA T- TICE2010, 281 (2010), arXiv:1104.1011 [hep-lat]

    2010 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Ryu and T

    S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, Holographic derivation of en- tanglement entropy from AdS/CFT, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 181602 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0603001

    2006 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Jokela and J

    N. Jokela and J. G. Subils, Is entanglement a probe of confinement?, JHEP02, 147, arXiv:2010.09392 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Nishioka and T

    T. Nishioka and T. Takayanagi, AdS Bubbles, Entropy and Closed String Tachyons, JHEP01, 090, arXiv:hep- th/0611035

  9. [17]

    I. R. Klebanov, D. Kutasov, and A. Murugan, Entangle- ment as a probe of confinement, Nucl. Phys. B796, 274 (2008), arXiv:0709.2140 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Prokof’ev and B

    N. Prokof’ev and B. Svistunov, Worm algorithms for clas- sical statistical models, Physical review letters87, 160601 (2001)

    2001

  11. [19]

    Philipsen, Lattice QCD at finite temperature and den- sity, Eur

    O. Philipsen, Lattice QCD at finite temperature and den- sity, Eur. Phys. J. ST152, 29 (2007), arXiv:0708.1293 [hep-lat]

    2007 arXiv

  12. [20]

    de Forcrand, Simulating QCD at finite density, PoS LA T2009, 010 (2009), arXiv:1005.0539 [hep-lat]

    P. de Forcrand, Simulating QCD at finite density, PoS LA T2009, 010 (2009), arXiv:1005.0539 [hep-lat]

    2009 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Rindlisbacher and P

    T. Rindlisbacher and P. de Forcrand, Lattice simulation of the SU(2) chiral model at zero and non-zero pion den- sity, PoSLA TTICE2015, 171 (2016), arXiv:1512.05684 [hep-lat]

    2016 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Rindlisbacher, O

    T. Rindlisbacher, O. ˚Akerlund, and P. de Forcrand, Sampling of General Correlators in Worm Algorithm- based Simulations, Nucl. Phys. B909, 542 (2016), arXiv:1602.09017 [hep-lat]

    2016 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Rindlisbacher,Lattice Field Theory at Finite Density, Ph.D

    T. Rindlisbacher,Lattice Field Theory at Finite Density, Ph.D. thesis, Zurich, ETH (2017)

    2017

  16. [24]

    Gattringer and T

    C. Gattringer and T. Kloiber, Lattice study of the Silver Blaze phenomenon for a charged scalarϕ 4 field, Nucl. Phys. B869, 56 (2013), arXiv:1206.2954 [hep-lat]

    2013 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Gattringer and T

    C. Gattringer and T. Kloiber, Spectroscopy in finite den- sity lattice field theory: An exploratory study in the relativistic Bose gas, Phys. Lett. B720, 210 (2013), arXiv:1212.3770 [hep-lat]

    2013 arXiv

  18. [26]

    M. G. Endres, Method for simulating O(N) lattice mod- els at finite density, Phys. Rev. D75, 065012 (2007), arXiv:hep-lat/0610029

    2007 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Bruckmann, C

    F. Bruckmann, C. Gattringer, T. Kloiber, and T. Sule- jmanpasic, Dual lattice representations for O(N) and CP(N−1) models with a chemical potential, Phys. Lett. B749, 495 (2015), [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 751, 595–595 (2015)], arXiv:1507.04253 [hep-lat]

    2015 arXiv

  20. [28]

    S. Katz, F. Niedermayer, D. Nogradi, and C. Torok, Comparison of algorithms for solving the sign prob- lem in the O(3) model in 1+1 dimensions at finite chemical potential, Phys. Rev. D95, 054506 (2017), arXiv:1611.03987 [hep-lat]

    2017 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Schmidt, Y

    A. Schmidt, Y. Delgado Mercado, and C. Gattringer, Monte Carlo simulation of abelian gauge-Higgs lattice models using dual representation, PoSLA TTICE2012, 098 (2012), arXiv:1211.1573 [hep-lat]

    2012 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Delgado Mercado, C

    Y. Delgado Mercado, C. Gattringer, and A. Schmidt, Surface worm algorithm for abelian Gauge-Higgs sys- tems on the lattice, Comput. Phys. Commun.184, 1535 (2013), arXiv:1211.3436 [hep-lat]

    2013 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Rindlisbacher and P

    T. Rindlisbacher and P. de Forcrand, Worm algorithm for the Worm algorithm for theCP N−1 model model, Nucl. Phys. B918, 178 (2017), arXiv:1610.01435 [hep-lat]

    2017 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Rajala, N

    A. Rajala, N. Jokela, and T. Rindlisbacher, Lattice stud- ies of entanglement entropy inO(N) models at finite den- sities (2026) arXiv:2602.22881 [hep-lat]

    2026 arXiv

  25. [33]

    P. V. Buividovich and M. I. Polikarpov, Numerical study of entanglement entropy in SU(2) lattice gauge theory, Nucl. Phys. B802, 458 (2008), arXiv:0802.4247 [hep-lat]

    2008 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Rabenstein, N

    A. Rabenstein, N. Bodendorfer, P. Buividovich, and A. Sch¨ afer, Lattice study of R´ enyi entanglement entropy inSU(N c) lattice Yang-Mills theory withN c = 2,3,4, Phys. Rev. D100, 034504 (2019), arXiv:1812.04279 [hep- lat]

    2019 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Rindlisbacher, N

    T. Rindlisbacher, N. Jokela, A. P¨ onni, K. Rummukainen, and A. Salami, Improved lattice method for determin- ing entanglement measures in SU(N) gauge theories, PoS LA TTICE2022, 031 (2022), arXiv:2211.00425 [hep-lat]

    2022 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Nakagawa, A

    Y. Nakagawa, A. Nakamura, S. Motoki, and V. I. Za- kharov, Entanglement entropy of SU(3) Yang-Mills the- ory, PoSLA T2009, 188 (2009), arXiv:0911.2596 [hep- lat]

    2009 arXiv

  29. [37]

    E. Itou, K. Nagata, Y. Nakagawa, A. Nakamura, and V. I. Zakharov, Entanglement in Four-Dimensional 7 SU(3) Gauge Theory, PTEP2016, 061B01 (2016), arXiv:1512.01334 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Alba, Out-of-equilibrium protocol for R´ enyi entropies via the Jarzynski equality, Phys

    V. Alba, Out-of-equilibrium protocol for R´ enyi entropies via the Jarzynski equality, Phys. Rev. E95, 062132 (2017), arXiv:1609.02157 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2017 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Bulgarelli and M

    A. Bulgarelli and M. Panero, Entanglement entropy from non-equilibrium Monte Carlo simulations, JHEP06, 030, arXiv:2304.03311 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  32. [40]

    Bulgarelli and M

    A. Bulgarelli and M. Panero, Duality transformations and the entanglement entropy of gauge theories, JHEP 06, 041, arXiv:2404.01987 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  33. [41]

    Bulgarelli, E

    A. Bulgarelli, E. Cellini, K. Jansen, S. K¨ uhn, A. Nada, S. Nakajima, K. A. Nicoli, and M. Panero, Flow-Based Sampling for Entanglement Entropy and the Machine Learning of Defects, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 151601 (2025), arXiv:2410.14466 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Bulgarelli, E

    A. Bulgarelli, E. Cellini, K. Jansen, S. K¨ uhn, A. Nada, S. Nakajima, K. A. Nicoli, and M. Panero, Computing quantum entanglement with machine learning, in42th International Symposium on Lattice Field Theory(2025) arXiv:2512.11389 [hep-lat]

    2025

  35. [43]

    Amorosso, S

    R. Amorosso, S. Syritsyn, and R. Venugopalan, Entangle- ment entropy of a color flux tube in (2+1)D Yang-Mills theory, JHEP12, 177, arXiv:2410.00112 [hep-lat]

    arXiv

  36. [44]

    Amorosso, S

    R. Amorosso, S. Syritsyn, and R. Venugopalan, En- tanglement entropy of a color flux tube in (1+1)D Yang–Mills theory, Phys. Lett. B868, 139806 (2025), arXiv:2411.12818 [hep-lat]

    2025 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Amorosso, S

    R. Amorosso, S. Syritsyn, and R. Venugopalan, Entangle- ment enabled tomography of flux tubes in (2+1)d yang- mills theory (2026), arXiv:2601.17199 [hep-th]

    2026

  38. [46]

    Coser, L

    A. Coser, L. Tagliacozzo, and E. Tonni, On R´ enyi en- tropies of disjoint intervals in conformal field theory, J. Stat. Mech.1401, P01008 (2014), arXiv:1309.2189 [hep- th]

    2014 arXiv

  39. [47]

    L.-P. Yang, Y. Liu, H. Zou, Z. Y. Xie, and Y. Meurice, Fine structure of the entanglement entropy in the O(2) model, Phys. Rev. E93, 012138 (2016), arXiv:1507.01471 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2016 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Bazavov, Y

    A. Bazavov, Y. Meurice, S. W. Tsai, J. Unmuth-Yockey, L.-P. Yang, and J. Zhang, Estimating the central charge from the R´ enyi entanglement entropy, Phys. Rev. D96, 034514 (2017), arXiv:1703.10577 [hep-lat]

    2017 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Cataldi, G

    G. Cataldi, G. Magnifico, P. Silvi, and S. Montangero, Simulating (2+1)D SU(2) Yang-Mills lattice gauge the- ory at finite density with tensor networks, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 033057 (2024), arXiv:2307.09396 [hep-lat]

    2024 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Hayazaki, D

    T. Hayazaki, D. Kadoh, S. Takeda, and G. Tanaka, Ten- sor renormalization group approach to entanglement en- tropy (2025), arXiv:2509.02185 [hep-lat]

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.