Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 70 references

Probability representation of quantum dynamics using pseudostochastic maps

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that finite-dimensional quantum dynamics can be written as linear equations on real SIC-POVM probability vectors, with pseudostochastic generators, and that a time-independent Markovian generator yields a classically…

desk verdict Conditional on SIC existence the derivations are sound and the experiment is a nice proof of concept, but the abstract overreaches and the optimization-based 'projectors' are not fully justified. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03404 v2 pith:ZPF7MSLN submitted 2019-08-09 quant-ph

E.O. Kiktenko , A.O. Malyshev , A.S. Mastiukova , V.I. Man'ko , A.K. Fedorov , D. Chruściński This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords probabilityrepresentationSIC-POVMpseudostochasticmapsquantumdynamicsMarkovianmasterequationnonclassicalitynon-Markovianityprocesstomography
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 develops a representation in which quantum states are described by true probability vectors obtained from SIC-POVM measurements, and quantum dynamics becomes a linear differential equation for those vectors. In this representation the generators of evolution are pseudostochastic matrices: their columns sum to one like conditional probabilities, but some entries are negative. The central result is a theorem: for a time-independent Markovian generator, the evolved map is stochastic for every positive time if and only if all off-diagonal elements of the generator are nonnegative. A direct corollary is that any nonzero unitary evolution necessarily produces negative entries at some times, so purely unitary quantum dynamics cannot be simulated by classical random processes of this kind. The paper then turns this condition into quantitative measures of nonclassicality and non-Markovianity and tests them on experiments with a superconducting quantum processor.

What carries the argument

The central object is the SIC-POVM probability vector p, whose components are p_i = Tr(ρΠ_i)/d for d² symmetric projectors Π_i, together with the linear reconstruction map ρ = Kp where K_i = (d+1)Π_i − 1. This K bridges the density-matrix picture and the probability picture, and it is used to derive the generators H = −$iK^{{-1}}$(H ⊗ 1 − 1 ⊗ H^*)K and L = $K^{{-1}}$ΛK from the von Neumann and GKSL equations. Theorem 1 is carried by the semigroup representation $e^{{Lt}}$ = lim_{n→∞}(I + Lt/n)^n, which shows that nonnegative off-diagonal entries preserve stochasticity, and by a small-t expansion that exposes any negative off-diagonal entry as a negative matrix element of $e^{{Lt}}$. The additional machinery consists of projectors Punit, PMark, and PCPTP, which map arbitrary matrices onto the nearest physical Hamiltonian, Markovian, or completely-positive generator, and these projectors make the nonclassicality and non-Markovianity measures computable from tomographic data.

What would settle it

Search for a time-independent Markovian generator L in the SIC-POVM representation with at least one off-diagonal entry L_{ij} < 0 whose matrix exponential $e^{{Lt}}$ has all entries nonnegative for every t > 0; a single such example would disprove the only-if direction of Theorem 1.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For any Hilbert space dimension d in which a SIC-POVM exists, the von Neumann equation and every Markovian GKSL master equation can be recast as linear equations for a d²-component SIC-POVM probability vector p: unitary evolution becomes p-dot = Hp with H a real antisymmetric matrix, and dissipative evolution becomes p-dot = Lp with L a pseudo-Kolmogorov generator. Theorem 1 states that for a time-independent Markovian generator L, the evolution map S(t) = $e^{{Lt}}$ is stochastic for all t > 0 if and only if every off-diagonal element of L is nonnegative. Since any nonzero antisymmetric H has negative off-diagonal entries, Corollary 1 concludes that no nontrivial unitary evolution is classically simulable in this sense; decoherence is required to make the pseudostochastic map classical. The paper also constructs projectors onto the spaces of physical Hamiltonian generators, Markovian generators, and completely positive maps, defines a nonclassicality measure δquant and a non-Markovianity measure δnMark, and applies them to experimental reconstruction of a single-qubit gate and an imperfect SIC-POVM measurement, obtaining δquant = 0.781 for the gate and δquant = 0 for the measurement.

Load-bearing premise

The entire representation assumes that a SIC-POVM exists in the Hilbert space dimension d under study, which is known for many small dimensions but remains an open mathematical conjecture in general.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any nontrivial unitary evolution of a d-level system must show negative pseudostochastic entries at some times, so it cannot be reproduced by sampling ordinary classical conditional probabilities.
  • A quantum gate with measurable nonclassicality has δquant > 0, while a process that can be made completely classical by a change of basis has δquant = 0.
  • A process can be certified as Markovian, within the tomographic precision, when its non-Markovianity measure δnMark falls below the statistical error of the reconstructed pseudostochastic matrix.
  • The explicit pseudostochastic forms derived for transposition, the reduction map, and Rabi oscillations provide ready benchmarks for comparing classical and nonclassical behavior in qubit systems.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If SIC-POVMs continue to be found in higher dimensions, the same construction yields canonical pseudostochastic generators for those dimensions; if the SIC conjecture fails in some dimension, the explicit formulas for H and L would need to be replaced by those of a non-symmetric informationally complete measurement.
  • The theorem's if-and-only-if structure suggests a direct experimental test: engineer Markovian generators with small negative off-diagonal entries and look for the first time at which negative entries appear in the reconstructed evolution matrix.
  • Because Theorem 1 is stated for time-independent generators, an analogous criterion for time-ordered exponentials of time-dependent generators is a natural extension, and it can be checked numerically before attempting any experimental demonstration.
  • The non-Markovianity measure here is tied to the specific Markovian projection; comparing it with established trace-distance or divisibility-based measures on the same experimental data would clarify which aspects of non-Markovian behavior it actually captures.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a probability representation of finite-dimensional quantum dynamics in which states are represented by SIC-POVM probability vectors and quantum channels act by pseudostochastic matrices. It derives explicit generator equations for unitary von Neumann dynamics (Eqs. (24)-(26)) and for GKSL dissipative dynamics (Eqs. (43)-(45)), and it proves Theorem 1: for a time-independent Markovian generator L, the map e^{Lt} is stochastic for every t>0 if and only if all off-diagonal elements of L are nonnegative. On this basis the paper defines measures of nonclassicality and non-Markovianity and applies them to a single-qubit S gate and a SIC-POVM measurement carried out on the IBM QX4 processor. The presentation is careful, and the algebraic core is self-contained, but the universal scope of the results is conditional on SIC-POVM existence and on unproved properties of the numerical projectors used in the measures.

Significance. The main theoretical contribution is a clean and largely self-contained translation of standard quantum dynamical equations into a pseudostochastic language, together with a simple and apparently correct necessary-and-sufficient criterion for stochastic (classically simulable) Markovian evolution in a fixed SIC-POVM representation. Theorem 1 gives a concrete, falsifiable condition, and the proposed nonclassicality and non-Markovianity measures have clear practical appeal. The experimental demonstration on IBM QX4 is a useful stress test and shows that the framework can be applied to real tomographic data. The derivation does not appear to fit free parameters to force the main theorem. However, the construction is conditional on the SIC-POVM existence conjecture for general dimension, and the two 'projectors' PMark and PCPTP are defined through nonconvex optimizations whose global optimality and idempotence are not established; these points must be addressed before the central claims can be accepted in full generality.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II, Eq. (1); Abstract] The entire construction is conditional on the existence of a SIC-POVM for the Hilbert space dimension d, which remains an open conjecture for general d. The manuscript states in Sec. II that 'we assume that it is possible to find out a set of d^2 normalized states' satisfying Eq. (1), and it lists only specific dimensions for which SIC-POVMs are known, yet the abstract and conclusion present the representation for 'finite-dimensional quantum systems' without this qualification. Since the matrices K, H, L, and Theorem 1 are all defined through Eq. (1), the scope of every result should be restricted to dimensions admitting a SIC-POVM, and the conditional status should be stated explicitly in the abstract and conclusion. This is a scope limitation rather than an internal inconsistency; the d=2 experimental part is unaffected because a concrete SIC is given in Eq. (62).
  2. [Sec. III.C, Eq. (52); Sec. V, Eq. (68)] The maps PMark and PCPTP are introduced as 'projectors' but are defined by argmin over the matrix V of an objective that is nonconvex in V; no proof is given that the global minimum is attained, that the argmin is unique, or that the resulting map is idempotent. Without these properties the non-Markovianity measure in Eq. (60) and the physical projection used in the experimental reconstruction are not well-defined functions, and the equality in Eq. (53) is not a verified necessary-and-sufficient condition. Since D(V) and S(V) are linear in X = VV†, the optimization can be reformulated as a convex problem over the positive semidefinite cone; the authors should provide this reformulation or otherwise certify global optimality and idempotence, at least for the reported experimental instances.
  3. [Sec. IV.B, Eqs. (59)-(60)] The definition L := log S presupposes a logarithm of a real pseudostochastic matrix, but no domain or branch specification is given. A pseudostochastic matrix, for example a unitary evolution operator in this representation, can have negative eigenvalues, in which case a real matrix logarithm does not exist and the expression exp[Punit(L)+PMark(L-Punit(L))] is either undefined or dependent on a choice of complex branch. The non-Markovianity measure therefore is not defined for all channels to which the paper applies it. Please specify the class of S for which the logarithm is taken and how non-unique branches are handled.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV.B, Eq. (60)] The sentence describing δnMark as an 'average difference between elements' is imprecise: the quantity is a normalized Frobenius norm of the difference matrix, not an elementwise average. Please reword.
  2. [Appendix D and Sec. V] The error estimate δ in Appendix D is an upper bound for the per-element standard deviation of the reconstructed pseudostochastic matrix, but the separation of Sdec and SU uses S_dec^{-1}, which can amplify errors; the text states that the error 'remained the same' without accounting for this additional propagation. Please add a comment or a more detailed estimate.
  3. [Sec. V, Table II] The reconstructed matrices are reported to four decimal places without confidence intervals. Given the estimated per-element error of about 0.031, some indication of the uncertainty in the reported nonclassicality and non-Markovianity values would improve the experimental discussion.
  4. [Sec. IV.A, Eq. (56)] There is a typo in the sentence before Eq. (56): 'sone' should be 'some'. Please also check the notation in Eq. (A6), where the last displayed matrix element appears to contain an unbalanced parenthesis.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the SIC-POVM representation and Theorem 1 are derived algebraically from the stated assumptions, and the experimental analysis is a tomographic reconstruction, not a fitted prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation starts from the SIC-POVM condition Eq. (1), defines SIC-POVM probabilities in Eq. (2), and the reconstruction matrix K in Eqs. (6)-(7). The dynamical equations for the probability vector, Eqs. (24) and (43)-(44), are obtained by direct substitution of these definitions into the von Neumann and GKSL equations; they are exact algebraic rewritings rather than fitted relations. Theorem 1, stating that e^{Lt} is stochastic for all t>0 iff all off-diagonal elements of L are nonnegative, is a self-contained mathematical statement about semigroup generators with zero column sums: its proof uses the product expansion e^{Lt}=lim(I+Lt/n)^n and a small-t expansion of e^{Lt}, with no fitted parameters and no dependence on an external result of the authors. The measures of nonclassicality and non-Markovianity, Eqs. (56)-(60), are defined as distances to the sets of stochastic maps and Markovian generators, respectively; this is a standard operational construction and does not reduce to the quantity being measured. The IBM QX4 experiment reconstructs the pseudostochastic matrices S_dec and S_U by linear inversion of measured frequencies, Eq. (66), and then projects them onto the physical CPTP set; the ideal S-gate matrix Sideal_U in Eq. (65) is used only as a comparison fidelity target, not as an input to the reconstruction. The paper explicitly acknowledges the conditional nature of its framework in Sec. II: it assumes the existence of a SIC-POVM satisfying Eq. (1), noting that only some dimensions are currently solved; this is a genuine scope limitation rather than a circular argument. Self-citations to earlier probability-representation and pseudostochastic-matrix work are contextual and are not load-bearing for the new derivations. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited, and the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation is self-contained linear algebra given a SIC-POVM. The only non-standard input is the assumed existence of SIC-POVMs, which is open for many dimensions. The projector functions PMark and PCPTP also assume global solvability of non-convex optimizations.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption There exists a set of d^2 rank-one projectors satisfying Eq. (1) for the Hilbert space dimension d.
    The entire representation rests on the existence of SIC-POVMs; for general d this is an open conjecture, although known for d=2 used in the experiment.
  • standard math The set {Π_i} forms an operator basis of L(H).
    Used to reconstruct density matrices via Eq. (3); follows from the SIC condition and dimension count.
  • domain assumption The dynamics is governed by the von Neumann equation or a GKSL Markovian master equation.
    The paper only treats these equations; the representations are derived from them.
  • ad hoc to paper The optimization problems defining PMark and PCPTP have global minima.
    The paper defines these as projectors via argmin over V, but does not prove convexity or global convergence.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Probability representation of quantum dynamics using pseudostochastic maps." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZPF7MSLN

@misc{pith2026190803404,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Probability representation of quantum dynamics using pseudostochastic maps},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZPF7MSLN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03404}
}
read the original abstract

In this work, we consider a probability representation of quantum dynamics for finite-dimensional quantum systems with the use of pseudostochastic maps acting on true probability distributions. These probability distributions are obtained via symmetric informationally complete positive operator-valued measure (SIC-POVM) and can be directly accessible in an experiment. We provide SIC-POVM probability representations both for unitary evolution of the density matrix governed by the von Neumann equation and dissipative evolution governed by Markovian master equation. In particular, we discuss whereas the quantum dynamics can be simulated via classical random processes in terms of the conditions for the master equation generator in the SIC-POVM probability representation. We construct practical measures of nonclassicality non-Markovianity of quantum processes and apply them for studying experimental realization of quantum circuits realized with the IBM cloud quantum processor.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.03404 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. General relation among the set of SIC-POVM [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Scheme of a quantum-mechanical experiment. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The experimental setup. For the tomography of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The Bloch vectors corresponded to SIC-POVM pro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Experimentally reconstructed pseudostochastic ma [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    H is real and antisymmetric: Hi,j =−Hji

    work page

  2. [2]

    Diagonal elements and trace of H are zero: Hii = 0, TrH = 0

    work page

  3. [3]

    The number of independent parameters defining the d2×d2 matrix with such properties is equal to NH = (d2− 1)(d2− 2)/2

    Each row and column of H summing to 0:∑ i Hi,j = 0, ∑ j Hi,j = 0 (here we employed the fact that∑ i|ψi⟩⟨ψi| = 1d). The number of independent parameters defining the d2×d2 matrix with such properties is equal to NH = (d2− 1)(d2− 2)/2. Meanwhile, the physical properties of the Hamiltonian is defined with NH =d2− 1 parameters (the term−1 comes from the fact th...

    work page

  4. [4]

    U(t) is pseudobistochastic: ∑ i Ui,j(t) = ∑ j Ui,j(t) = 1, (37) and some its elements of may be negative

    work page

  5. [5]

    We note that according to these two properties an action of U(t) preserves both l1 and l2 norms

    U(t) is orthogonal: U(t)UT(t) = UT(t)U(t) = I, (38) where I is a d2×d2 identity matrix. We note that according to these two properties an action of U(t) preserves both l1 and l2 norms. Finally, the generalization on time-dependent Hamil- tonians can be provided in a straightforward way. In this case of t> 0, the evolution operator is given by U(t) =T { ex...

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Nielsen and I.L

    M.A. Nielsen and I.L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000)

    work page 2000

  7. [7]

    Wigner, On the quantum correction for thermody- namic equilibrium, Phys

    E.P. Wigner, On the quantum correction for thermody- namic equilibrium, Phys. Rev. 40, 749 (1932)

    work page 1932

  8. [8]

    Husimi, Some formal properties of the density matrix, Proc

    E. Husimi, Some formal properties of the density matrix, Proc. Phys. Math. Soc. Jpn. 23, 264 (1940)

    work page 1940

Show all 70 references
  1. [9]

    Glauber, Photon correlations, Phys

    R.J. Glauber, Photon correlations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 84 (1963)

    1963

  2. [10]

    Sudarshan, Equivalence of semiclassical and quantum mechanical descriptions of statistical light beams, Phys

    E.C.G. Sudarshan, Equivalence of semiclassical and quantum mechanical descriptions of statistical light beams, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 277 (1963)

    1963

  3. [11]

    Hillery, R

    M. Hillery, R. OConnell, M. Scully, and E. Wigner, Dis- tribution functions in physics: Fundamentals, Phys. Rep. 106, 121 (1984)

    1984

  4. [12]

    Weinbub and D.K

    J. Weinbub and D.K. Ferry, Recent advances in Wigner function approaches, Appl. Phys. Rev. 5, 041104 (2018)

    2018

  5. [13]

    Spekkens, Negativity and contextuality are equiv- alent notions of nonclassicality, Phys

    R.W. Spekkens, Negativity and contextuality are equiv- alent notions of nonclassicality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 020401 (2008)

    2008

  6. [14]

    Wootters, A Wigner-function formulation of finite- state quantum mechanics, Ann

    W.K. Wootters, A Wigner-function formulation of finite- state quantum mechanics, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 176, 1 (1987)

    1987

  7. [15]

    Gibbons, M.J

    K.S. Gibbons, M.J. Hoffman, and W.K. Wootters, Dis- crete phase space based on finite fields, Phys. Rev. A 70, 062101 (2004)

    2004

  8. [16]

    Gross, Hudsons theorem for finite-dimensional quan- tum systems, J

    D. Gross, Hudsons theorem for finite-dimensional quan- tum systems, J. Math. Phys 47, 122107 (2006)

    2006

  9. [17]

    Ferrie and J

    C. Ferrie and J. Emerson, Framed Hilbert space: Hang- ing the quasi-probability pictures of quantum theory, New J. Phys. 11, 063040 (2009)

    2009

  10. [18]

    Ferrie, Quasi-probability representations of quantum theory with applications to quantum information science, Rep

    C. Ferrie, Quasi-probability representations of quantum theory with applications to quantum information science, Rep. Prog. Phys. 74, 116001 (2011)

    2011

  11. [19]

    Zhu, Permutation symmetry determines the discrete Wigner function, Phys

    H. Zhu, Permutation symmetry determines the discrete Wigner function, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 040501 (2016)

    2016

  12. [20]

    Galv˜ ao, Discrete Wigner functions and quantum computational speedup, Phys

    E.F. Galv˜ ao, Discrete Wigner functions and quantum computational speedup, Phys. Rev. A 71, 042302 (2005)

    2005

  13. [21]

    Cormick, E

    C. Cormick, E. F. Galv˜ ao, D. Gottesman, J. P. Paz, and A.O. Pittenger, Classicality in discrete Wigner functions, Phys. Rev. A 73, 012301 (2006)

    2006

  14. [22]

    Veitch, C

    V. Veitch, C. Ferrie, D. Gross, and J. Emerson, Negative quasi-probability as a resource for quantum computation, New J. Phys. 14, 113011 (2012)

    2012

  15. [23]

    Veitch, S

    V. Veitch, S. A. H. Mousavian, D. Gottesman, and J. Emerson, The resource theory of stabilizer quantum com- putation, New J. Phys. 16, 013009 (2014)

    2014

  16. [24]

    Howard, J

    M. Howard, J. Wallman, V. Veitch, and J. Emerson, Con- textuality supplies the magic for quantum computation, Nature (London) 510, 351 (2014)

    2014

  17. [25]

    Delfosse, P

    N. Delfosse, P. Allard Guerin, J. Bian, and R. Raussendorf, Wigner function negativity and contextu- ality in quantum computation on rebits, Phys. Rev. X 5, 021003 (2015)

    2015

  18. [26]

    Pashayan, J.J

    H. Pashayan, J.J. Wallman, and S.D. Bartlett, Esti- mating outcome probabilities of quantum circuits using 15 quasiprobabilities, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 070501 (2015)

    2015

  19. [27]

    Chernega, O.V

    V.N. Chernega, O.V. Manko, and V.I. Manko, Probabil- ity representation of quantum observables and quantum states, J. Russ. Laser Res. 38, 324 (2017)

    2017

  20. [28]

    Chernega, O.V

    V.N. Chernega, O.V. Man’ko, and V.I. Man’ko, God plays coins or superposition principle for classical proba- bilities in quantum suprematism representation of qubit states, J. Russ. Laser Res. 39, 128 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    Avanesov and Man’ko, Statistical properties of qutrit in probability representation of quantum mechanics, Phys

    A. Avanesov and Man’ko, Statistical properties of qutrit in probability representation of quantum mechanics, Phys. A 533, 121898 (2019)

    2019

  22. [30]

    Avanesov and V.I

    A. Avanesov and V.I. Man’ko, Probability representation of quantum channels, Lobachevskii J. Math. 40, 1444- 1449 (2019)

    2019

  23. [31]

    Caves, C.A

    C.M. Caves, C.A. Fuchs, and R. Schack, Quantum prob- abilities as Bayesian probabilities, Phys. Rev. A 65, 022305 (2002)

    2002

  24. [32]

    Renes, R

    J.M. Renes, R. Blume-Kohout, A. J. Scott, and C.M. Caves, Quantum probabilities as Bayesian probabilities, J. Math. Phys. 45, 2171 (2004)

    2004

  25. [33]

    Filippov and V.I

    S.N. Filippov and V.I. Man’ko, Symmetric information- ally complete positive operator valued measure and prob- ability representation of quantum mechanics, J. Russ. Laser Res. 31, 211 (2010)

    2010

  26. [34]

    Fuchs, M

    C.A. Fuchs, M. C. Hoang, and B.C. Stacey, The SIC question: History and state of play, Axioms 6, 21 (2017)

    2017

  27. [35]

    Appleby, A

    D.M. Appleby, A. Ericsson, and C.A. Fuchs, Properties of QBist state spaces, Found. Phys. 41, 564 (2011)

    2011

  28. [36]

    Fuchs and R

    C.A. Fuchs and R. Schack, Quantum-Bayesian coherence, Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 1693 (2013)

    2013

  29. [37]

    ehek, B.-G

    J. ehek, B.-G. Englert, and D. Kaszlikowski, Minimal qubit tomography, Phys. Rev. A 70, 052321 (2004)

    2004

  30. [38]

    T. Durt, C. Kurtsiefer, A. Lamas-Linares, and A. Ling, Wigner tomography of two-qubit states and quantum cryptography, Phys. Rev. A 78, 042338 (2008)

    2008

  31. [39]

    Medendorp, F.A

    Z.E.D. Medendorp, F.A. Torres-Ruiz, L.K. Shalm, G.N.M. Tabia, C.A. Fuchs, and A.M. Steinberg, Experi- mental characterization of qutrits using symmetric, infor- mationally complete positive operator-valued measures, Phys. Rev. A 83, 051801 (2011)

    2011

  32. [40]

    N. Bent, H. Qassim, A.A. Tahir, D. Sych, G. Leuchs, L.L. S´ anchez-Soto, E. Karimi, and R.W. Boyd, Ex- perimental realization of quantum tomography of pho- tonic qudits via symmetric informationally complete pos- itive operator-valued measures, Phys. Rev. X 5, 041006 (2015)

    2015

  33. [41]

    Zhao, N.-k

    Y.-y. Zhao, N.-k. Yu, P. Kurzy´ nski, G.-Y. Xiang, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Experimental realization of general- ized qubit measurements based on quantum walks, Phys. Rev. A 91, 042101 (2015)

    2015

  34. [42]

    Z. Hou, J. Tang, J. Shang, H. Zhu, J. Li, Y. Yuan, K.-D. Wu, G.-Y. Xiang, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Determin- istic realization of collective measurements via photonic quantum walks, Nat. Commun. 9, 1414 (2018)

    2018

  35. [43]

    Appleby, C.A

    M. Appleby, C.A. Fuchs, B.C. Stacey, and H. Zhu, In- troducing the qplex: a novel arena for quantum theory, Eur. Phys. J. D 71 197 (2017)

    2017

  36. [44]

    Zhu, Quasiprobability representations of quantum me- chanics with minimal negativity, Phys

    H. Zhu, Quasiprobability representations of quantum me- chanics with minimal negativity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 120404 (2016)

    2016

  37. [45]

    van de Wetering, Quantum theory is a quasi-stochastic process theory, Electron

    J. van de Wetering, Quantum theory is a quasi-stochastic process theory, Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci.266, 179 (2018)

    2018

  38. [46]

    Chru´ sci´ nski, V.I

    D. Chru´ sci´ nski, V.I. Man’ko, G. Marmo, and F. Ven- triglia, Stochastic evolution of finite level systems: Clas- sical versus quantum Phys. Scr. 87, 045015 (2013)

    2013

  39. [47]

    Chru´ sci´ nski, V.I

    D. Chru´ sci´ nski, V.I. Man’ko, G. Marmo, and F. Ven- triglia, On pseudo-stochastic matrices and pseudo- positive maps, Phys. Scr. 90, 115202 (2015)

    2015

  40. [48]

    M.M. Wolf, J. Eisert, T.S. Cubitt, and J.I. Cirac, Assess- ing non-Markovian quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 150402 (2008)

    2008

  41. [49]

    Breuer, E.-M

    H.-P. Breuer, E.-M. Laine, and J. Piilo, Measure for the degree of non-Markovian behavior of quantum processes in open systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 210401 (2009)

    2009

  42. [50]

    Rivas, S.F

    ´A. Rivas, S.F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Entanglement and non-Markovianity of quantum evolutions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 050403 (2010)

    2010

  43. [51]

    S. Luo, S. Fu, and H. Song, Quantifying non- Markovianity via correlations, Phys. Rev. A 86, 044101 (2012)

    2012

  44. [52]

    Breuer, Foundations and measures of quantum non- Markovianity, J

    H.-P. Breuer, Foundations and measures of quantum non- Markovianity, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.45, 154001 (2012)

    2012

  45. [53]

    Hall, J.D

    M.J.W. Hall, J.D. Cresser, L. Li, and E. Andersson, Canonical form of master equations and characterization of non-Markovianity, Phys. Rev. A 89, 042120 (2014)

    2014

  46. [54]

    Chru´ sci´ nski and S

    D. Chru´ sci´ nski and S. Maniscalco, Degree of non- Markovianity of quantum evolution, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 120404 (2014)

    2014

  47. [55]

    Bylicka, D

    B. Bylicka, D. Chru´ sci´ nski, and S. Maniscalco, Non- Markovianity and reservoir memory of quantum chan- nels: A quantum information theory perspective, Sci. Rep. 4 5720 (2014)

    2014

  48. [56]

    Chru´ sci´ nski and F

    D. Chru´ sci´ nski and F. A. Wudarski, Non-Markovianity degree for random unitary evolution, Phys. Rev. A 91, 012104 (2015)

    2015

  49. [57]

    Torre, W

    G. Torre, W. Roga, and F. Illuminati, Non-Markovianity of Gaussian channels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 070401 (2015)

    2015

  50. [58]

    Pineda, T

    C. Pineda, T. Gorin, D. Davalos, D.A. Wisniacki, and I. Garc´ ıa-Mata, Measuring and using non-Markovianity, Phys. Rev. A 93, 022117 (2016)

    2016

  51. [59]

    Li, G.-C

    C.-F. Li, G.-C. Guo, and J. Piilo, Non-Markovian quan- tum dynamics: What does it mean? Europhys. Lett. 27, 50001 (2019)

    2019

  52. [60]

    IBM Quantum Experience [research.ibm.com/ibm-q]

  53. [61]

    Gorini, A

    V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E.C.G. Sudarshan, Com- pletely positive dynamical semigroups of N-level systems, J. Math. Phys. 17, 821 (1976)

    1976

  54. [62]

    Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Commun

    G. Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Commun. Math. Phys. 48, 119 (1976)

    1976

  55. [63]

    Maciejewski, Z

    F.B. Maciejewski, Z. Zimbor´ as, and M. Oszmaniec, Miti- gation of readout noise in near-term quantum devices by classical post-processing based on detector tomography, arXiv:1907.08518

    1907 arXiv

  56. [64]

    DeBrota, C.A

    J.B. DeBrota, C.A. Fuchs, M.C. Hoang, B.C. Stacey, QBism Research Group [http://www.physics.umb.edu/Research/QBism]

  57. [65]

    Scott and M

    A.J. Scott and M. Grassl, Symmetric informationally complete positive-operator-valued measures: A new com- puter study, J. Math. Phys. 51, 042203 (2010)

    2010

  58. [66]

    Scott, SICs: Extending the list of solutions, arXiv:1703.03993

    A.J. Scott, SICs: Extending the list of solutions, arXiv:1703.03993

    arXiv

  59. [67]

    Bantysh, D.V

    B.I. Bantysh, D.V. Fastovets, and Y.I. Bogdanov, High- fidelity quantum tomography with imperfect measure- ments, Proc. SPIE 11022, 110222N (2018). 16

    2018

  60. [68]

    van Kampen, Stochastic Processes in Physics and Chemistry, 3rd ed, (North Holland, 2007)

    N.G. van Kampen, Stochastic Processes in Physics and Chemistry, 3rd ed, (North Holland, 2007)

    2007

  61. [69]

    DeBrota, C.A

    J.B. DeBrota, C.A. Fuchs, and B.C. Stacey, Symmetric informationally complete measurements Identify the es- sential difference between classical and quantum, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013074 (2020)

    2020

  62. [70]

    Oszmaniec, F.B

    M. Oszmaniec, F.B. Maciejewski, and Z. Puchala, Sim- ulating all quantum measurements using only projec- tive measurements and postselection, Phys. Rev. A 100, 012351 (2019)

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.