Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 48 references

Superclassical non-Markovian open quantum dynamics

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper defines a class of 'superclassical' non-Markovian open quantum dynamics in which a measurement in the system's diagonal basis is completely non-invasive for any measurement history, so classical Kolmogorov consistency holds…

desk verdict The paper introduces a useful operational notion of superclassical non-Markovian dynamics and finds depolarizing Lindblad examples, but the classification leans on an unpublished no-go result and the worked examples contain normalization slips. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13471 v2 pith:BYIB4QUR submitted 2024-11-20 quant-ph

Adrian A. Budini This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph MSC 81P1581S2281P40 PACS 03.65.Yz03.65.Ta
keywords superclassicaldynamicsnon-MarkovianopenquantumsystemsmeasurementinvasivenessKolmogorovconsistencydepolarizingchannelsdiscordLindbladmasterequations
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

This paper proposes and characterizes a class of non-Markovian open quantum dynamics, called superclassical, in which memory effects do not produce any measurement invasiveness. The defining feature is diagonal non-invasiveness: a projective measurement in the basis where the system state is diagonal leaves all subsequent outcome statistics unchanged, no matter what measurements were made before or will be made later. Under this condition the joint probabilities satisfy classical Kolmogorov consistency $P_3(z,x)=P_2(z,x)$ even though the dynamics retain memory. The paper shows that such dynamics exist and arise from non-unitary system-environment couplings; specifically, whenever each environment transition applies a depolarizing map to the system, the system propagator remains depolarizing and the non-invasiveness condition holds, with or without generation of quantum discord. This connects a purely operational notion of classicality to the more familiar family of depolarizing channels.

What carries the argument

The central object is the bipartite propagator $G_{t,0}=e^{t\mathcal{L}}$ of a system-environment semigroup, together with the diagonal non-invasiveness condition $\triangle_Z \mathcal{G}_{t+\tau,t}\triangle^t_Y \mathcal{G}_{t,0}\triangle_X = \triangle_Z \mathcal{G}_{t+\tau,t}\mathcal{G}_{t,0}\triangle_X$ for arbitrary dephasing maps $\triangle_X,\triangle_Z$, with $\triangle^t_Y$ fixing the pre-measurement state. The paper's main construction is a collisional Lindblad generator in which each environment transition $B_\alpha$ applies a depolarizing map $\mathcal{D}_{w_\alpha}$ to the system; this guarantees DNI and yields the depolarizing system propagator $\rho_t = w(t)\rho_0 + (1-w(t))I_s/d$. A secondary object is the trace condition (30) on environment propagators that must hold when quantum discord is generated but remains undetectable by the measurement protocol.

What would settle it

Compute the invasiveness distance $I(t,\tau)$ of Eq. (9) on a qubit whose system state follows a depolarizing evolution but whose bipartite coupling is unitary, as in Eqs. (47)-(48): the paper obtains $I(t)=|\cos(\theta_Z-\theta_X)|\sin^2(2\Omega t)$, which does not vanish even when the intermediate measurement is in the state's eigenbasis. A single counterexample where a non-depolarizing system propagator satisfies Eq. (5) for all X and Z would overturn the claimed characterization.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is a constructive characterization: superclassicality, the validity of Eq. (5) for arbitrary X and Z measurements, forces the system dynamics to be, at every time, a unitary followed by a depolarizing map, $\rho_t = U_t[\lambda_t \rho_0 + (1-\lambda_t)I_s/d]U_t^\dagger$. The paper constructs bipartite Lindblad generators that realize this: a collisional generator in which each environment transition $B_\alpha$ applies a depolarizing map $\mathcal{D}_{w_\alpha}$ to the system (Eq. (26)) realizes superclassicality without discord generation, while the more constrained form (31) realizes it with discord generation. For the discord-generating case, the environment propagators must obey the index-independence and trace constraints of Eq. (30). The paper further shows, via explicit qubit examples, that depolarizing system dynamics generated by unitary or two-way (incoherent) couplings lose superclassicality, and that the subclass of superclassical dynamics also satisfies the non-operational classicality condition and, in the absence of a system Hamiltonian, the fixed-basis operational classicality in every basis.

Load-bearing premise

The characterization assumes the bipartite propagator is a semigroup with a time-independent generator and that initial states are uncorrelated or zero-discord, and it imports the result that unitary and stochastic-Hamiltonian couplings cannot be diagonally non-invasive; if that imported result fails or non-semigroup generators are allowed, the restriction of superclassicality to depolarizing dynamics may collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Non-Markovian memory can coexist with classical Kolmogorov consistency whenever the system dynamics is depolarizing and the coupling is of the transition-triggered depolarizing form.
  • Superclassicality limits system dynamics to depolarizing maps up to a unitary, so any superclassical non-Markovian process has a system propagator $\rho_t = U_t[\lambda_t \rho_0 + (1-\lambda_t)I_s/d]U_t^\dagger$ at every time.
  • Superclassical dynamics automatically satisfy the non-operational classicality condition and, when no system Hamiltonian is present, the fixed-basis operational classicality condition in every measurement basis.
  • The diagonal non-invasiveness condition can be met both with and without quantum discord generation; the discord-carrying case requires extra trace constraints on the environment propagators.
  • For any non-superclassical non-Markovian dynamics, memory produces a measurable invasiveness distance $I(t,\tau)$ that a three-measurement protocol can detect.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The three-measurement protocol could serve as an experimental test to certify whether a given non-Markovian noise channel is classical in this sense, by measuring $P_3$ versus $P_2$ for varied X and Z bases.
  • The result suggests a hierarchy where superclassical dynamics are the only non-Markovian processes that entirely escape measurement invasiveness, while preserving memory.
  • Since discord can be generated yet remain non-invasive, this operational classicality is not about the absence of quantum correlations but about their undetectability through the chosen measurement protocol.
  • Because depolarizing maps are standard in quantum error correction, a collisional bath realization of these superclassical channels would offer a setting where non-Markovianity is engineered without introducing measurement back-action.
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

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces 'superclassical' non-Markovian open quantum dynamics, defined by diagonal non-invasiveness of intermediate projective measurements that commute with the pre-measurement state, for arbitrary pre- and post-measurement histories. It argues that these dynamics satisfy Kolmogorov consistency despite memory, and that the system propagator must be a composition of unitary and depolarizing maps. It proposes a class of bipartite Lindblad generators in which environment transitions are accompanied by depolarizing maps on the system, and gives qubit examples with and without discord generation, together with explicit expressions for measurement-invasiveness and conditional past-future correlations.

Significance. The operational notion of superclassicality is interesting, and the explicit construction of non-Markovian models that are measurement-noninvasive is valuable. If the characterization were fully established, it would draw a sharp boundary between classical memory and quantum memory in operational approaches. The paper's explicit analytical examples and comparison with prior classicality criteria (Milz et al., Banacki et al.) are useful. However, several load-bearing steps are either imported from an unpublished reference, assumed rather than derived, or inconsistent in the displayed examples, so the central classification claim is not yet established.

major comments (5)
  1. [Sec. IV A, Eqs. (34)-(37)] Section IV A, Eqs. (34) and (35) are inconsistent with the solution (37) and with the definition of S in Eq. (33). Since S[rho]=2I_s-rho has trace 3, the jump term in Eq. (35) is not trace-normalized: substituting the proposed solution rho^se_t = w(t)rho_0 otimes |0><0| + (1-w(t))/3 S[rho_0] otimes |1><1| into Eq. (35) gives \dot w = -gamma w from the |0> component and \dot w = -3gamma w from the |1> component, so the solution does not solve the master equation. Likewise, Eq. (34) cannot generate the depolarizing trajectory (32), because its right-hand side is 2gamma_t(I_s-rho_t), which is not proportional to \dot rho_t for nonconstant w(t). The examples should either use the normalized completely depolarizing map (e.g., I_s/2) in the jump terms or the master equations and stated solutions should be reconciled.
  2. [Sec. III C1, Eqs. (18)-(22)] The passage from the no-discord form (18) to the affine ansatz (22) is an assumption, not a derivation. Linearity of the bipartite evolution gives sigma_c^t = sum_{c'} A_{cc'}^t[sigma_0] p_{c'}^0, and the depolarizing character of the reduced system state fixes only the traces Tr A_{cc'}; it does not force A_{cc'} = delta_{cc'} E_t[sigma_0] + (1/d) \bar E_t[sigma_0]. Hence Eq. (26) is shown to be sufficient, but not necessary, for superclassicality without discord generation. If the paper aims at a full characterization, the necessity proof must be supplied; otherwise the claims in the Conclusions should be weakened accordingly.
  3. [Sec. III C2, Eq. (31)] The discord-generating generalization is explicitly conjectural, and the constraints (30) are only necessary conditions derived from the ansatz (28). No argument is given that Eq. (31) generically obeys (30), nor that the ansatz (28) covers all discord-generating superclassical propagators. The Conclusion statement that superclassicality 'restrict[s] the system dynamics to a subclass of non-Markovian depolarizing time-evolutions' is therefore stronger than what is proven; the conjectural status should be stated in the abstract and conclusions.
  4. [Sec. III B and Sec. IV B 2] Two load-bearing assumptions are not established within the manuscript. First, the assertion that unitary and stochastic-Hamiltonian s-e couplings cannot satisfy DNI is imported from the unpublished Ref. [16]; the unitary check in Sec. IV B 2 covers only one Hamiltonian. Second, Eq. (17) restricts the bipartite propagator to a time-independent generator L, a restriction that is not 'without loss of generality' for the definition (5). If either assumption fails, superclassical models with non-depolarizing system dynamics may exist. These premises should be proved or explicitly flagged as assumptions.
  5. [Sec. III C1, after Eq. (27b)] After Eq. (27b), the claim that the evolutions of E_t[sigma_0] and \bar E_t[sigma_0] are completely positive is not justified by the displayed equations; for w_alpha < 1, Eq. (27a) is not itself a Lindblad equation. The conclusion is correct if one notes that the ansatz (22) is invariant under the manifestly Lindblad generator (26), but this argument should be written out.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] The manuscript contains several typographical errors: 'commutates' should be 'commutes' (abstract, Sec. II C), 'depper' should be 'deeper' (Sec. II C), 'lefts' should be 'leaves' (Appendix A), and 'lighten' should be 'illustrate' (Sec. IV).
  2. [Eq. (44)] Equation (44) contains an unbalanced parenthesis in the phi-term; the dissipator should be enclosed in parentheses.
  3. [Eqs. (15) and (33)] The relation of S in Eq. (33) to Eq. (15) should be clarified: without the identity Kraus operator and the factor 1/4, S/3 is the channel D_{-1/3}, not the completely depolarizing map I_s/2; this is the root of the inconsistency in Major Comment 1.
  4. [Eq. (5)] Equation (5) should specify how the intermediate basis is chosen when the pre-measurement state has degenerate eigenvalues, since the commuting basis is then not unique.
  5. [Sec. V] In Section V, the statement that, except for superclassical dynamics, non-Markovian memory effects lead to intrinsic measurement invasiveness should be qualified to the class of bipartite Lindblad semigroups and initial states considered in this paper.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The 'depolarizing-only' classification is imported from the author's unpublished no-go theorem; the explicit models and probability checks are self-contained.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section III C, first paragraph after Eq. (17)]
    "As demonstrated in Ref. [16] DNI cannot be fulfilled when the s-e interaction is unitary or described through stochastic Hamiltonians. Below, we determine the possible non-unitary s-e couplings."

    This is the step that forces the search to non-unitary couplings and ultimately to depolarizing system dynamics. The exclusion of unitary and stochastic-Hamiltonian couplings is not re-derived in this paper; it is asserted as a result of Ref. [16], which is the author's own unpublished arXiv preprint (arXiv:2301.02500). The paper's own unitary example in Sec. IV B2 checks only one particular Hamiltonian and therefore does not establish the general no-go theorem. The central classification claim, that superclassicality restricts the system dynamics to depolarizing maps, thus rests at a load-bearing point on a same-author citation rather than on a proof contained in this manuscript.

  2. uniqueness imported from authors [Section III C2, first paragraph]
    "The starting point is to note that the extra non-classical correlations generated by the s-e coupling must not affect the system dynamics [16]. Thus, the system propagator must be again the composition of a unitary and a depolarizing map."

    In the discord-generating branch, the paper again imports from the author's Ref. [16] the premise that non-classical s-e correlations cannot affect the system propagator, and from that premise concludes that the system dynamics must again be unitary-plus-depolarizing. This is not derived from the superclassicality definition Eq. (5) within the present paper; it is a forced uniqueness-type conclusion taken from the same unpublished source. The subsequent generator (31) is only conjectured, so this branch of the depolarizing characterization is load-bearing self-citation rather than an independent derivation.

full rationale

Most of the paper's positive construction is self-contained. The no-discord construction in Sec. III C1 starts from zero-discord bipartite states and, via Appendix A, identifies depolarizing maps; the explicit qubit models in Eqs. (35)-(42) are solved directly, and the non-superclassical depolarizing examples in Sec. IV B are computed in the paper. The circularity is concentrated in the classification step: the conclusion that unitary and stochastic-Hamiltonian couplings cannot satisfy diagonal non-invasiveness, and hence that superclassicality forces depolarizing system dynamics, is imported from Ref. [16], the author's own unpublished arXiv preprint. The second branch, Sec. III C2, likewise imports from the same Ref. [16] the premise that non-classical correlations cannot affect the system dynamics, and its explicit generator (31) is admittedly a conjecture. I do not treat the semigroup assumption (17) as circular, nor the explicit conjecture (31) as circular; these are limitations or verification gaps rather than definitional reductions. Because the positive models and probability calculations are independent and checkable, the paper is not wholly circular, but its central 'depolarizing only' claim reduces at a load-bearing point to a same-author citation.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The free parameters are the rates, weights, and initial environment states that define the model family; they are not fitted to data. The main assumptions are the semigroup form of the bipartite generator, the product or null-discord initial states, the imported negative result from Ref [16], and the explicit ansatz plus conjecture for the two superclassical cases.

free parameters (4)
  • bath transition rates gamma and phi
    Arbitrary non-negative rates in the collisional models Eqs. (35), (40), (43), and (44); the claims are intended to hold for any positive values.
  • depolarizing weights w_alpha
    Arbitrary weights in the proposed generator Eq. (26); they define the model family and are not fitted to data.
  • time-dependent depolarizing weight w(t)
    Examples use w(t)=exp(-gamma t) or similar; it sets the memory profile but is not inferred from any experiment.
  • initial environment state sigma0
    Examples use pure states, e.g. |0><0|, or the maximally mixed state; the no-discord construction is intended to work for arbitrary sigma0.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The bipartite system-environment propagator is a semigroup with time-independent generator L, Eq. (17).
    Restricts the search to local-in-time Lindblad generators of the s-e dynamics; the paper calls this 'without loss of generality' but it is a real restriction.
  • domain assumption Initial system-environment states are uncorrelated, rho_se(0)=rho0 otimes sigma0, or have zero discord.
    All derivations and examples start from product or null-discord states; correlated initial states are not treated.
  • ad hoc to paper Unitary and stochastic-Hamiltonian s-e couplings cannot satisfy diagonal non-invasiveness, imported from Ref [16].
    This load-bearing negative result is not proven in the present text and is taken from the author's own unpublished work; if it fails, the classification is incomplete.
  • ad hoc to paper The ansatz rho_se(t) = U_t{rho0 otimes E_t[sigma0] + I_d/d otimes Ebar_t[sigma0]}U_t^dagger, Eq. (22), and the proposed generator Eq. (26).
    The no-discord solution is assumed to have this structure rather than derived from a more primitive principle; the authors state Eq. (26) as their main proposal.
  • ad hoc to paper The conjectured generator Eq. (31) for superclassicality with discord generation.
    The text explicitly labels Eq. (31) a conjecture and says a general underlying evolution cannot be derived; only examples support it.
  • standard math Standard quantum measurement theory, CPTP maps, Lindblad master equations, and the depolarizing-map characterization of Appendix A.
    These background tools are used throughout; Appendix A proves the uniqueness of depolarizing maps under the stated invariance conditions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Superclassical non-Markovian open quantum dynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BYIB4QUR

@misc{pith2026241113471,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Superclassical non-Markovian open quantum dynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BYIB4QUR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13471}
}
read the original abstract

We characterize a class of superclassical non-Markovian open quantum system dynamics that are defined by their lack of measurement invasiveness when the corresponding observable commutates with the pre-measurement state. This diagonal non-invasiveness guarantees that joint probabilities for measurement outcomes fulfill classical Kolmogorov consistency conditions. These features are fulfilled regardless of the previous (measurement) system history and are valid at arbitrary later times after an arbitrary system initialization. It is shown that a subclass of depolarizing dynamics, which are based on a (time-irreversible) non-unitary system-environment coupling, satisfy the required properties. The relationship with other operational [Milz et al., Phys. Rev. X 10, 041049 (2020)] and non-operational [Banacki et al., Phys. Rev. A 107, 032202 (2023)] notions of classicality in non-Markovian open quantum systems is studied in detail and exemplified through different examples.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [16]

    Strasberg and M

    P. Strasberg and M. Garc ´ ıa D ´ ıaz, Classical quantum stochastic processes, Phys. Rev. A 100, 022120 (2019)

    work page 2019

  2. [1]

    (17)] does not generate any quantum discord when it assumes the structure ρse t = Gt, 0[ρ0 ⊗ σ0] = ∑ c |ct⟩⟨ct| ⊗ σ c t

    Superclassicality without discord generation The bipartite propagator [Eq. (17)] does not generate any quantum discord when it assumes the structure ρse t = Gt, 0[ρ0 ⊗ σ0] = ∑ c |ct⟩⟨ct| ⊗ σ c t . (18) Here, {σ c t } are non-normalized environment states while {|ct⟩} is the basis where the system state is a diagonal matrix at time t, ρ t = Tre(Gt, 0[ρ0 ⊗ ...

    work page

  3. [2]

    partial depolarizing maps

    Superclassicality with discord generation Superclassicality can be satisfied even when the bipar- tite s-e interaction leads to quantum discord [the solution structure (18) is not satisfied]. Here, we find which un- derlying s-e interactions could lead to this situation. The starting point is to note that the extra non- classical correlations generated by th...

    work page

  4. [3]

    non-Markovian

    Superclassical dynamics without discord generation The bipartite s-e state evolves as dρse t dt = γ(BS[ρse t ]B† − 1 2 {B†B, ρ se t }+). (35) The environment is also a two-level system, whose states are denoted as {|0⟩, |1⟩}. The environment operator is B = |1⟩⟨0|. The bipartite evolution can be read straightforwardly as follows. The operator B induces th...

    work page

  5. [4]

    Consistently with Eq

    Superclassical dynamics with discord generation In this example, the environment Hilbert space is four dimensional with a natural basis of states {|0⟩, |1⟩, |2⟩, |3⟩}. Consistently with Eq. (31), the s-e dy- namics reads dρse t dt = γ 3 ∑ k=1, 2, 3 BkSk[ρse t ]B† k − 1 2 {B† kBk, ρ se t }+. (40) Here, the bath operators are Bk ≡ | k⟩⟨0|, k = 1 , 2, 3. The...

    work page

  6. [5]

    (26), the superclassical example without quantum discord generation [Eq

    Incoherent reservoir dynamics Taking into account the general result defined by Eq. (26), the superclassical example without quantum discord generation [Eq. (35)] can be generalized as dρse t dt = γ(BS[ρse t ]B† − 1 2 {B†B, ρ se t }+) (43) +φ(B†S[ρse t ]B − 1 2 {BB †, ρ se t }+). Here the two-level environment dynamics is defined by the transitions |0⟩ S → ...

    work page

  7. [6]

    For simplicity we consider a two-level environ- mental system

    Unitary system-environment dynamics Now we consider a unitary s-e evolution dρse t dt = −i[Hse, ρ se t ], (47) where the Hamiltonian Hse introduces their mutual in- teraction. For simplicity we consider a two-level environ- mental system. The Hamiltonian is taken as Hse = Ω 2 ∑ k=1, 2, 3 σk ⊗ σk. (48) With σk we denotes the k-Pauli matrix ( k = 1 , 2, 3) ...

    work page

  8. [7]

    H. P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The theory of open quantum systems , (Oxford University Press, 2002)

    work page 2002

Show all 48 references
  1. [8]

    de Vega and D

    I. de Vega and D. Alonso, Dynamics of non-Markovian open quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 015001 (2017)

    2017

  2. [9]

    Complementarily, with operational we mean approaches whose formulation intrinsically involves the outcomes associated to explicit quantum measure- ment processes

    With non-operational we mean schemes that, while could be executed or implemented in a laboratory, do not rely on performing explicit measurement processes over the system of interest. Complementarily, with operational we mean approaches whose formulation intrinsically involve...

  3. [10]

    H. P. Breuer, E. M. Laine, J. Piilo, and V. Vacchini, Colloquium: Non-Markovian dynamics in open quan- tum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 021002 (2016); H. P. Breuer, E. M. Laine, and J. Piilo, Measure for the De- gree of Non-Markovian Behavior of Quantum Processes in Open Syste...

    2016

  4. [11]

    Rivas, S

    A. Rivas, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Quantum non-Markovianity: characterization, quantification and detection, Rep. Prog. Phys. 77, 094001 (2014)

    2014

  5. [12]

    F. A. Pollock, C. Rodr ´ ıguez-Rosario, T. Frauenheim, M. Paternostro, and K. Modi, Operational Markov Con- dition for Quantum Processes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 040405 (2018); F. A. Pollock, C. Rodr ´ ıguez-Rosario, T. Frauenheim, M. Paternostro, and K. Modi, Non- Markovian qua...

    2018

  6. [13]

    A. A. Budini, Quantum Non-Markovian Processes Break Conditional Past-Future Independence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 240401 (2018); A. A. Budini, Conditional past- future correlation induced by non-Markovian dephasing reservoirs, Phys. Rev. A 99, 052125 (2019)

    2018

  7. [14]

    Banacki, M

    M. Banacki, M. Marciniak, K. Horodecki, and P. Horodecki, Information backflow may not indicate quan- tum memory, Phys. Rev. A 107, 032202 (2023)

    2023

  8. [15]

    Smirne, D

    A. Smirne, D. Egloff, M. G. D ´ ıaz, M. B. Plenio, and S. F. Huelga, Coherence and non-classicality of quan- tum Markov processes, Quantum Sci. Technol. 4, 01LT01 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    Garc ´ ıa D ´ ıaz, B

    M. Garc ´ ıa D ´ ıaz, B. Desef, M. Rosati, D. Egloff, J. Cal- samiglia, A. Smirne, M. Skotiniotis, and S. F. Huelga, Accessible coherence in open quantum system dynamics, Quantum 2020-03-27

    2020

  10. [18]

    Smirne, T

    A. Smirne, T. Nitsche, D. Egloff, S. Barkhofen, S. De, I. Dhand, C. Silberhorn, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Ple- nio, Experimental control of the degree of non-classicalit y via quantum coherence, Quantum Sci. Technol. 5 04LT01 (2020)

    2020

  11. [19]

    S. Milz, D. Egloff, P. Taranto, T. Theurer, M. B. Plenio, A. Smirne, and S. F. Huelga, When Is a Non-Markovian Quantum Process Classical?, Phys. Rev. X 10, 041049 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    Sakuldee, P

    F. Sakuldee, P. Taranto, and S. Milz, Connecting commu- tativity and classicality for multitime quantum processes , Phys. Rev. A 106, 022416 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    A. A. Budini, Quantum Non-Markovian Environment- to-System Backflows of Information: Nonoperational vs. Operational Approaches, Entropy 24, 649 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    A. A. Budini, Violation of Diagonal Non-Invasiveness: A Hallmark of Non-Classical Memory Effects, submitted to Phys. Rev. A, arXiv:2301.02500v4 (updated)

    arXiv

  15. [23]

    This kind of evolutions always admit an underlying (tri - partite) microscopic Hamiltonian description, which in- cludes extra degrees of freedom that lead to the bipartite dynamics. Nevertheless, in similitude with the derivation of Markovian quantum master equations [1], an ...

  16. [24]

    Zyczkowski, P

    K. Zyczkowski, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Dynamics of quantum entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 65, 012101 (2001)

    2001

  17. [25]

    Bowen and S

    G. Bowen and S. Bose, Teleportation as a Depolarizing Quantum Channel, Relative Entropy, and Classical Ca- pacity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 267901 (2001)

    2001

  18. [26]

    G. G. Amosov, Strong superadditivity conjecture holds for the quantum depolarizing channel in any dimension, Phys. Rev. A 75, 060304(R) (2007)

    2007

  19. [27]

    Pastawski, A

    F. Pastawski, A. Kay, N. Schuch, and I. Cirac, How 12 Long Can a Quantum Memory Withstand Depolarizing Noise?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 080501 (2009)

    2009

  20. [28]

    Cafaro and S

    C. Cafaro and S. Mancini, Quantum stabilizer codes for correlated and asymmetric depolarizing errors, Phys. Rev. A 82, 012306 (2010)

    2010

  21. [29]

    Fanizza, F

    M. Fanizza, F. Kianvash, and V. Giovannetti, Quantum Flags and New Bounds on the Quantum Capacity of the Depolarizing Channel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 020503 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Fitzek, M

    D. Fitzek, M. Eliasson, A. F. Kockum, and M. Granath, Deep Q-learning decoder for depolarizing noise on the toric code, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 023230 (2020)

    2020

  23. [31]

    Chiribella, M

    G. Chiribella, M. Wilson, and H. F. Chau, Quantum and Classical Data Transmission through Completely Depo- larizing Channels in a Superposition of Cyclic Orders, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 190502 (2021)

    2021

  24. [32]

    Vovrosh, K

    J. Vovrosh, K. E. Khosla, S. Greenaway, C. Self, M. S. Kim, and Johannes Knolle, Simple mitigation of global depolarizing errors in quantum simulations, Phys. Rev. E 104, 035309 (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    Urbanek, B

    M. Urbanek, B. Nachman, V. R. Pascuzzi, A. He, C. W. Bauer, and W. A. de Jong, Mitigating Depolarizing Noise on Quantum Computers with Noise-Estimation Circuits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 270502 (2021)

    2021

  26. [34]

    Sasaki, M

    M. Sasaki, M. Ban, and S. M. Barnett, Optimal parame- ter estimation of a depolarizing channel, Phys. Rev. A 66, 022308 (2002); D. Collins and J. Stephens, Depolarizing- channel parameter estimation using noisy initial states, Phys. Rev. A 92, 032324 (2015)

    2002

  27. [35]

    Narang and Arvind, Simulating a single-qubit chan- nel using a mixed-state environment, Phys

    G. Narang and Arvind, Simulating a single-qubit chan- nel using a mixed-state environment, Phys. Rev. A 75, 032305 (2007); D. Crow and R. Joynt, Classical simula- tion of quantum dephasing and depolarizing noise, Phys. Rev. A 89, 042123 (2014)

    2007

  28. [36]

    Jeong, J.-C

    Y.-C. Jeong, J.-C. Lee, and Y.-H. Kim, Experimental im- plementation of a fully controllable depolarizing quantum operation, Phys. Rev. A 87, 014301 (2013)

    2013

  29. [37]

    Dixit and E

    K. Dixit and E. C. G. Sudarshan, Geometry of depolar- izing channels, Phys. Rev. A 78, 032308 (2008); C. K. Burrell, Geometry of generalized depolarizing channels, Phys. Rev. A 80, 042330 (2009)

    2008

  30. [38]

    Daffer, K

    S. Daffer, K. W´ odkiewicz, J. D. Cresser, and J. K. McIver, Depolarizing channel as a completely positive map with memory, Phys. Rev. A 70, 010304(R) (2004)

    2004

  31. [39]

    Wouters, M

    J. Wouters, M. Fannes, I. Akhalwaya, and F. Petruc- cione, Classical capacity of a qubit depolarizing channel with memory, Phys. Rev. A 79, 042303 (2009)

    2009

  32. [40]

    Shrikant, R

    U. Shrikant, R. Srikanth, and S. Banerjee, Non- Markovian dephasing and depolarizing channels, Phys. Rev. A 98, 032328 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    Davalos and M

    D. Davalos and M. Ziman, Quantum Dynamics is Not Strictly Bidivisible, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 080801 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

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

    2000

  35. [43]

    M. M. Wilde, Quantum Information Theory (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2013); M. M. Wilde, From Classical to Quantum Shannon Theory, arXiv:1106.1445v8 (2019)

    2019

  36. [44]

    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

  37. [45]

    A. A. Budini, Lindblad rate equations, Phys. Rev. A 74, 053815 (2006); A.A. Budini, Random Lindblad equations from complex environments, Phys. Rev. E 72, 056106 (2005)

    2006

  38. [46]

    Cywi´ nski, Equivalence of qubit-environment entangl e- ment and discord generation via pure dephasing interac- tions and the resulting consequences, Phys. Rev. A 97, 012306 (2018)

    2018

  39. [47]

    X. Hu, Y. Gu, Q. Gong, and G. Guo, Necessary and sufficient condition for Markovian-dissipative-dynamics- induced quantum discord, Phys. Rev. A 84, 022113 (2011)

    2011

  40. [48]

    A. A. Budini, Almost all dynamics generate quantum discord, unpublished

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.