Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 51 references

Non-Markovian noise limits for sustaining entanglement in multiparty quantum states

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Under noise with memory, W states retain entanglement as the number of qubits grows.

desk verdict The paper's finite-N numerics are plausible, but the advertised asymptotic W-state robustness under dephasing is an extrapolation artifact contradicted by the exact 1-Rest negativity formula. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.04526 v1 pith:OMZ7SJMX submitted 2025-01-08 quant-ph

Suchetana Goswami , Ujjwal Sen This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords multipartiteentanglementnon-MarkoviandynamicsdephasingchanneldepolarisingWstatesGHZlogarithmicnegativityrevival
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

Entanglement is the working resource for distributed quantum tasks, but real qubits are hit by their environments. This paper asks whether multiparty entanglement can survive when each qubit is locally coupled to a reservoir that remembers its past, a non-Markovian channel, rather than a memoryless one. By solving the master equation for GHZ cat states and W states under local dephasing and depolarising noise, the authors find that memory effects change the answer: under non-Markovian dephasing, W-state entanglement saturates at a nonzero value in every bipartition as the number of qubits grows, while GHZ entanglement dies out around 16 qubits. Under non-Markovian depolarising noise, both state families show entanglement revival after collapse. If these claims hold, engineering or exploiting environmental memory is a way to protect multiparty entanglement.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the time-local GKSL master equation with time-dependent decay rates, whose signs control whether the channel is Markovian or non-Markovian. For dephasing, the paper uses the zero-temperature Ohmic-bath rate $\gamma_{T=0}(t,s)=\omega_c[1+(\omega_c t)^2]^{-s/2}\Gamma[s]\sin(s\arctan(\omega_c t))$: for $s>2$ the rate turns negative, producing information back-flow and non-Markovianity. The evolved state $\rho(t)$ is obtained by integrating the master equation for each $N$, and entanglement is quantified by logarithmic negativity over the 1-Rest and highest-cut bipartitions. The $N$-dependence of the saturated negativity is then extrapolated with exponential-plus-constant fits, and the constant term is what yields the claimed asymptotic values.

What would settle it

Take the $N$-qubit W state and apply local dephasing with coherence survival factor $p$; the exact 1-Rest logarithmic negativity is $\log_2\!(1+\frac{2\sqrt{N-1}\,p}{N})$, which tends to zero for any fixed $p<1$ as $N\to\infty$. Evaluating this closed form for $N=10,20,50,100$ using the paper's dephasing factor would directly show whether the extrapolated $0.24$ floor is real or a finite-size fitting artifact.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery, stated on the paper's own terms, is that information back-flow from a non-Markovian environment changes the asymptotic fate of multiparty entanglement. For local dephasing with an Ohmic reservoir at zero temperature, the time-dependent rate $\gamma_{T=0}(t,s)$ becomes negative for Ohmicity $s>2$, and in that regime the time-saturated logarithmic negativity, an entanglement measure for mixed states, stays positive for W states when evaluated on 1-vs-rest and highest-cut bipartitions. Fitting results for $N=3$ through $N=10$ at $t=30$ to $E_N = a e^{-c(N-3)}+b^2$, the authors obtain $b^2=0.24$ for the 1-Rest cut and conclude that W states are 24% robust asymptotically; the highest-cut saturates at $E_N=0.4977$ for even $N$ and approaches $0.4962$ for odd $N$, an even-odd dichotomy. By contrast, GHZ states retain a nonzero value only up to about $N=16$ before it vanishes. Under local depolarising noise with a periodically sign-changing rate, both GHZ and W states collapse and then revive, with a second revival for $N\ge7$ in the highest-cut case.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's asymptotic claims rest on assuming that a curve fit through data for $N=3$ through $N=10$ at one time continues to hold for all larger $N$, so the fitted constant term is taken to be the permanent entanglement value.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For dephasing, W states are claimed to retain a nonzero amount of entanglement in every bipartition in the asymptotic limit, with the 1-Rest value saturating at $E_N=0.24$.
  • GHZ states under the same non-Markovian dephasing are claimed to lose their retained entanglement completely by about $N=16$.
  • For the highest-cut bipartition under dephasing, even-$N$ W states saturate at $E_N=0.4977$ independent of $N$, while odd-$N$ W states approach $E_N=0.4962$, giving an even-odd dichotomy.
  • Under non-Markovian depolarising noise, both GHZ and W states first lose their entanglement and then revive it, with a second revival appearing for $N\ge7$ in the highest-cut case.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An exact calculation of the dephased single-mode W state's 1-Rest logarithmic negativity gives $\log_2\!(1+2\sqrt{N-1}\,p/N)$, which vanishes as $N\to\infty$; if that calculation applies to the paper's model, the reported $0.24$ asymptotic value is a finite-size fitting artifact rather than a true limit.
  • The even-odd saturation pattern suggests a design rule for dephasing-prone protocols: choose an even number of parties so the highest-cut entanglement floor is flat in $N$.
  • The revival windows in the depolarising channel suggest scheduling entanglement distribution or distillation during the high-entanglement intervals, turning non-Markovian memory into a timing resource.
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 manuscript studies the effect of local non-Markovian dephasing and depolarizing noise on the entanglement of N-qubit GHZ and W states. The authors numerically solve the time-local master equation for N=3 to 10, compute logarithmic negativity for the 1-Rest and highest-cut bipartitions, and extrapolate the N-dependence using fitted exponential forms. The main advertised results are that non-Markovian dephasing makes W-state entanglement saturate to a nonzero value as N grows (24% for the 1-Rest cut, about 49.7% for the highest cut), that W states are more robust than GHZ states, that there is an even-odd dichotomy in the highest-cut entanglement, and that non-Markovian depolarizing noise induces entanglement revival after collapse.

Significance. If the asymptotic claims were correct, the paper would establish a striking resource-preservation effect of non-Markovian noise and would be a useful contribution to the open-systems literature. The finite-N numerical work for N=3 to 10 appears internally consistent, and the identification of the optimal Ohmicity region (s between 2.3 and 2.5) is a useful observation. However, the central asymptotic W-state claim is directly contradicted by an exact calculation for the 1-Rest bipartition, so the main message of the paper is not reliable. The depolarizing-noise revival phenomenology and the finite-N comparisons may survive a revision, but the advertised asymptotic robustness does not.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III, 'Results for Dephasing noise', paragraph after Fig. 4(c)] The claimed asymptotic saturation E_N = 0.24 for the 1-Rest bipartition is an extrapolation artifact. For any local dephasing channel the evolved W state is rho(t) = lambda^2 |W_N><W_N| + (1-lambda^2)/N P_1, where lambda = exp[-integral_0^t gamma(t') dt'] and P_1 projects onto the single-excitation subspace. The 1-Rest logarithmic negativity is exactly E_N^{1-Rest} = log2(1 + 2 sqrt(N-1) lambda^2 / N). For a legitimate CPTP dephasing evolution 0 <= lambda <= 1, and for every fixed lambda this quantity tends to 0 as N goes to infinity; even the decoherence-free case lambda = 1 behaves as log2(1 + 2/sqrt(N)) and vanishes asymptotically. The data in Fig. 4(c) for N=3..10 are compatible with this slow decay, and the fitted offset b^2 = 0.4906^2 is not a physical limit. This directly invalidates the statement in the Conclusion that the W state retains a nonzero amount of entanglement for any bipartition in the asymptotic limit.
  2. [Section III, extrapolation procedure for GHZ and W states] The asymptotic predictions are obtained by fitting E_N = a e^{-c(N-3)} + b^2 (or the reciprocal form for the odd-N highest cut) to eight data points at a single time t=30 and reading off b^2 as the asymptotic value. No model selection, uncertainty quantification, or validation on larger N is provided. This procedure is especially fragile here because the exact 1-Rest W formula decays only as a power law, so an exponential-plus-offset fit over N=3..10 will generically return a spurious positive offset. The extrapolation method is therefore not a reliable basis for any of the asymptotic claims in the paper.
  3. [Section IV, Conclusion] The concluding claim that the W state retains a nonzero amount of entanglement for any bipartition in the asymptotic limit is false for the 1-Rest cut, as shown by the exact formula above. In addition, for N>=4 the paper computes only two cuts (1-Rest and highest-cut); intermediate bipartitions such as 2 vs N-2 for N>=6 are not computed, so the 'any bipartition' wording is unsupported even independently of the exact contradiction.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section II, Eq. (8)] The ratio omega_c/omega_0 never appears explicitly in the text, although the dimensionless time t = omega_0 t~ is used throughout; the authors should state the value of omega_c/omega_0 used in the numerical simulations.
  2. [Section III, depolarising-noise subsection] The phrase 'single to (N-1) mode excitation' is used, but a multimode W state is never defined; Eq. (2) gives only the single-excitation W state, so the depolarising-section statement about multimode W states is ambiguous.
  3. [Section III, 'characterising the final state entanglement'] The text says the evolution runs to t=100, yet all N-dependence data are reported at t=30; a convergence check in t for the largest N would clarify that the values plotted are indeed saturated values.
  4. [Fig. 4(c) and Fig. 4(d)] The extrapolation panels extend to N=60 while the data cover only N=3..10, and no error bars or goodness-of-fit measures are shown; this makes it difficult to assess the reliability of the fitted offsets.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 7.0 of 10

The advertised asymptotic W-state robustness is read off from the fitted offset of an extrapolation ansatz, not derived from the dephasing dynamics.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section III, Results for Dephasing noise, paragraph following Fig. 4(c)]
    "We have, E_N = ae^{−c(N−3)} + b^2 for all values of s > 2. For s = 2.47, the parameters take the following values: a = 0.2329, b = 0.4906 and c = 0.1559. ... By extrapolating with respect to the given function, we see that the final state entanglement in “1-Rest” case saturates at a non-zero value, in particular E_N = 0.24"

    The asymptotic value is not derived from the master equation; it is the offset of the fitting function E_N = a e^{-c(N−3)} + b^2, which was fitted to numerical data for N=3..10. Taking N → ∞ in this ansatz gives exactly b^2 = 0.4906^2 = 0.2407, and the paper reports this same fitted constant as the predicted saturation E_N = 0.24. For a locally dephased W state, the 1-Rest logarithmic negativity is exactly log2(1 + 2√(N−1)q/N) with q the fixed single-qubit coherence factor, which tends to 0 as N→∞ for every q ≤ 1; the non-zero limit is therefore an artifact of assuming a constant offset in the fitting form.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section III, Results for Dephasing noise, paragraph following Fig. 4(d)]
    "for the odd case, the output state entanglement variation with N is governed by E_N = 1/(ae^{−cN} + b^2) with a = 0.2832, b = 1.4195 and c = 0.4546. ... for odd number of qubits it increases and saturates at a value of E_N = 0.4962."

    The same construction is used for the odd-N highest-cut data: the fitting function E_N = 1/(a e^{-cN} + b^2) has large-N limit 1/b^2 = 1/1.4195^2 = 0.4962, and this fitted offset is then labeled the saturation value. The reported even-odd dichotomy asymptotic numbers are therefore determined by the chosen fitting form, not by an independent calculation, and the claim that W states retain non-zero entanglement for any bipartition in the asymptotic limit rests on these fitted constants.

full rationale

The finite-N computations in the paper, which solve the local-dephasing master equation for N=3..10 and observe time-saturation for fixed N, are genuine numerical results and are not circular. The circularity enters at the extrapolation stage. The paper fits E_N = a e^{-c(N−3)} + b^2 to the N=3..10 data and then reads off the asymptotic saturation as b^2, reporting 0.24 for the 1-Rest cut; likewise the odd-N highest-cut saturation 0.4962 is 1/b^2 from another fitted reciprocal-exponential ansatz. In both cases the 'predicted' asymptotic value is literally the fitted offset, so the headline asymptotic robustness is an artifact of the assumed fitting form rather than a consequence of the non-Markovian dephasing model. An exact calculation for the locally dephased W state gives E_1-Rest = log2(1 + 2√(N−1)q/N), which tends to 0 as N→∞ for any fixed coherence factor q, confirming that the fitted constant is not physical. No load-bearing self-citation chain or uniqueness-theorem import is present; the difficulty is the fit-as-prediction pattern in the central asymptotic claim.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard master-equation methods plus several unverified modeling choices: the Ohmic dephasing bath, the ad hoc depolarizing rates, and the fitted extrapolation functions. There are no new postulated physical entities. The extrapolation constants are fitted to data and then used as predictions, which is the main source of circularity burden.

free parameters (7)
  • Ohmicity parameter s = 2.47 (scanned range 1.0 to 3.8)
    In the non-Markovian regime s>2, the paper scans s and selects s=2.47 because it gives the maximum saturated entanglement for all N; this is a post-hoc choice.
  • GHZ extrapolation constants (a, b, c) = a=0.3399, b=7.0847e-05, c=0.4167
    Fit to EN versus N at t=30 for dephased GHZ states; the asymptotic limit is b^2.
  • W 1-Rest extrapolation constants (a, b, c) = a=0.2329, b=0.4906, c=0.1559
    Fit to EN versus N at t=30 for dephased W states in the 1-Rest cut; the claimed asymptotic 0.24 is b^2.
  • W highest-cut odd-N extrapolation constants (a, b, c) = a=0.2832, b=1.4195, c=0.4546
    Fit to odd-N highest-cut data; the asymptotic limit is 1/b^2 = 0.4962.
  • W highest-cut even-N saturation constant = 0.4977 ebits
    Observed saturated value assumed independent of N for even N.
  • Depolarizing channel parameters alpha, gamma_x, gamma_y = alpha=1.0, gamma_x=gamma_y=0.1
    Hand-picked to make the channel non-Markovian and generate revival; no microscopic derivation.
  • Cutoff frequency ratio omega_c/omega_0 = not stated (plots use dimensionless t, likely 1)
    The dephasing rate in Eq. (8) depends on omega_c, but the paper never states its value or the ratio omega_c/omega_0; this sets the time scale of the saturation values.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math GKSL master equation with time-local Lindblad generators describes the open-system dynamics
    Used throughout Section II to write Eqs. (3), (5), (10).
  • standard math Logarithmic negativity across a bipartition is a valid entanglement measure for the multipartite analysis
    Used in Section III to quantify entanglement in all bipartitions; it only captures bipartite entanglement across each cut.
  • domain assumption System and reservoirs are initially uncorrelated, and each qubit couples to identical independent reservoirs at zero temperature
    State in Section II before Eq. (6); needed to derive the dephasing rate in Eq. (8).
  • domain assumption Ohmic spectral density S(omega)=omega^s / omega_c^{s-1} e^{-omega/omega_c} and zero temperature
    Eqs. (7) and (8); the non-Markovian regime s>2 relies on this specific spectral density.
  • ad hoc to paper The chosen depolarizing rates gamma_z(t)=alpha sin(t), gamma_x=gamma_y=0.1 generate a legitimate non-Markovian CPTP dynamics
    Section II, local depolarising noise; the paper checks P-divisibility conditions from [47,48] but does not prove the map is completely positive at all times or derive the rates from a Hamiltonian.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Non-Markovian noise limits for sustaining entanglement in multiparty quantum states." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OMZ7SJMX

@misc{pith2026250104526,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Non-Markovian noise limits for sustaining entanglement in multiparty quantum states},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OMZ7SJMX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.04526}
}
read the original abstract

The principal resource in several quantum information processing tasks is entanglement. Building practically useful versions of such tasks, one often needs to consider multipartite systems. And in such scenarios, it is impossible to eliminate the effects of environment while distributing the resources. We show how information back-flow from the environment, as a result of non-Markovianity in the system dynamics, affects the resources in multipartite systems, specifically multiparty entanglement. In particular, we find that entanglement of multi-qubit Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger cat states saturate with time to a non-zero value for a non-Markovian dephasing noise. The multi-qubit W states saturate to a higher value. Such non-zero time-saturated values are washed out if the non-Markovianity in the channel is removed. The multi-qubit W states provide a richer set of features, including a non-zero value for an asymptotic number of qubits and an even-odd dichotomy in entanglement with number of qubits. Moving over to a non-Markovian depolarising channel, we find that both cat and W states exhibit revival of entanglement after collapse.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.04526 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of system-environment interaction. Here N parties, A1 to AN each holding a single qubit, share an entangled state and each qubit of the system is interacting with N identical non-interacting reservoirs, R1 to RN . In our prescription, we have an N-qubit system ini￾tialised in either of the states given in Eqs. (1) and (2). These N qubits are considered to be interacting with N reservoirs individual… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Entanglement of the final state under dephasing noise with time when the input state is a GHZ state. The vertical axes are in ebits, while the horizontal ones are dimensionless. To obtain the evolution of the state of the system un￾dergoing the environmental interaction, we solve the mas￾ter equation. In this particular case, mathematically one can write the dynamics of the state as, ρ˙(t) = γ(t) 4ω0 [(σz ⊗ I ⊗ I)ρ(… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Entanglement characterisation of the final state generated by applying dephasing noise on GHZ state. The vertical axes are in ebits, while the horizontal ones are dimensionless. and in that domain the value of logarithmic negativity reduces with time and touches zero after a certain period of time. However, the non-Markovian features in the dy￾namics for s > 2 induce information back-flow from the environment to the… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Entanglement characterisation of the final state generated by applying dephasing noise on W state. The vertical axes are in ebits, while the horizontal ones are dimensionless. We see that similar to the case of GHZ states, the value of output state entanglement (in ter…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Entanglement of the final state under depolarising noise with time when the initial state is W. The vertical axes are in ebits, while the horizontal ones are dimensionless. Kossakowski-Sudarshan-Lindblad master equation. By imposing non-Markovian versions of these chan…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Entanglement of the final state under depolarising noise with time when the initial state is GHZ. The vertical axes are in ebits, while the horizontal ones are dimensionless. IV. CONCLUSION In this article, we presented a detailed analysis re￾garding entanglement chara…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Horodecki, P

    R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, Quantum entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009)

    2009

  2. [2]

    On the other hand the W state can be written as(|0⟩ |14⟩ + |0⟩ |24⟩+|0⟩ |44⟩+|0⟩ |84⟩+|1⟩ |04⟩)/ √

    work page

  3. [3]

    1-Rest" scenario, when the bipartition is betweenone party standing alone with the rest of the parties stand- ing together, and ii) the “highest-cut

    Here the basis for the two-qubit and the three-qubit systems are|j2⟩3 j=0 and |k3⟩7 j=0 respectively. Hence both the states are symmetric under the particular bipartition considered. The above claim can be extended to any N. The noise models considered in such a way that they affect each qubit in the system in the same way. Hence the interaction with the ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Rahaman and M

    R. Rahaman and M. G. Parker, Quantum scheme for se- cret sharing based on local distinguishability, Phys. Rev. A 91, 022330 (2015)

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    Similarly for m = 2, the bipartitions are A1A2 vs

    Herethebasisfor the four-qubit system is considered as|i5⟩15 i=0. Similarly for m = 2, the bipartitions are A1A2 vs. A3A4A5 and all possible such permutations with two parties stand- ing together and the rest three parties are also standing together. In this situation, the GHZ state can be writ- ten as (|02⟩ |03⟩ + |32⟩ |73⟩)/ √ 2, and the W state can be ...

    work page

  6. [6]

    S. Das, T. Chanda, M. Lewenstein, A. Sanpera, A. S. De, and U. Sen, The separability versus entanglement problem, arXiv:1701.02187 (2017)

    arXiv 2017

  7. [7]

    Eggeling and R

    T. Eggeling and R. F. Werner, Hiding classical data in multipartite quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett.89, 097905 (2002)

    2002

  8. [8]

    Zhang and X

    Z.-C. Zhang and X. Zhang, Strong quantum nonlocal- ity in multipartite quantum systems, Phys. Rev. A99, 062108 (2019)

    work page 2019

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    Goswami and S

    S. Goswami and S. Halder, Information locking and its resource-efficient extraction, Phys. Rev. A108, 012405 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    Karlsson, M

    A. Karlsson, M. Koashi, and N. Imoto, Quantum entan- glement for secret sharing and secret splitting, Phys. Rev. A 59, 162 (1999)

    1999

  3. [11]

    Markham and B

    D. Markham and B. C. Sanders, Graph states for quan- tum secret sharing, Phys. Rev. A78, 042309 (2008)

    2008

  4. [12]

    M. B. Plenio, V. Vedral, and P. L. Knight, Quantum error correction in the presence of spontaneous emission, Phys. Rev. A55, 67 (1997)

    1997

  5. [13]

    Koashi and M

    M. Koashi and M. Ueda, Reversing measurement and probabilistic quantum error correction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 2598 (1999)

    1999

  6. [14]

    D. A. Lidar and K. Birgitta Whaley, Decoherence-free subspaces and subsystems, in Irreversible quantum dy- namics (Springer, 2003) pp. 83–120

    2003

  7. [15]

    Shabani and D

    A. Shabani and D. A. Lidar, Theory of initialization-free decoherence-free subspaces and subsystems, Phys. Rev. A 72, 042303 (2005)

    2005

  8. [16]

    A. N. Korotkov and A. N. Jordan, Undoing a weak quan- tum measurement of a solid-state qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 166805 (2006)

    2006

  9. [17]

    Braungardt, A

    S. Braungardt, A. Sen(De), U. Sen, and M. Lewenstein, Error-resistant distributed quantum computation in a trapped ion chain, Phys. Rev. A76, 042307 (2007)

    2007

  10. [18]

    Blume-Kohout, H

    R. Blume-Kohout, H. K. Ng, D. Poulin, and L. Viola, Characterizing the structure of preserved information in quantum processes, Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 030501 (2008)

    2008

  11. [19]

    Nayak, S

    C. Nayak, S. H. Simon, A. Stern, M. Freedman, and S. Das Sarma, Non-abelian anyons and topological quan- tum computation, Rev. Mod. Phys.80, 1083 (2008)

    2008

  12. [20]

    Kim, J.-C

    Y.-S. Kim, J.-C. Lee, O. Kwon, and Y.-H. Kim, Pro- tecting entanglement from decoherence using weak mea- surement and quantum measurement reversal, Nature Physics 8, 117 (2012)

    2012

  13. [21]

    Datta, S

    S. Datta, S. Goswami, T. Pramanik, and A. Majumdar, Preservation of a lower bound of quantum secret key rate in the presence of decoherence, Physics Letters A381, 897 (2017)

    2017

  14. [22]

    Goswami, S

    S. Goswami, S. Ghosh, and A. Majumdar, Protecting quantum correlations in presence of generalised ampli- tude damping channel: the two-qubit case, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 54, 045302 (2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    Gorini, A

    V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, Completely positive dynamical semigroups of n-level sys- tems, Journal of Mathematical Physics17, 821 (1976)

    1976

  16. [24]

    Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Communications in Mathematical Physics 48, 119 (1976)

    G. Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Communications in Mathematical Physics 48, 119 (1976)

    1976

  17. [25]

    Breuer and F

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

    2002

  18. [26]

    Shabani and D

    A. Shabani and D. A. Lidar, Vanishing quantum discord is necessary and sufficient for completely positive maps, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 100402 (2009)

    2009

  19. [27]

    Brodutch, A

    A. Brodutch, A. Datta, K. Modi, A. Rivas, and C. A. Rodríguez-Rosario, Vanishing quantum discord is not necessary for completely positive maps, Phys. Rev. A87, 042301 (2013)

    2013

  20. [28]

    Liu and D

    L. Liu and D. M. Tong, Completely positive maps within the framework of direct-sum decomposition of state space, Phys. Rev. A90, 012305 (2014)

    2014

  21. [29]

    Buscemi, Complete positivity, markovianity, and the quantum data-processing inequality, in the presence of initial system-environment correlations, Phys

    F. Buscemi, Complete positivity, markovianity, and the quantum data-processing inequality, in the presence of initial system-environment correlations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 140502 (2014)

    2014

  22. [30]

    Shabani and D

    A. Shabani and D. A. Lidar, Erratum: Vanishing quan- tum discord is necessary and sufficient for completely positive maps [phys. rev. lett. 102, 100402 (2009)], Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 049901 (2016)

    2009

  23. [31]

    Schmid, K

    D. Schmid, K. Ried, and R. W. Spekkens, Why initial system-environment correlations do not imply the failure of complete positivity: A causal perspective, Phys. Rev. A 100, 022112 (2019)

    2019

  24. [32]

    Colla, N

    A. Colla, N. Neubrand, and H.-P. Breuer, Initial cor- relations in open quantum systems: constructing linear dynamical maps and master equations, New Journal of Physics 24, 123005 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    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

  26. [34]

    Rivas, S

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

    2010

  27. [35]

    D. M. Greenberger, M. A. Horne, and A. Zeilinger, Going beyond bell’s theorem, inBell’s theorem, quantum theory and conceptions of the universe (Springer, 1989) pp. 69– 72

    1989

  28. [36]

    N. D. Mermin, Quantum mysteries revisited, American Journal of Physics58, 731 (1990)

    1990

  29. [37]

    Zeilinger, M

    A. Zeilinger, M. A. Horne, and D. M. Greenberger, Higher-order quantum entanglement, in Proceedings of Squeezed States and Quantum Uncertainty, edited by D. Han, Y. S. Kim, and W. W. Zachary (Nasa Conf. Publ., 9

  30. [38]

    W. Dür, G. Vidal, and J. I. Cirac, Three qubits can be entangled in two inequivalent ways, Phys. Rev. A 62, 062314 (2000)

    2000

  31. [39]

    Sen(De), U

    A. Sen(De), U. Sen, M. Wieśniak, D. Kaszlikowski, and M. Żukowski, Multiqubit w states lead to stronger non- classicalitythangreenberger-horne-zeilingerstates,Phys. Rev. A 68, 062306 (2003)

    2003

  32. [40]

    Simon and J

    C. Simon and J. Kempe, Robustness of multiparty en- tanglement, Phys. Rev. A65, 052327 (2002)

    2002

  33. [41]

    A. R. R. Carvalho, F. Mintert, and A. Buchleitner, Deco- herence and multipartite entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 230501 (2004)

    2004

  34. [42]

    M. Hein, W. Dür, and H.-J. Briegel, Entanglement prop- erties of multipartite entangled states under the influence of decoherence, Phys. Rev. A71, 032350 (2005)

    2005

  35. [43]

    Gühne, F

    O. Gühne, F. Bodoky, and M. Blaauboer, Multiparticle entanglement under the influence of decoherence, Phys. Rev. A 78, 060301 (2008)

    2008

  36. [44]

    Yu and J

    T. Yu and J. Eberly, Sudden death of entanglement, Sci- ence 323, 598 (2009)

    2009

  37. [45]

    Killoran, M

    N. Killoran, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio, Extracting entanglement from identical particles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 150501 (2014)

    2014

  38. [46]

    Mansour and S

    M. Mansour and S. Haddadi, Bipartite entanglement of decohered mixed states generated from maximally en- tangled cluster states, Modern Physics Letters A 36, 2150010 (2021)

    2021

  39. [47]

    Peng, F.-L

    Z.-Y. Peng, F.-L. Wu, J. Li, H.-N. Xue, S.-Y. Liu, and Z.- Y. Wang, Analytical method of multiqubit entanglement robustness in correlated quantum channels, Phys. Rev. A 107, 022405 (2023)

    2023

  40. [48]

    Z.-P. Xu, S. Imai, and O. Gühne, Fate of multiparticle entanglement when one particle becomes classical, Phys. Rev. A 107, L040401 (2023)

    2023

  41. [49]

    Haikka, T

    P. Haikka, T. H. Johnson, and S. Maniscalco, Non- markovianity of local dephasing channels and time- invariant discord, Phys. Rev. A87, 010103 (2013)

    2013

  42. [50]

    Chruściński and F

    D. Chruściński and F. A. Wudarski, Non-markovian ran- dom unitary qubit dynamics, Physics Letters A 377, 1425 (2013)

    2013

  43. [51]

    Chruściński and S

    D. Chruściński and S. Maniscalco, Degree of non- markovianity of quantum evolution, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 120404 (2014)

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.