Exact solution to a Bhatnagar-Gross-Krook-type equation for quantum lattice gases with dephasing noise

Michele Coppola

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 96 references

Exact solution to a Bhatnagar-Gross-Krook-type equation for quantum lattice gases with dephasing noise

T0 review · 2 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 This paper derives an exact solution to the linear BGK-type kinetic equation for the Wigner function of a dephasing quantum lattice gas, showing that the mean-state dynamics is exactly reproduced by an ensemble of classical run-and-tumble…

desk verdict The closed-form kernel is likely right and useful, but the paper's exactness claim rests on an asserted inverse transform that the referee must verify. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.12155 v2 pith:FDHNNYTA submitted 2025-01-21 cond-mat.stat-mech cond-mat.quant-gas

Michele Coppola This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.stat-mechcond-mat.quant-gas

keywords dephasingnoisequantumlatticegasesBhatnagar-Gross-KrookequationWignerfunctionrun-and-tumbleprocessballistic-to-diffusivecrossovercontinuousmeasurementsfreefermions

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper aims to solve, in closed form, the kinetic equation that governs the mean-state dynamics of free fermions (and, by extension, bosons) on a lattice under continuous local measurements, i.e., dephasing noise. In the continuum limit this equation reduces to a special Bhatnagar-Gross-Krook (BGK) equation without energy conservation, and the paper proves that its exact solution is built from classical run-and-tumble trajectories: particles fly ballistically and randomly reset their velocity at a rate set by the monitoring frequency. If correct, the result gives the exact time-dependent density profile of a monitored quantum gas as a simple convolution with a universal kernel, and it recovers the ballistic-to-diffusive crossover without any numerical simulation. A sympathetic reader would care because the exact kernel provides a complete, parameter-free description of dephasing-induced transport in one-dimensional quantum lattice gases and validates the quasiparticle picture for monitored systems.

What carries the argument

The central object is the scattering probability distribution $\beta(x,t|y,k)$ together with the Wigner propagator $K(x,p,t|y,k)$ that it generates. The balance equation (IV.2) encodes a run-and-tumble process: after each collision the quasiparticle momentum is drawn uniformly from the Brillouin zone, and flight times are exponentially distributed with rate $\lambda$. The exact solution is obtained by applying Fourier and Laplace transforms, using the velocity distribution $\mu(v) = \frac{1}{\pi\sqrt{1-v^2}}\Theta(1-|v|)$ on $[-1,1]$, and inverting the transformed series to produce the closed-form kernel $f(x,t)$. That kernel carries the whole time evolution of the density and gives the explicit crossover between ballistic and diffusive regimes.

What would settle it

Compute the exact correlation-matrix dynamics (II.4) on a lattice of modest size (say 100 sites) with a sharply localized initial state, and compare the density profile at short times $t\ll\lambda^{-1}$ with the kinetic prediction (IV.10); if discrepancies do not vanish as the lattice spacing approaches zero, the continuum-limit bridge fails. A complementary experimental falsifier is to measure the density profile of monitored fermions at the crossover time $t\sim\lambda^{-1}$ and check it against the universal kernel $f(x,t)$ of Eq. (IV.6), since any deviation beyond continuum-limit error would invalidate the exact solution.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Wigner function $n(x,p,t)$ satisfying $\partial_t n + v(p)\,\partial_x n = \lambda(\rho(x,t)-n(x,p,t))$ admits an exact solution through the Wigner propagator $K(x,p,t|y,k)$. The propagator is expressed in terms of the scattering probability distribution $\beta(x,t|y,k)$, which solves the balance equation (IV.2). The paper proves analytically that $\beta(x,t|y,k) = \phi(t)\delta(x-y-t\,v(k)) + \int_0^t ds\, \phi(s)\, f(x-y-s\,v(k),\,t-s)$, where $f(x,t) = \frac{\lambda e^{-\lambda t}}{\pi\sqrt{t^2-x^2}}\left[1 + \frac{\pi\lambda}{2}\sqrt{t^2-x^2}\left(I_0(\lambda\sqrt{t^2-x^2}) + L_0(\lambda\sqrt{t^2-x^2})\right)\right]\Theta(t-|x|)$, with $I_0$ the modified Bessel function and $L_0$ the modified Struve function. Consequently, for any initial state that is homogeneous in momentum, the momentum distribution relaxes as $n(p,t)=(1-e^{-\lambda t})\int dk/(2\pi)\,n(k,0)+e^{-\lambda t}n(p,0)$, and for an arbitrary initial density profile the density at time $t$ is $\rho(x,t)=\lambda^{-1}\int dy\, f(x-y,t)\,\rho(y,0)$. This shows that the ensemble-averaged Wigner dynamics of monitored free fermions and bosons is exactly equivalent to a classical run-and-tumble process.

Load-bearing premise

The main load-bearing premise is that the Wigner function varies slowly enough on the lattice and momentum-grid scales that dropping higher-order derivatives in the continuum limit faithfully represents the exact lattice dynamics.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For any initial density profile, the exact density at all later times is a convolution with the single kernel $f(x,t)$, so no simulation of the microscopic correlation matrix is needed to predict charge or spin transport.
The ballistic-to-diffusive crossover occurs at the characteristic time $t\sim\lambda^{-1}$, with mean squared displacement $d(t)=t/\lambda + (e^{-\lambda t}-1)/\lambda^2$, which scales as $t^2/2$ for $\lambda t\ll 1$ and as $t/\lambda$ for $\lambda t\gg 1$.
For an initially localized density, the asymptotic Wigner profile is the light-cone shape $\Theta(t-|x|)/(\pi\sqrt{t^2-x^2})$ in the ballistic regime and the Gaussian $\sqrt{\lambda/(2\pi t)}\,e^{-\lambda x^2/(2t)}$ in the diffusive regime, the latter obeying Fick's law with diffusion constant $D=1/(2\lambda)$.
A homogeneous-in-momentum initial state relaxes exponentially to the infinite-temperature state, with the momentum distribution approaching a flat distribution at rate $\lambda$.
Because the same kinetic equation governs dephasing bosons, the exact solution applies beyond free fermions to any hopping lattice gas subject to the same dephasing noise.

Reading between the lines

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

A natural extension not pursued in the paper is to test the universality of the kernel $f(x,t)$ by preparing a superposition of two domain walls and measuring the density interference pattern around $t\sim\lambda^{-1}$, where the ballistic and diffusive contributions are both significant.
The balance-equation method should generalize to non-uniform post-collision momentum distributions; replacing the uniform velocity distribution by a momentum-dependent scattering rate would produce a modified kernel whose long-time tail could exhibit superdiffusive transport, as the momentum-dependent dephasing case mentioned in the paper suggests.
Since the density evolution collapses to a convolution, the same exact formalism may be extended to compute higher-order correlation functions or full counting statistics of the monitored gas, where the run-and-tumble picture would provide a classical stochastic representation beyond the mean density.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Here is the short version: this paper solves, in closed form, the BGK-type kinetic equation for the Wigner function of monitored free fermions in the continuum limit, and it gives a clean convolution formula for the density profile. That result is genuinely new as far as I can tell, and it is well checked against the microscopic Lindblad dynamics. The weak spot is not the continuum limit—which is an acknowledged approximation and standard in this line of work—but the unproved inverse Laplace–Fourier transform in Eq. (A.8). Everything downstream depends on that "One can show". The checks in Sec. V only constrain low moments and the large-time Gaussian, so they would not catch a wrong smooth correction or a bad coefficient near the light cone.

What the paper does well: the mapping to run-and-tumble dynamics is clearly explained, the balance equation is a sensible starting point, the normalization, second moment, ballistic and diffusive limits are consistent, and the numerics match. The author also honestly flags the continuum-limit caveat and even notes the discretization mismatch in the double-domain-wall initial state. That is careful.

The soft spots, in proportion: (1) Eq. (A.8) is asserted. For a paper whose main claim is exactness, that step needs a derivation or a reference. It may well be true, but the reader cannot check it. (2) The connection to the Lévy-walk literature is underdeveloped. The kernel f(x,t) resembles known results for Lévy walks with velocity fluctuations [83,84], and the paper cites those works for the balance equation but does not say whether this closed form already appears there. If it does, the novelty claim weakens. (3) Minor: the boson extension is mentioned but not demonstrated; it is plausible but the paper does not show the correlation-matrix equation for bosons.

Who is this for? People working on monitored free fermions, dephasing-induced transport, and kinetic theory of measurement-induced dynamics. They will get a useful benchmark formula. I would cite it if I needed the exact density profile.

Recommendation: send to peer review. The central solution is likely correct and is a useful contribution, but the referee must be asked to verify Eq. (A.8) and the relation to known Lévy-walk kernels. That is exactly what referees are for.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper studies the mean-state dynamics of free fermions (and, by extension, bosons) on a one-dimensional lattice under continuous monitoring of local occupation numbers, which is described by a Lindblad equation with dephasing noise. In the continuum limit, the correlation-matrix equation is mapped to a BGK-type kinetic equation for the Wigner function. The paper claims an exact closed-form solution to this kinetic equation: the scattering probability β is given by Eqs. (IV.5)–(IV.6), the Wigner propagator by Eq. (IV.3), and the density profile by a convolution with the kernel f(x,t) in Eq. (IV.10). The solution is derived from a run-and-tumble renewal equation, and its predictions for the mean-squared displacement and density profiles are compared with numerical integration of the microscopic Lindblad dynamics.

Significance. If correct, the result provides a rare exact propagator for a kinetic equation with a nonlocal collision term, and it rigorously establishes the equivalence between the Wigner dynamics of monitored free particles and classical run-and-tumble processes. The paper is written clearly, contains no free parameters, and its final formulas are explicit and easy to use; the agreement with microscopic numerics in Figs. 2–3 is a genuine strength. The main caveat is that the key inverse transform in Eq. (A.8) is not proved, which is a load-bearing gap in the exactness claim.

major comments (2)

[Appendix A, Eq. (A.8)] The central exactness claim rests on the inverse Laplace-Fourier transform identity in Eq. (A.8), which is asserted with 'One can show' and no derivation. Since Eqs. (IV.5)–(IV.6), (IV.9), and (IV.10) all inherit this identity, and the checks in Sec. V test only moments and asymptotics, the authors should provide a complete proof of (A.8), for example by direct evaluation of the Bromwich integral or by verifying that f(x,t) in (IV.6) satisfies the balance equation (IV.2).
[Sec. IV, Eq. (IV.9)] The identity ∫ dk/(2π) β(x,t|y,k) = f(x−y,t) is stated without proof, and it is needed for the central result (IV.10). Please provide a derivation or explicitly show that it follows from (A.8); as written, the step 'applying the convolution theorem analogously to the Appendix A' is too terse for a result that carries the main physical application.

minor comments (4)

[Appendix A, Eq. (A.5)] The notation F[μ(x)](tz) is confusing because μ is a function of the velocity v, not of x; please use a clearer notation, e.g., F[μ](tz).
[Fig. 3 caption and Sec. V] The figure caption states λ=0.1, while the body text uses λ=0.02; please correct the inconsistency, as the quoted crossover times t≈25,50,100 correspond to λ=0.02.
[Sec. IV, Eq. (IV.10)] The paper does not explicitly state that f(x,t) integrates to λ, which is useful for checking normalization; consider adding a sentence.
[Sec. III, Eq. (III.2)] The derivation of the kinetic equation from Eq. (II.4) is cited to Refs. [19,72] but not summarized; a brief statement of the regime of validity (slow variation on the lattice scale) would help readers assess the applicability of the exact solution to the microscopic model.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the BGK-type solution is derived from a standard renewal equation and benchmarked against independent numerics; the only self-citation is not load-bearing, and the unproved inversion in Eq. (A.8) is a proof gap rather than a circular step.

full rationale

The paper's central result is the analytical solution (IV.5)-(IV.6) of the balance equation (IV.2), which is a standard run-and-tumble renewal equation imported from Refs. [83,84]; the solution is obtained by Fourier-Laplace transformation in Appendix A. The closed form f(x,t) is not defined as the answer but asserted as the inverse transform of an explicit series in Eq. (A.8), so the derivation does not presuppose the target formula. No parameter is fitted and then renamed a prediction: the ballistic-diffusive crossover is tested against numerical integration of the microscopic correlation-matrix equation (II.4) and against independent works [19,74,95]. The continuum limit leading to the kinetic equation (III.2) is an acknowledged physical approximation, not a circular definition. The only self-citation, Ref. [72], supports the bosonic extension and one route to the kinetic equation, but the fermionic kinetic equation is also attributed to the independent Ref. [19], and the main propagator result does not rest on the author's prior results. The unproved 'One can show' inverse transform in Eq. (A.8) is a verification gap that could invalidate the exactness claim if incorrect, but it is not circularity under the definitions used here; accordingly the score is low rather than zero only because of the minor non-load-bearing self-citation.

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

The central claim rests on the continuum-limit mapping and the classical-quasiparticle interpretation of the Wigner function. No free parameters are fitted in the derivation; λ and the initial condition are physical inputs. No new physical entities are postulated.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The Wigner function n(x,p,t) varies slowly on lattice and Brillouin-zone scales, justifying the continuum limit and the neglect of higher-order derivatives.
In Sec. III, after Eq. (III.1), the paper states 'we assume that the Wigner function n(x,p,t) varies slowly on the microscopic scales... Under this assumption, we can take the continuum limit.' This is the bridge from the exact lattice equation (II.4) to the kinetic equation (III.2).
domain assumption The initial Wigner function can be interpreted as a distribution of independent classical quasiparticles undergoing stochastic momentum resets.
In Sec. III, 'The key assumption is that the initial Wigner function n(x,p,0) can be interpreted as a distribution of classical, noninteracting quasiparticles.' This makes the probabilistic representation and the balance equation (IV.2) applicable.
domain assumption Measurement events form a Poisson process with rate λ, so the waiting-time distribution is φ(t)=λe^{-λt}.
This is stated in Sec. II (monitoring rate λ/2 leading to dephasing rate λ) and used throughout Sec. IV in the balance equation.
standard math The uniform momentum reset after collision is equivalent to drawing velocities from μ(v)=1/(π√(1-v^2)).
In Appendix A, Eq. (A.3), the velocity distribution follows from the change of variables v=sin p; this is a mathematical consequence, not an extra physical assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Exact solution to a Bhatnagar-Gross-Krook-type equation for quantum lattice gases with dephasing noise." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FDHNNYTA

@misc{pith2026250112155,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Exact solution to a Bhatnagar-Gross-Krook-type equation for quantum lattice gases with dephasing noise},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FDHNNYTA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.12155}
}

read the original abstract

The mean-state dynamics of free fermions subject to random projective measurements of local occupation number operators is governed by a Lindblad equation with dephasing noise. In the continuum limit, the equation of motion for the correlation matrix is mapped to a kinetic equation for the Wigner function, which corresponds to a special case of the Bhatnagar-Gross-Krook (BGK) equation without energy conservation. Our main result is the solution to the kinetic equation, showing that the Wigner dynamics emerges from stochastic sampling of classical run-and-tumble processes. As an application, we recover the crossover between ballistic and diffusive transport regimes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.12155 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Evolution of the mean squared displacement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

[1]

53 (Princeton university press, 2018)

John V on Neumann, Mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics: New edition , V ol. 53 (Princeton university press, 2018)

2018
[2]

81 (Princeton University Press, 2014)

John Archibald Wheeler and Wojciech Hubert Zurek, Quantum theory and measurement, V ol. 81 (Princeton University Press, 2014)

2014
[3]

The problem of measurement,

Eugene P Wigner, “The problem of measurement,” American Journal of Physics 31, 6–15 (1963)

1963
[4]

Three measurement problems,

Tim Maudlin, “Three measurement problems,” topoi 14, 7–15 (1995)

1995
[5]

Models of wave-function collapse, un- derlying theories, and experimental tests,

Angelo Bassi, Kinjalk Lochan, Seema Satin, Tejinder P Singh, and Hendrik Ulbricht, “Models of wave-function collapse, un- derlying theories, and experimental tests,” Reviews of Modern Physics 85, 471–527 (2013)

2013
[6]

Measurement-induced phase transitions in the dynamics of en- tanglement,

Brian Skinner, Jonathan Ruhman, and Adam Nahum, “Measurement-induced phase transitions in the dynamics of en- tanglement,” Physical Review X 9, 031009 (2019)

2019
[7]

Theory of the phase transition in random unitary circuits with measurements,

Yimu Bao, Soonwon Choi, and Ehud Altman, “Theory of the phase transition in random unitary circuits with measurements,” Physical Review B 101, 104301 (2020)

2020
[8]

Unitary-projective entanglement dynamics,

Amos Chan, Rahul M Nandkishore, Michael Pretko, and Graeme Smith, “Unitary-projective entanglement dynamics,” Physical Review B 99, 224307 (2019)

2019

Show all 96 references

[9]

Quantum zeno effect and the many-body entanglement transition,

Yaodong Li, Xiao Chen, and Matthew PA Fisher, “Quantum zeno effect and the many-body entanglement transition,” Phys- ical Review B 98, 205136 (2018)

2018
[10]

Quantum error correction in scrambling dynamics and measurement-induced phase transition,

Soonwon Choi, Yimu Bao, Xiao-Liang Qi, and Ehud Alt- man, “Quantum error correction in scrambling dynamics and measurement-induced phase transition,” Physical Review Let- ters 125, 030505 (2020)

2020
[11]

Entanglement transition from variable-strength weak measurements,

Marcin Szyniszewski, Alessandro Romito, and Henning Schomerus, “Entanglement transition from variable-strength weak measurements,” Physical Review B 100, 064204 (2019)

2019
[12]

Measurement-induced criticality in ran- dom quantum circuits,

Chao-Ming Jian, Yi-Zhuang You, Romain Vasseur, and An- dreas WW Ludwig, “Measurement-induced criticality in ran- dom quantum circuits,” Physical Review B101, 104302 (2020)

2020
[13]

Measurement-induced topological entanglement transitions in symmetric random quantum circuits,

Ali Lavasani, Yahya Alavirad, and Maissam Barkeshli, “Measurement-induced topological entanglement transitions in symmetric random quantum circuits,” Nature Physics 17, 342– 347 (2021)

2021
[14]

Critical prop- erties of the measurement-induced transition in random quan- tum circuits,

Aidan Zabalo, Michael J Gullans, Justin H Wilson, Sarang Gopalakrishnan, David A Huse, and JH Pixley, “Critical prop- erties of the measurement-induced transition in random quan- tum circuits,” Physical Review B 101, 060301 (2020)

2020
[15]

Measurement-induced criticality in extended and long-range unitary circuits,

Shraddha Sharma, Xhek Turkeshi, Rosario Fazio, and Mar- cello Dalmonte, “Measurement-induced criticality in extended and long-range unitary circuits,” SciPost Physics Core 5, 023 (2022)

2022
[16]

Measurement-induced transition in long- range interacting quantum circuits,

Maxwell Block, Yimu Bao, Soonwon Choi, Ehud Altman, and Norman Y Yao, “Measurement-induced transition in long- range interacting quantum circuits,” Physical Review Letters 128, 010604 (2022)

2022
[17]

Measurement-induced criticality in (2+ 1)-dimensional hybrid quantum circuits,

Xhek Turkeshi, Rosario Fazio, and Marcello Dalmonte, “Measurement-induced criticality in (2+ 1)-dimensional hybrid quantum circuits,” Physical Review B 102, 014315 (2020)

2020
[18]

Emergent conformal symmetry in nonunitary random dy- namics of free fermions,

Xiao Chen, Yaodong Li, Matthew PA Fisher, and Andrew Lu- cas, “Emergent conformal symmetry in nonunitary random dy- namics of free fermions,” Physical Review Research 2, 033017 (2020)

2020
[19]

Entangle- ment in a fermion chain under continuous monitoring,

Xiangyu Cao, Antoine Tilloy, and Andrea De Luca, “Entangle- ment in a fermion chain under continuous monitoring,” SciPost Physics 7, 024 (2019)

2019
[20]

Growth of entanglement entropy under lo- cal projective measurements,

Michele Coppola, Emanuele Tirrito, Dragi Karevski, and Mario Collura, “Growth of entanglement entropy under lo- cal projective measurements,” Physical Review B 105, 094303 (2022)

2022
[21]

Theory of free fermions under random projective mea- surements,

Igor Poboiko, Paul P ¨opperl, Igor V Gornyi, and Alexander D Mirlin, “Theory of free fermions under random projective mea- surements,” Physical Review X 13, 041046 (2023)

2023
[22]

Measurement- induced phase transition in free bosons,

Kazuki Yokomizo and Yuto Ashida, “Measurement- induced phase transition in free bosons,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.19768 (2024)

2024 arXiv
[23]

Measurement-induced transitions beyond gaussian- ity: A single particle description,

Luca Lumia, Emanuele Tirrito, Rosario Fazio, and Mario Collura, “Measurement-induced transitions beyond gaussian- ity: A single particle description,” Physical Review Research 6, 023176 (2024)

2024
[24]

En- tanglement transition in a monitored free-fermion chain: From extended criticality to area law,

Ori Alberton, Michael Buchhold, and Sebastian Diehl, “En- tanglement transition in a monitored free-fermion chain: From extended criticality to area law,” Physical Review Letters 126, 170602 (2021)

2021
[25]

Entangled multiplets and spreading of quantum correlations in a continuously monitored tight-binding chain,

Federico Carollo and Vincenzo Alba, “Entangled multiplets and spreading of quantum correlations in a continuously monitored tight-binding chain,” Phys. Rev. B106, L220304 (2022)

2022
[26]

Dis- ordered monitored free fermions,

Marcin Szyniszewski, Oliver Lunt, and Arijeet Pal, “Dis- ordered monitored free fermions,” Physical Review B 108, 165126 (2023)

2023
[27]

E ffective theory for the measurement-induced phase transition of dirac fermions,

M Buchhold, Y Minoguchi, A Altland, and S Diehl, “E ffective theory for the measurement-induced phase transition of dirac fermions,” Physical Review X 11, 041004 (2021)

2021
[28]

Topo- logical transitions in weakly monitored free fermions,

Graham Kells, Dganit Meidan, and Alessandro Romito, “Topo- logical transitions in weakly monitored free fermions,” SciPost Physics 14, 031 (2023)

2023
[29]

Measurement-induced phase transition in periodically driven free-fermionic systems,

Pallabi Chatterjee and Ranjan Modak, “Measurement-induced phase transition in periodically driven free-fermionic systems,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01917 (2024)

2024 arXiv
[30]

Entanglement transition in the projective transverse field ising model,

Nicolai Lang and Hans Peter B¨uchler, “Entanglement transition in the projective transverse field ising model,” Physical Review B 102, 094204 (2020)

2020
[31]

Measurement-induced dy- namics of many-body systems at quantum criticality,

Davide Rossini and Ettore Vicari, “Measurement-induced dy- namics of many-body systems at quantum criticality,” Physical Review B 102, 035119 (2020)

2020
[32]

Measurement-altered ising quantum criticality,

Sara Murciano, Pablo Sala, Yue Liu, Roger SK Mong, and Jason Alicea, “Measurement-altered ising quantum criticality,” Physical Review X 13, 041042 (2023)

2023
[33]

En- tanglement transitions in the quantum ising chain: A compar- ison between di fferent unravelings of the same lindbladian,

Giulia Piccitto, Angelo Russomanno, and Davide Rossini, “En- tanglement transitions in the quantum ising chain: A compar- ison between di fferent unravelings of the same lindbladian,” Physical Review B 105, 064305 (2022)

2022
[34]

Dissipative floquet dynamics: From steady state to measurement induced criticality in trapped-ion chains,

Piotr Sierant, Giuliano Chiriac `o, Federica M Surace, Shraddha Sharma, Xhek Turkeshi, Marcello Dalmonte, Rosario Fazio, and Guido Pagano, “Dissipative floquet dynamics: From steady state to measurement induced criticality in trapped-ion chains,” Quantum 6, 638 (2022)

2022
[35]

Measurement-induced entangle- ment transitions in the quantum ising chain: From infinite to zero clicks,

Xhek Turkeshi, Alberto Biella, Rosario Fazio, Marcello Dal- monte, and Marco Schir ´o, “Measurement-induced entangle- ment transitions in the quantum ising chain: From infinite to zero clicks,” Physical Review B 103, 224210 (2021)

2021
[36]

Entanglement in a one-dimensional critical state after measurements,

Zhou Yang, Dan Mao, and Chao-Ming Jian, “Entanglement in a one-dimensional critical state after measurements,” Physical Review B 108, 165120 (2023)

2023
[37]

Nonlocality and entanglement in measured critical 8 quantum ising chains,

Zack Weinstein, Rohith Sajith, Ehud Altman, and Samuel J Garratt, “Nonlocality and entanglement in measured critical 8 quantum ising chains,” Physical Review B107, 245132 (2023)

2023
[38]

Measurement-induced quantum criticality under continuous monitoring,

Yohei Fuji and Yuto Ashida, “Measurement-induced quantum criticality under continuous monitoring,” Physical Review B 102, 054302 (2020)

2020
[39]

Measurement-induced tran- sitions of the entanglement scaling law in ultracold gases with controllable dissipation,

Shimpei Goto and Ippei Danshita, “Measurement-induced tran- sitions of the entanglement scaling law in ultracold gases with controllable dissipation,” Physical Review A 102, 033316 (2020)

2020
[40]

Generalized quantum mea- surements with matrix product states: Entanglement phase tran- sition and clusterization,

Elmer VH Doggen, Yuval Gefen, Igor V Gornyi, Alexander D Mirlin, and Dmitry G Polyakov, “Generalized quantum mea- surements with matrix product states: Entanglement phase tran- sition and clusterization,” Physical Review Research 4, 023146 (2022)

2022
[41]

Lecture notes on Generalised Hydrodynam- ics,

Benjamin Doyon, “Lecture notes on Generalised Hydrodynam- ics,” SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes , 18 (2020)

2020
[42]

Generalized hydrodynamics with space-time inhomogeneous interactions,

Alvise Bastianello, Vincenzo Alba, and Jean-S ´ebastien Caux, “Generalized hydrodynamics with space-time inhomogeneous interactions,” Physical Review Letters 123, 130602 (2019)

2019
[43]

Domain wall melting across a defect,

Luca Capizzi, Stefano Scopa, Federico Rottoli, and Pasquale Calabrese, “Domain wall melting across a defect,” Europhysics Letters 141, 31002 (2023)

2023
[44]

Exact hydrodynamic solution of a double domain wall melting in the spin-1/2 XXZ model,

Stefano Scopa, Pasquale Calabrese, and J ´erˆome Dubail, “Exact hydrodynamic solution of a double domain wall melting in the spin-1/2 XXZ model,” SciPost Phys. 12, 207 (2022)

2022
[45]

Conformal field theory for inhomogeneous one- dimensional quantum systems: the example of non-interacting fermi gases,

Jerome Dubail, Jean-Marie St ´ephan, Jacopo Viti, and Pasquale Calabrese, “Conformal field theory for inhomogeneous one- dimensional quantum systems: the example of non-interacting fermi gases,” SciPost Physics 2, 002 (2017)

2017
[46]

Analytic solution of the domain-wall nonequilibrium stationary state,

Mario Collura, Andrea De Luca, and Jacopo Viti, “Analytic solution of the domain-wall nonequilibrium stationary state,” Physical Review B 97, 081111 (2018)

2018
[47]

Domain wall melting in the spin-1 2 xxz spin chain: Emergent luttinger liquid with a fractal quasiparticle charge,

Mario Collura, Andrea De Luca, Pasquale Calabrese, and J´erˆome Dubail, “Domain wall melting in the spin-1 2 xxz spin chain: Emergent luttinger liquid with a fractal quasiparticle charge,” Physical Review B 102, 180409 (2020)

2020
[48]

Generalized-hydrodynamic ap- proach to inhomogeneous quenches: correlations, entangle- ment and quantum e ffects,

Vincenzo Alba, Bruno Bertini, Maurizio Fagotti, Lorenzo Piroli, and Paola Ruggiero, “Generalized-hydrodynamic ap- proach to inhomogeneous quenches: correlations, entangle- ment and quantum e ffects,” Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2021, 114004 (2021)

2021
[49]

Generalized hydrody- namics in the one-dimensional bose gas: theory and experi- ments,

Isabelle Bouchoule and J ´erˆome Dubail, “Generalized hydrody- namics in the one-dimensional bose gas: theory and experi- ments,” Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experi- ment 2022, 014003 (2022)

2022
[50]

Solvable hydrodynamics of quantum integrable systems,

Vir B Bulchandani, Romain Vasseur, Christoph Karrasch, and Joel E Moore, “Solvable hydrodynamics of quantum integrable systems,” Physical review letters 119, 220604 (2017)

2017
[51]

Bethe-boltzmann hydrodynamics and spin transport in the xxz chain,

Vir B Bulchandani, Romain Vasseur, Christoph Karrasch, and Joel E Moore, “Bethe-boltzmann hydrodynamics and spin transport in the xxz chain,” Physical Review B 97, 045407 (2018)

2018
[52]

Soliton gases and generalized hydrodynamics,

Benjamin Doyon, Takato Yoshimura, and Jean-S ´ebastien Caux, “Soliton gases and generalized hydrodynamics,” Physi- cal review letters 120, 045301 (2018)

2018
[53]

Generalized hydrodynamics on an atom chip,

Max Schemmer, Isabelle Bouchoule, Benjamin Doyon, and J’erome Dubail, “Generalized hydrodynamics on an atom chip,” Physical review letters 122, 090601 (2019)

2019
[54]

Generalized hydrodynamics in strongly interacting 1d bose gases,

Neel Malvania, Yicheng Zhang, Yuan Le, Jerome Dubail, Mar- cos Rigol, and David S Weiss, “Generalized hydrodynamics in strongly interacting 1d bose gases,” Science373, 1129–1133 (2021)

2021
[55]

Entangling many-body bound states with propagative modes in bose-hubbard systems,

Mario Collura, Helge Aufderheide, Guillaume Roux, and Dragi Karevski, “Entangling many-body bound states with propagative modes in bose-hubbard systems,” Physical Review A 86, 013615 (2012)

2012
[56]

Hy- drodynamic description of hard-core bosons on a galileo ramp,

Pierre Wendenbaum, Mario Collura, and Dragi Karevski, “Hy- drodynamic description of hard-core bosons on a galileo ramp,” Physical Review A 87, 023624 (2013)

2013
[57]

Interplay between transport and quantum coherences in free fermionic systems,

Tony Jin, Tristan Gauti ´e, Alexandre Krajenbrink, Paola Rug- giero, and Takato Yoshimura, “Interplay between transport and quantum coherences in free fermionic systems,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 54, 404001 (2021)

2021
[58]

The effect of atom losses on the distribution of rapidities in the one-dimensional bose gas,

Isabelle Bouchoule, Benjamin Doyon, and Jerome Dubail, “The effect of atom losses on the distribution of rapidities in the one-dimensional bose gas,” SciPost Physics 9, 044 (2020)

2020
[59]

Quantum master equation with balanced gain and loss,

Dennis Dast, Daniel Haag, Holger Cartarius, and G ¨unter Wun- ner, “Quantum master equation with balanced gain and loss,” Physical Review A 90, 052120 (2014)

2014
[60]

Noninteracting fermionic systems with localized losses: Exact results in the hydrodynamic limit,

Vincenzo Alba and Federico Carollo, “Noninteracting fermionic systems with localized losses: Exact results in the hydrodynamic limit,” Physical Review B 105, 054303 (2022)

2022
[61]

Hydrodynamics of quan- tum entropies in ising chains with linear dissipation,

Vincenzo Alba and Federico Carollo, “Hydrodynamics of quan- tum entropies in ising chains with linear dissipation,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 55, 074002 (2022)

2022
[62]

Dissipative quasiparticle picture for quadratic markovian open quantum systems,

Federico Carollo and Vincenzo Alba, “Dissipative quasiparticle picture for quadratic markovian open quantum systems,” Phys- ical Review B 105, 144305 (2022)

2022
[63]

Hydrodynamics of weak integrability breaking,

Alvise Bastianello, Andrea De Luca, and Romain Vasseur, “Hydrodynamics of weak integrability breaking,” Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2021, 114003 (2021)

2021
[64]

Generalized hydrodynamics with dephasing noise,

Alvise Bastianello, Jacopo De Nardis, and Andrea De Luca, “Generalized hydrodynamics with dephasing noise,” Physical Review B 102, 161110 (2020)

2020
[65]

Higher-order generalized hydrodynamics in one dimension: The noninteracting test,

Maurizio Fagotti, “Higher-order generalized hydrodynamics in one dimension: The noninteracting test,” Physical Review B96, 220302 (2017)

2017
[66]

Locally quasi-stationary states in noninter- acting spin chains,

Maurizio Fagotti, “Locally quasi-stationary states in noninter- acting spin chains,” SciPost Physics 8, 048 (2020)

2020
[67]

Nonequilibrium dynamics of noninteracting fermions in a trap,

David S Dean, Pierre Le Doussal, Satya N Majumdar, and Gr´egory Schehr, “Nonequilibrium dynamics of noninteracting fermions in a trap,” Europhysics Letters 126, 20006 (2019)

2019
[68]

Quantum mechanics as a statistical theory,

Jos ´e E Moyal, “Quantum mechanics as a statistical theory,” in Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical So- ciety, V ol. 45 (Cambridge University Press, 1949) pp. 99–124

1949
[69]

Exact entanglement growth of a one- dimensional hard-core quantum gas during a free expansion,

Stefano Scopa, Alexandre Krajenbrink, Pasquale Calabrese, and J ´erˆome Dubail, “Exact entanglement growth of a one- dimensional hard-core quantum gas during a free expansion,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical54, 404002 (2021)

2021
[70]

Quantum generalized hydrodynamics,

Paola Ruggiero, Pasquale Calabrese, Benjamin Doyon, and J´erˆome Dubail, “Quantum generalized hydrodynamics,” Physi- cal review letters 124, 140603 (2020)

2020
[71]

Conformal field theory on top of a breathing one-dimensional gas of hard core bosons,

Paola Ruggiero, Yannis Brun, and Jerome Dubail, “Conformal field theory on top of a breathing one-dimensional gas of hard core bosons,” SciPost Physics 6, 051 (2019)

2019
[72]

Wigner dynamics for quantum gases under inhomogeneous gain and loss processes with dephasing,

Michele Coppola, Gabriel T Landi, and Dragi Karevski, “Wigner dynamics for quantum gases under inhomogeneous gain and loss processes with dephasing,” Physical Review A 107, 052213 (2023)

2023
[73]

A model for collision processes in gases. i. small amplitude pro- cesses in charged and neutral one-component systems,

Prabhu Lal Bhatnagar, Eugene P Gross, and Max Krook, “A model for collision processes in gases. i. small amplitude pro- cesses in charged and neutral one-component systems,” Physi- cal review 94, 511 (1954)

1954
[74]

Continuously monitored quantum systems beyond lindblad dynamics,

Guglielmo Lami, Alessandro Santini, and Mario Collura, “Continuously monitored quantum systems beyond lindblad dynamics,” New Journal of Physics 26, 023041 (2024)

2024
[75]

Statistical mechanics 9 of interacting run-and-tumble bacteria,

Julien Tailleur and Michael E Cates, “Statistical mechanics 9 of interacting run-and-tumble bacteria,” Physical review letters 100, 218103 (2008)

2008
[76]

coli in Motion (Springer, 2004)

Howard C Berg, E. coli in Motion (Springer, 2004)

2004
[77]

Running and tumbling with e. coli in polymeric solutions,

AE Patteson, Arvind Gopinath, M Goulian, and PE Arratia, “Running and tumbling with e. coli in polymeric solutions,” Scientific reports 5, 15761 (2015)

2015
[78]

Mod- eling e. coli tumbles by rotational di ffusion. implications for chemotaxis,

Jonathan Saragosti, Pascal Silberzan, and Axel Buguin, “Mod- eling e. coli tumbles by rotational di ffusion. implications for chemotaxis,” PloS one 7, e35412 (2012)

2012
[79]

Ac- tive brownian particles and run-and-tumble particles: A com- parative study,

Alexandre P Solon, Michael E Cates, and Julien Tailleur, “Ac- tive brownian particles and run-and-tumble particles: A com- parative study,” The European Physical Journal Special Topics 224, 1231–1262 (2015)

2015
[80]

Active matter trans- port and jamming on disordered landscapes,

C Reichhardt and CJ Olson Reichhardt, “Active matter trans- port and jamming on disordered landscapes,” Physical Review E 90, 012701 (2014)

2014
[81]

When are active brow- nian particles and run-and-tumble particles equivalent? con- sequences for motility-induced phase separation,

Michael E Cates and Julien Tailleur, “When are active brow- nian particles and run-and-tumble particles equivalent? con- sequences for motility-induced phase separation,” Europhysics Letters 101, 20010 (2013)

2013
[82]

Hydrodynamics of soft active matter,

M Cristina Marchetti, Jean-Franc ¸ois Joanny, Sriram Ra- maswamy, Tanniemola B Liverpool, Jacques Prost, Madan Rao, and R Aditi Simha, “Hydrodynamics of soft active matter,” Re- views of modern physics 85, 1143–1189 (2013)

2013
[83]

L´evy walks with velocity fluctuations,

S Denisov, Vasily Zaburdaev, and Peter H ¨anggi, “L´evy walks with velocity fluctuations,” Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics 85, 031148 (2012)

2012
[84]

L ´evy walks,

Vasily Zaburdaev, Sergey Denisov, and Joseph Klafter, “L ´evy walks,” Reviews of Modern Physics 87, 483–530 (2015)

2015
[85]

Gerald D Mahan, Many-particle physics (Springer Science & Business Media, 2013)

2013
[86]

Jørgen Rammer, Quantum field theory of non-equilibrium states (Cambridge University Press, 2011)

2011
[87]

Alex Kamenev, Field theory of non-equilibrium systems (Cam- bridge University Press, 2023)

2023
[88]

Exact bethe ansatz spectrum of a tight-binding chain with de- phasing noise,

Mariya V Medvedyeva, Fabian HL Essler, and Toma ˇz Prosen, “Exact bethe ansatz spectrum of a tight-binding chain with de- phasing noise,” Physical review letters 117, 137202 (2016)

2016
[89]

Exact solution for a diffusive nonequilibrium steady state of an open quantum chain,

Marko ˇZnidariˇc, “Exact solution for a diffusive nonequilibrium steady state of an open quantum chain,” Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2010, L05002 (2010)

2010
[90]

Transport in a disordered tight-binding chain with dephasing,

Marko ˇZnidariˇc and Martin Horvat, “Transport in a disordered tight-binding chain with dephasing,” The European Physical Journal B 86, 1–11 (2013)

2013
[91]

Dephasing-induced diffusive transport in the anisotropic heisenberg model,

Marko ˇZnidariˇc, “Dephasing-induced diffusive transport in the anisotropic heisenberg model,” New Journal of Physics 12, 043001 (2010)

2010
[92]

Superdiffusive trans- port in quasi-particle dephasing models,

Yu-Peng Wang, Chen Fang, and Jie Ren, “Superdiffusive trans- port in quasi-particle dephasing models,” SciPost Physics 17, 150 (2024)

2024
[93]

Semiclassical theory of quantum stochas- tic resistors,

Tony Jin, Jo ˜ao Ferreira, Michel Bauer, Michele Filippone, and Thierry Giamarchi, “Semiclassical theory of quantum stochas- tic resistors,” Physical Review Research 5, 013033 (2023)

2023
[94]

Some speculations about local thermalization of nonequilibrium extended quantum systems,

M Coppola and D Karevski, “Some speculations about local thermalization of nonequilibrium extended quantum systems,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.01881 (2023)

2023 arXiv
[95]

Exact density profile in a tight-binding chain with dephasing noise,

Taiki Ishiyama, Fujimoto Kazuya, and Tomohiro Sasamoto, “Exact density profile in a tight-binding chain with dephasing noise,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.07095 (2025)

2025 arXiv
[96]

Exact solution to a bhatnagar-gross-krook- type equation for quantum lattice gases with dephasing noise [dataset],

Michele Coppola, “Exact solution to a bhatnagar-gross-krook- type equation for quantum lattice gases with dephasing noise [dataset],” (2025), dataset available athttps://doi.org/10. 5281/zenodo.15854708

2025

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

53 (Princeton university press, 2018)

John V on Neumann, Mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics: New edition , V ol. 53 (Princeton university press, 2018)

2018

[2] [2]

81 (Princeton University Press, 2014)

John Archibald Wheeler and Wojciech Hubert Zurek, Quantum theory and measurement, V ol. 81 (Princeton University Press, 2014)

2014

[3] [3]

The problem of measurement,

Eugene P Wigner, “The problem of measurement,” American Journal of Physics 31, 6–15 (1963)

1963

[4] [4]

Three measurement problems,

Tim Maudlin, “Three measurement problems,” topoi 14, 7–15 (1995)

1995

[5] [5]

Models of wave-function collapse, un- derlying theories, and experimental tests,

Angelo Bassi, Kinjalk Lochan, Seema Satin, Tejinder P Singh, and Hendrik Ulbricht, “Models of wave-function collapse, un- derlying theories, and experimental tests,” Reviews of Modern Physics 85, 471–527 (2013)

2013

[6] [6]

Measurement-induced phase transitions in the dynamics of en- tanglement,

Brian Skinner, Jonathan Ruhman, and Adam Nahum, “Measurement-induced phase transitions in the dynamics of en- tanglement,” Physical Review X 9, 031009 (2019)

2019

[7] [7]

Theory of the phase transition in random unitary circuits with measurements,

Yimu Bao, Soonwon Choi, and Ehud Altman, “Theory of the phase transition in random unitary circuits with measurements,” Physical Review B 101, 104301 (2020)

2020

[8] [8]

Unitary-projective entanglement dynamics,

Amos Chan, Rahul M Nandkishore, Michael Pretko, and Graeme Smith, “Unitary-projective entanglement dynamics,” Physical Review B 99, 224307 (2019)

2019