pith. sign in

arxiv: 2502.18812 · v4 · submitted 2025-02-26 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.stat-mech· gr-qc· hep-th

Work Statistics via Real-Time Effective Field Theory: Application to Work Extraction from Thermal Bath with Qubit Coupling

Jhh-Jing Hong , Feng-Li Lin This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 02:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mechgr-qchep-th
keywords work statisticseffective field theoryquantum heat enginethermal bathqubit couplingwork extractionfluctuation theoremspectral function
0
0 comments X

The pith

Coupling a thermal bath to a spin or topological qubit allows greater work extraction than fermionic coupling due to quantum statistics.

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

The paper develops a real-time effective field theory to compute work statistics for a thermal bath coupled to a qubit during a cyclic process. Work statistics are reduced to the thermal spectral function of a chosen quasiparticle operator once the external drive is assumed to act on that operator. From the resulting work distribution functions the regime of positive work extraction is identified, and efficiencies of the resulting heat engines or refrigerators are obtained via the fluctuation theorem combined with the first law. The calculation shows that spin and topological qubit couplings generally produce higher efficiencies than fermionic coupling. A reader cares because the method supplies a concrete route to compare and optimize different qubit-bath designs for quantum thermal machines.

Core claim

By assuming the driven source couples to a specific quasiparticle operator, the work statistics of the qubit-bath system are expressed solely in terms of that operator's thermal spectral function. This yields a non-perturbative work distribution function for the uncoupled bath and a second-order work distribution function once the qubit is coupled, from which the physical regime permitting work extraction is determined. The efficiency or coefficient of performance follows directly from the fluctuation theorem and the first law, revealing that spin and topological qubit-bath systems outperform the fermionic alternative because of their underlying quantum statistics.

What carries the argument

Real-time effective field theory that reduces work statistics to the thermal spectral function of the quasiparticle operator coupled by the drive.

If this is right

  • The work distribution function for the pure thermal bath is obtained non-perturbatively from the spectral function.
  • The second-order work distribution function with qubit coupling identifies the precise parameter regime for work extraction.
  • Efficiency and coefficient of performance of the resulting quantum heat engine or refrigerator follow from the fluctuation theorem plus the first law.
  • Spin and topological qubit couplings produce higher efficiencies than fermionic coupling owing to their quantum statistics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same reduction to a spectral function could be tested on other many-body baths where explicit work statistics have been intractable.
  • The performance ordering among qubit types supplies a design rule for selecting couplings in experimental quantum thermal machines.
  • Extending the effective-field-theory treatment to non-cyclic or multi-stroke protocols would test whether the advantage of spin and topological couplings persists.

Load-bearing premise

The externally driven source couples to one specific quasiparticle operator of the thermal state.

What would settle it

Explicit computation or measurement of the work distribution functions for the three qubit types followed by direct comparison of the extracted work or efficiencies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.18812 by Feng-Li Lin, Jhh-Jing Hong.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Our e [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: The Schwinger-Keyldysh contour for defining the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Three Ohmic-type spectral density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Example WDFs: (a) comparison of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Density plots of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Similar density plots of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: Density plots of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Similar plots to Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: Density plots of the e [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: Compared to Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11: Examples of unimodal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12: Two asymmetric [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14: Simialr plots to Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_14.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum thermal states are known to be passive, as required by the second law of thermodynamics. This paper investigates the potential for work extraction by coupling a thermal bath to a qubit of either spin, fermionic, or topological type, which acts as a quantum thermal state at different temperatures. The amount of work extraction is derived from the work statistics under a cyclic nonequilibrium process. Although the work statistics of many-body systems are known to be challenging to calculate explicitly, we propose an effective field theory approach to tackle this problem by assuming the externally driven source couples to a specific quasiparticle operator of the thermal state. We show that the work statistics can be expressed succinctly in terms of this quasiparticle's thermal spectral function. We obtain the non-perturbative work distribution function (WDF) for the pure thermal bath without the qubit coupling. With qubit coupling, we get the second-order WDF, from which the physical regime of work extraction can be pinned down precisely to help devise quantum heat engines or refrigerators. Their efficiency or coefficient of performance (COP) can be inferred from the combination of the fluctuation theorem and the first law, and we find that the spin/topological qubit-bath system generally yields a far better heat engine/refrigerator than the other two alternatives due to the underlying quantum statistics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a real-time effective field theory to compute work statistics for cyclic driving of a thermal bath coupled to a qubit (spin, fermionic or topological). Under the assumption that the external drive couples to a single quasiparticle operator, the work distribution function (WDF) is expressed via that operator's thermal spectral function. A non-perturbative WDF is obtained for the pure bath; a second-order WDF is derived for the coupled system. Efficiencies of the resulting heat engines/refrigerators are then extracted via the fluctuation theorem plus first law, with the claim that spin/topological couplings outperform fermionic ones due to underlying quantum statistics.

Significance. If the single-operator coupling assumption holds and the second-order truncation is controlled, the approach offers a compact route from spectral functions to work statistics and a concrete ordering of quantum-statistical effects in thermal machines. The non-perturbative pure-bath result is a clear technical strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [coupled qubit-bath regime and efficiency comparison] The superiority claim for spin/topological over fermionic systems (abstract and the coupled-regime comparison) is obtained exclusively from the second-order WDF under the single-quasiparticle-operator coupling assumption stated in the abstract. If realistic couplings involve multiple operators or if the quasiparticle picture fails for topological baths, the extracted efficiencies and the claimed ordering would not follow. The manuscript should either justify the assumption for the three cases or demonstrate robustness against multi-operator extensions.
  2. [work extraction and efficiency inference] The non-perturbative pure-bath WDF is derived, yet the performance comparison that underpins the central claim uses only the perturbative (second-order) coupled WDF. It is unclear whether the non-perturbative result is needed to validate the fluctuation-theorem inference of efficiency in the coupled regime or whether the ordering survives beyond second order.
minor comments (2)
  1. [effective field theory setup] Notation for the quasiparticle operator and its spectral function should be introduced with an explicit equation number when first used.
  2. [efficiency extraction] The abstract states that efficiencies are 'inferred from the combination of the fluctuation theorem and the first law'; a brief derivation or reference to the precise relation used would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address the two major comments point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The superiority claim for spin/topological over fermionic systems (abstract and the coupled-regime comparison) is obtained exclusively from the second-order WDF under the single-quasiparticle-operator coupling assumption stated in the abstract. If realistic couplings involve multiple operators or if the quasiparticle picture fails for topological baths, the extracted efficiencies and the claimed ordering would not follow. The manuscript should either justify the assumption for the three cases or demonstrate robustness against multi-operator extensions.

    Authors: We agree that the single-quasiparticle-operator coupling is a central modeling assumption. This assumption is justified within the real-time EFT framework because the external drive is taken to couple to the leading relevant quasiparticle operator of each thermal bath (spin operator for the spin qubit, density operator for the fermionic case, and the corresponding topological quasiparticle operator). These choices follow from symmetry and the low-energy effective description standard in the literature for each system. We will expand the justification in the revised manuscript (Introduction and Sec. II) with additional references. A full numerical demonstration of robustness to multi-operator couplings lies beyond the present scope and would require a separate extension of the formalism; we will add a brief discussion of this limitation and the expected regime of validity. revision: partial

  2. Referee: The non-perturbative pure-bath WDF is derived, yet the performance comparison that underpins the central claim uses only the perturbative (second-order) coupled WDF. It is unclear whether the non-perturbative result is needed to validate the fluctuation-theorem inference of efficiency in the coupled regime or whether the ordering survives beyond second order.

    Authors: The non-perturbative pure-bath WDF illustrates the EFT method in a controlled limit and directly links the work distribution to the spectral function without truncation. For the coupled qubit-bath system the second-order result is the leading correction in the weak-coupling regime relevant to the heat-engine/refrigerator analysis. The fluctuation theorem holds exactly for the true WDF; our second-order truncation preserves the necessary integral properties to allow efficiency extraction via the first law. The reported ordering of efficiencies is therefore controlled within the stated perturbative regime. We will clarify this distinction and the range of validity in the revised text (Sec. IV and Discussion). revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation follows from explicit modeling assumption and standard fluctuation relations.

full rationale

The paper explicitly states the modeling assumption that the external drive couples to one quasiparticle operator and then shows the work statistics reduce to that operator's spectral function. This is a direct consequence of the assumption rather than a hidden self-definition or fit. The non-perturbative pure-bath WDF and second-order coupled WDF are obtained via the proposed EFT, after which efficiencies are inferred from the fluctuation theorem plus first law. Different qubit types enter through their distinct spectral functions arising from spin/fermion/topological statistics; no evidence that these spectral functions are fitted to the target efficiencies or that central results reduce to self-citations. The derivation chain remains self-contained against the stated assumptions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review yields incomplete ledger; the central claim rests on the unverified assumption that the drive couples exclusively to one quasiparticle operator whose spectral function is treated as known input.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Externally driven source couples to a specific quasiparticle operator of the thermal state
    Stated in abstract as the modeling choice that allows work statistics to be written in terms of the spectral function.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5778 in / 1214 out tokens · 17052 ms · 2026-05-23T02:50:11.016750+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages · 11 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    for spin coupling: S (1) β (ω) = S (2) β (ω) are the Wight- man spectral function of neutral scalar quasiparticle O in state ρβ, i.e., they equal to eβωnBE(ω)S O(ω)

    work page

  2. [2]

    To ensure thermal states’ stability, S Ψ(ω) should be bounded below; a

    for fermion coupling: S (1) β (ω) = nFD(ω)S Ψ(ω) and S (2) β (ω) = eβωnFD(ω)S Ψ(ω) are respectively the spectral densities of quasiparticles and quasi- holes, where nFD(ω) = (eβω + 1)−1 and S Ψ(ω) : =R ∞ −∞ dteiωt{Ψ†(t), Ψ(0)} is the Paui-Jordan spectral func- tion of Ψ. To ensure thermal states’ stability, S Ψ(ω) should be bounded below; a

    work page

  3. [3]

    thermal bath

    for topological qubit coupling with the causality con- straint (55): both S (1) β (ω) = S (2) β (ω) = 1 2 S Ψ(ω), which are β-independent. Note that (56) is reduced to (40) for gapless qubit, i.e., Ω = 0 if S (1) β (ω) = S (2) β (ω), so that they behave as the passive thermal state. Otherwise, the thermality or passivity can be violated. Substituting the ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Review on general Wick’s theorem To proceed with the χ(v)’s derivations, we should invoke the generalized Wick’s theorem [46, 47]. Consider two di ffer- ent orderings O and O′ defined for the corresponding sets of bases, namely, {ϕa} and {ψb}, as follows: O[ϕ1 · · ·ϕn] = (±1)Pϕp1 · · ·ϕpn , (B1) O′[ψ1 · · ·ψn] = (±1)Pψp1 · · ·ψpn (B2) with P the number of...

    work page

  5. [5]

    (B32) We start the example for V as the bosonic operator O in the initial thermal state ρβ

    Characteristic function from general Wick’s theorem We now apply (B29) and (B30) to calculate (A27), i.e., χ(v) = Tr n T+e−iO+ v ρ T−eiO− v o (B31) with O± v := Z −∞ ∞ dt λ±(t; v)VI(t) . (B32) We start the example for V as the bosonic operator O in the initial thermal state ρβ. We denote the normal ordering by Nβ for simplicity. Then, applying (B29) and (...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Work statistics with fermion qubit coupling to thermal bath To calculate χ(2)(v) by (27) of the total system, including the qubit and the environment, we shall first evaluate the corre- sponding real-time Green functions for the composite opera- tor VI(t) of (D12), which is the sum of the direct products of two fermion operators. Let us start with iG−+(t)...

    work page

  7. [7]

    Work statistics with topological qubit coupling to thermal bath On the other hand, when considering the topological qubit, the corresponding real-time Green functions appearing in (27) should be di fferent from the ones given by (D27) and (D31) due to imposing the causality condition (D9). Denoting the corresponding Green functions for the topological qub...

    work page

  8. [8]

    For simplicity, we neglect p0δ(W) of P(2)(W) in the following plots

    Work Distribution Function P(2)(W) In this subsection, we present more numerical plots for P(2)(W) for the pure thermal baths without or with three types of qubit couplings for various values of α, β, p, and Ω to highlight some interesting points about the modal structure and asymmetry of P(2)(W). For simplicity, we neglect p0δ(W) of P(2)(W) in the follow...

    work page

  9. [9]

    The plots for Ω = 1, 5 are given in Fig

    We first compare P(2)(W) with different values of Ω with other parameters fixed. The plots for Ω = 1, 5 are given in Fig. 10. It shows that P(2)(W) are almost symmetric about W = 0. This contrasts with Fig. 4(c) in the main text for Ω = 0.05, which show asymmetric P(2)(W) about W = 0. This implies that P(2)(W) tends to be asymmetric about W = 0 as Ω decre...

    work page

  10. [10]

    11 with or without qubit coupling, all with α ≤ 1

    We show examples of unimodal P(2)(W)’s in Fig. 11 with or without qubit coupling, all with α ≤ 1. This contrasts with the bimodal ones for the pure thermal bath with α > 1 as shown in Fig. 4(b) of the main text. These plots help to conclude that the P(2)(W) is bimodal only for α > 1 without qubit coupling. FIG. 11: Examples of unimodal P(2)(W)’s

    work page

  11. [11]

    12 that the asymmetry of P(2)(W) about W = 0 changes its bias as β changes

    We show in Fig. 12 that the asymmetry of P(2)(W) about W = 0 changes its bias as β changes. FIG. 12: Two asymmetric P(2)’s with qubit coupling correspond respectively toW(2) ext < 0 for β = 20 (left) and W(2) ext > 0 for β = 100 (right)

    work page

  12. [12]

    Alternatively, here we present the 1D plots ofW(2) ext on only one parameter but with others fixed for all three qubit-coupling cases in a single figure

    Work Extraction W(2) ext Though the density plots of W(2) ext can give a more complete picture, it is not easy to compare di fferent types of qubit coupling. Alternatively, here we present the 1D plots ofW(2) ext on only one parameter but with others fixed for all three qubit-coupling cases in a single figure. In this way, we can see how the patterns of W...

    work page

  13. [13]

    Lenard, Journal of Statistical Physics 19, 575 (1978)

    A. Lenard, Journal of Statistical Physics 19, 575 (1978)

    work page 1978

  14. [14]

    Pusz and S

    W. Pusz and S. L. Woronowicz, Communications in Mathemat- ical Physics 58, 273 (1978)

    work page 1978

  15. [15]

    Skrzypczyk, R

    P. Skrzypczyk, R. Silva, and N. Brunner, Phys. Rev. E 91, 052133 (2015)

    work page 2015

  16. [16]

    Jarzynski, Physical Review Letters 78, 2690 (1997)

    C. Jarzynski, Physical Review Letters 78, 2690 (1997)

    work page 1997

  17. [17]

    G. E. Crooks, Physical Review E 61, 2361 (2000)

    work page 2000

  18. [18]

    G. E. Crooks, Physical Review E 60, 2721 (1999)

    work page 1999

  19. [19]

    Jarzynski Relations for Quantum Systems and Some Applications

    H. Tasaki, arXiv preprint cond-mat /0009244 (2000), 10.48550/arXiv.cond-mat/0009244

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.cond-mat/0009244 2000

  20. [20]

    Liphardt, S

    J. Liphardt, S. Dumont, S. B. Smith, I. Tinoco, and C. Busta- mante, Science (New York, N.Y .)296, 1832—1835 (2002)

    work page 2002

  21. [21]

    Saira, Y

    O.-P. Saira, Y . Yoon, T. Tanttu, M. Möttönen, D. V . Averin, and J. P. Pekola, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 180601 (2012)

    work page 2012

  22. [22]

    T. B. Batalhão, A. M. Souza, L. Mazzola, R. Auccaise, R. S. Sarthour, I. S. Oliveira, J. Goold, G. De Chiara, M. Paternostro, and R. M. Serra, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 140601 (2014)

    work page 2014

  23. [23]

    N. C. Harris, Y . Song, and C.-H. Kiang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 068101 (2007)

    work page 2007

  24. [24]

    Z. Fei, J. Zhang, R. Pan, T. Qiu, and H. T. Quan, Phys. Rev. A 99, 052508 (2019)

    work page 2019

  25. [25]

    Solfanelli, A

    A. Solfanelli, A. Santini, and M. Campisi, PRX Quantum 2, 030353 (2021)

    work page 2021

  26. [26]

    D. Hahn, M. Dupont, M. Schmitt, D. J. Luitz, and M. Bukov, Physical Review X 13, 041023 (2023)

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    Bassman Oftelie and M

    L. Bassman Oftelie and M. Campisi, Quantum Sci. Technol.10, 025045 (2025), arXiv:2412.17491 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    Silva, Physical review letters 101, 120603 (2008)

    A. Silva, Physical review letters 101, 120603 (2008)

    work page 2008

  29. [29]

    F. N. Paraan and A. Silva, Physical Review E—Statistical, Non- linear, and Soft Matter Physics 80, 061130 (2009)

    work page 2009

  30. [30]

    N. O. Abeling and S. Kehrein, Phys. Rev. B 93, 104302 (2016)

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    Dong and Y .-f

    J.-J. Dong and Y .-f. Yang, Phys. Rev. B100, 035124 (2019)

    work page 2019

  32. [32]

    Ortega, E

    A. Ortega, E. McKay, A. M. Alhambra, and E. Martín- Martínez, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 240604 (2019), arXiv:1902.03258 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  33. [33]

    E. G. Arrais, D. A. Wisniacki, A. J. Roncaglia, and F. Toscano, Phys. Rev. E 100, 052136 (2019)

    work page 2019

  34. [34]

    Talkner, E

    P. Talkner, E. Lutz, and P. Hänggi, Physical Review E 75, 050102 (2007)

    work page 2007

  35. [35]

    Fei and H

    Z. Fei and H. Quan, Physical Review Letters 124, 240603 (2020)

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    C. Aron, G. Biroli, and L. F. Cugliandolo, SciPost Phys. 4, 008 (2018), arXiv:1705.10800 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  37. [37]

    Yeo, Phys

    J. Yeo, Phys. Rev. E 100, 062107 (2019)

    work page 2019

  38. [38]

    Lin and S

    F.-L. Lin and S. Mondal, (2024), arXiv:2411.09409 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    W. G. Unruh, Phys. Rev. D 14, 870 (1976)

    work page 1976

  40. [40]

    Quantum gravity: The new synthesis ,

    B. S. DeWitt, “Quantum gravity: The new synthesis ,” in Gen- eral Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey (1980) pp. 680– 745

    work page 1980

  41. [41]

    Jarzynski Equality for Driven Quantum Field Theories

    A. Bartolotta and S. De ffner, Phys. Rev. X 8, 011033 (2018), arXiv:1710.00829 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  42. [42]

    Ho, S.-P

    S.-H. Ho, S.-P. Chao, C.-H. Chou, and F.-L. Lin, New Journal of Physics 16, 113062 (2014)

    work page 2014

  43. [43]

    Liu and F.-L

    P.-H. Liu and F.-L. Lin, Journal of High Energy Physics 2016, 1 (2016)

    work page 2016

  44. [44]

    D. J. Evans, E. G. D. Cohen, and G. P. Morriss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 2401 (1993)

    work page 1993

  45. [45]

    D. J. Evans and D. J. Searles, Phys. Rev. E 50, 1645 (1994)

    work page 1994

  46. [46]

    Gallavotti and E

    G. Gallavotti and E. G. D. Cohen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 2694 (1995)

    work page 1995

  47. [47]

    G. E. Crooks, Phys. Rev. A 77, 034101 (2008)

    work page 2008

  48. [48]

    A. M. Alhambra, L. Masanes, J. Oppenheim, and C. Perry, Phys. Rev. X 6, 041017 (2016)

    work page 2016

  49. [49]

    Åberg, Phys

    J. Åberg, Phys. Rev. X 8, 011019 (2018)

    work page 2018

  50. [50]

    Kwon and M

    H. Kwon and M. S. Kim, Phys. Rev. X 9, 031029 (2019)

    work page 2019

  51. [51]

    Huang, Phys

    Z. Huang, Phys. Rev. A 105, 062217 (2022), arXiv:2201.08691 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  52. [52]

    Á. M. Alhambra, L. Masanes, J. Oppenheim, and C. Perry, Physical Review X 6, 041017 (2016), arXiv:1601.05799 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  53. [53]

    Petz, Commun

    D. Petz, Commun. Math. Phys. 105, 123 (1986)

    work page 1986

  54. [54]

    Kwon and M

    H. Kwon and M. Kim, Physical Review X 9, 031029 (2019)

    work page 2019

  55. [55]

    G. Bai, F. Buscemi, and V . Scarani, arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.12489 (2024)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  56. [56]

    Biggs and J

    A. Biggs and J. Maldacena, arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.02227 (2024), 10.48550/arXiv.2405.02227

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.02227 2024

  57. [57]

    Wick Theorem for General Initial States

    R. van Leeuwen and G. Stefanucci, Phys. Rev. B 85, 115119 (2012), arXiv:1102.4814 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  58. [58]

    Wick theorem for all orderings of canonical operators

    L. Diósi, J. Phys. A 51, 365201 (2018), arXiv:1712.08811 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  59. [59]

    Ferialdi and L

    L. Ferialdi and L. Diósi, Phys. Rev. A 104, 052209 (2021), arXiv:2110.02920 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  60. [60]

    Ferialdi, Phys

    L. Ferialdi, Phys. Rev. D 107, 105010 (2023), arXiv:2302.01264 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  61. [61]

    T. S. Evans and D. A. Steer, Nucl. Phys. B 474, 481 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9601268

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  62. [62]

    On Normal ordering and Canonical transformations in Thermal Field Theory

    M. Blasone, T. S. Evans, D. A. Steer, and G. Vitiello, J. Phys. A 32, 1185 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9706549

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  63. [63]

    T. S. Evans, T. W. B. Kibble, and D. A. Steer, J. Math. Phys. 39, 5726 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9801404

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  64. [64]

    L. S. Brown, Quantum Field Theory (Cambridge University Press, 1992)

    work page 1992

  65. [65]

    Seifert, Reports on progress in physics 75, 126001 (2012)

    U. Seifert, Reports on progress in physics 75, 126001 (2012)

    work page 2012

  66. [66]

    Yunger Halpern, Physical Review A 95, 012120 (2017)

    N. Yunger Halpern, Physical Review A 95, 012120 (2017)

    work page 2017

  67. [67]

    Polchinski, String theory

    J. Polchinski, String theory. V ol. 1: An introduction to the bosonic string , Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 2007)

    work page 2007

  68. [68]

    A. Y . Kitaev, Physics-uspekhi44, 131 (2001)

    work page 2001

  69. [69]

    Topological phases and quantum computation

    A. Kitaev and C. Laumann, (2010), 10.48550/arXiv.0904.2771, 0904.2771

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.0904.2771 2010