Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 39 references

Transportation cost and contraction coefficient for channels on von Neumann algebras

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that a Lipschitz contraction coefficient below one, together with its dual, gives explicit mixing-time bounds for primitive unital quantum channels on finite-dimensional matrix algebras, including non-symmetric ones.

desk verdict Solid new framework; the headline mixing-time application has a real gap in Proposition 5.9. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.04197 v1 pith:Q7ARZNLA submitted 2025-06-04 math.OA math-phmath.FAmath.MPquant-ph

Roy Araiza , Marius Junge , Peixue Wu This is my paper
classification math.OAmath-phmath.FAmath.MPquant-ph MSC 46L1046L5581P45
keywords transportationcostLipschitzcontractioncoefficientquantumchannelvonNeumannalgebramixingtimeentropynoncommutativeoptimaltransportWassersteinmetric
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper develops a noncommutative optimal transport framework for quantum channels, built around two quantities: the Lipschitz cost measure, which prices the minimal operator-norm movement induced by a channel, and the Lipschitz contraction coefficient, which measures how much the channel shrinks a Lipschitz seminorm. It establishes that these quantities behave like a well-formed cost functional, with subadditivity under composition, convexity, tensor additivity, and universal upper bounds. It then shows that when the contraction coefficient is strictly below one, the channel's entropy contraction coefficient is controlled and explicit mixing-time bounds follow, including for non-symmetric channels. The framework also recovers familiar invariants: expected word length in finite groups and Carnot-Carathéodory distance on Lie groups appear as transportation costs of natural channels. If correct, the main theorems give a route from a single computable Lipschitz number to quantitative convergence guarantees for quantum dynamics.

What carries the argument

The machinery has three parts: a matrix Lipschitz seminorm (a family of seminorms satisfying unit degeneracy and self-adjoint invariance) that generates a Wasserstein L-metric on states via duality; the two channel quantities Cost_L(Φ) and Lip_L(Φ) defined by strengthening that seminorm through commutators or arbitrary operator resources; and, for the mixing-time result, a BMO seminorm estimate imported from semigroup theory that bounds the Lipschitz seminorm of log Φ(ρ) by the Lipschitz seminorm of Φ(ρ) times a factor depending on the channel's spectral gap. The load-bearing identity is the dual formulation Lip_L(Φ) = sup_{ρ≠σ} W_L(Φ*ρ, Φ*σ)/W_L(ρ,σ), which connects an observable-side quantity to a state-side contraction rate.

What would settle it

Compute t_mix(ε,Φ) for a specific non-symmetric unital channel, such as a qubit channel Φ(X) = (1-p)X + p U X U* with a fixed unitary U, choose a commutator seminorm with Lip_L(Φ)<1 and Lip_L(Φ*)≤1, and check whether the inequality of Theorem 5.13 holds with a universal constant. A violation, or a direct failure of equation (5.24) for a single state ρ, would refute the claimed bound. Alternatively, verify explicitly whether lim_{t→∞} T_t([log Φ(ρ), x]) = 0 for the semigroup used in Lemma 5.8.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Lipschitz contraction coefficient Lip_L(Φ), defined as the supremum over observables of the ratio of the Lipschitz seminorm of Φ(x) to that of x, coincides with the contraction coefficient of the induced Wasserstein-type metric on states, and that this coefficient together with its dual Lip_L(Φ*) controls the speed at which a primitive unital channel reaches equilibrium. Specifically, Theorem 5.13 asserts that for any commutator seminorm with Lip_L(Φ)<1 and Lip_L(Φ*)≤1, the ε-mixing time satisfies t_mix(ε,Φ) ≤ c_abs (log(1/ε)+log d)/(-log Lip_L(Φ) - log Lip_L(Φ*)). The proof routes the contraction coefficient through a logarithmic Lipschitz bound, using BMO seminorm comparisons to estimate the Lipschitz seminorm of log Φ(ρ) in terms of that of log ρ, and then feeds Pinsker's inequality to convert relative-entropy decay into trace-norm mixing. Along the way, the same quantities recover expected word length and Carnot-Carathéodory distance, showing the transport framework is at once a metric tool and a geometric one.

Load-bearing premise

The proof of the logarithmic Lipschitz bound applies a semigroup averaging condition that is stated only for operators with zero limiting average, and it does not check that the specific commutators [log Φ(ρ), x] and [ρ, x] satisfy this condition; if that check fails, the bound breaks and the mixing-time theorem falls with it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any primitive unital quantum channel on M_d whose Lipschitz contraction and its dual are both below one, the ε-mixing time is O((log(1/ε)+log d)/(-log Lip - log Lip*)).
  • Entropy contraction coefficients are bounded above by the channel's Lipschitz and logarithmic Lipschitz constants, so exponential relative-entropy decay follows from a single contraction condition.
  • The transportation cost satisfies the axioms of a cost functional, making it a candidate complexity measure for quantum circuits and for simulating open quantum systems.
  • Expected group word length and Carnot-Carathéodory distance are realized as transportation costs of conditional expectations and unitary channels, linking the operator-algebraic framework to combinatorial and geometric invariants.
  • When the complete Lipschitz constant is less than one, the cost-induced mixing time is at most log(1/ε)/-log Lip_cb, giving a direct contraction-based bound on convergence in cost.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Closing the mean-zero gap in Proposition 5.9 would likely let the mixing-time estimate pass from finite-dimensional algebras to infinite-dimensional semifinite algebras, where trace-normalized L_p spaces still exist.
  • The simultaneous appearance of word length, Carnot-Carathéodory distance, and mixing time suggests one could test the Lipschitz cost as a unifying measure of quantum circuit complexity, with the cost of a circuit equal to the cost of its corresponding channel.
  • Because the cost-induced mixing-time bound only needs a complete Lipschitz constant below one, it may be sharp for channels with a large fixed-point algebra, where spectral-gap methods often give trivial bounds; comparing the two on such examples would clarify which parameter truly governs convergence.
  • The role of commutator seminorms in the main theorem hints that choosing non-commuting resource sets could make the framework sensitive to genuinely non-local effects in many-body systems, a feature explicitly absent from qubit Wasserstein distances of order one.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a noncommutative optimal transport framework for quantum channels on von Neumann algebras, built around two quantities: the Lipschitz cost measure Cost_L(Φ) and the Lipschitz contraction coefficient Lip_L(Φ). It establishes structural properties of these quantities (subadditivity, convexity, tensor additivity/maximality, continuity, and universal bounds), recovers the expected word length in finite groups and the Carnot–Carathéodory distance in Lie groups as special cases, and claims entropy-contraction and mixing-time estimates for primitive unital channels when Lip_L(Φ) < 1. The main advertised application is Theorem 5.13, which gives an explicit mixing-time bound in terms of Lip_L(Φ) and Lip_L(Φ*).

Significance. The foundational Sections 3 and 4 are substantive: the proofs of Propositions 3.4, 3.9, and 3.13 are detailed, and the recovery of group word length and Carnot–Carathéodory distance from a single framework is a genuine demonstration of the formalism. The paper is not based on fitted parameters, and the external benchmarks give the framework a clear testable content. However, the entropy-contraction and mixing-time application is not fully established. Proposition 5.9, which is the key input for Theorem 5.13, has two independent gaps: a missing supremum over the resource set, and unverified BMO hypotheses. Because Theorem 5.13 is the headline application advertised in the abstract, these gaps are load-bearing. If they can be repaired, the result would be a valuable contribution; as it stands, the main application is conditional.

major comments (3)
  1. [Proposition 5.9, Eq. (5.24)] The proof of Proposition 5.9 bounds, for each fixed operator x, the quantity [log Φ(ρ), x] in operator norm by a constant times Lip_x(Φ)[log ρ, x], where Lip_x(Φ) is the per-operator Lipschitz constant sup_ρ [Φ(ρ),x]/[ρ,x]. The final sentence 'we choose p = log d' removes the p-dependence but never takes the supremum over the resource set S. Since |||y|||_L = sup_{s∈S} [s,y], the quantity LogLip_L(Φ,1/d) is a ratio of such suprema, and converting the per-x bound into LogLip_L requires sup_{s∈S} Lip_s(Φ) ≤ Lip_L(Φ). Definition (3.4) does not imply this: Lip_L is computed under the constraint |||y|||_L ≤ 1, while each Lip_s is an unrestricted ratio. The inequality can fail, for instance if [s,ρ] = 0 but [s,Φ(ρ)] ≠ 0 for some s ∈ S, in which case Lip_s(Φ) is infinite and the displayed chain involves 0·∞. Thus Eq. (5.24) is not established, and Theorem 5.13, which invokes Proposition 5.9, is unproved as stated.
  2. [Proposition 5.9, Eqs. (5.22)–(5.23)] The BMO comparison (5.22) and the BMO–Lipschitz estimate (5.23) are quoted for elements X satisfying lim_{t→∞} T_t(X) = 0, but the proof applies them to [log Φ(ρ), x] and [ρ, x] without verifying this mean-zero condition and without specifying the symmetric quantum Markov semigroup T_t. Even if the missing supremum step were repaired, the inequalities labeled with ≲ would still be unjustified unless the relevant commutators are known to satisfy the hypothesis of (5.22)–(5.23) for a common choice of semigroup. This is a second independent gap in the same proposition.
  3. [Section 5.1.2 and Theorem 5.6] Theorem 5.6 is stated only for strictly positive channels, and its proof relies on Lemma 5.2 for the attained-optimizer case and on a separate spectral argument for sequences converging to σ. Remark 5.7 sketches the non-strictly-positive case via regularization, but the displayed limsup involving log((1−ε)Φ(ρ_ε)+εσ) is not proved. Since Theorem 5.13 uses a lazy version eΦ of the channel, this gap does not by itself invalidate Theorem 5.13; however, if the authors intend the entropy-contraction result to cover general primitive channels, the regularization argument needs to be completed rather than left as a remark.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 1.1] The phrase 'Rieffel’s semimal work' should read 'Rieffel’s seminal work'.
  2. [Proposition 3.15] In the display following Eq. (3.45), the second inequality reads |Lipcb_S(Φ2)−Lipcb_S(Φ2)|; the second argument should be Φ1.
  3. [Section 3.4] The sentence 'let S={V_j}_{j=1}^m be a set of 2self-adjoint operators' appears to contain a typo; it should probably say 'a set of m self-adjoint operators' or similar.
  4. [Proposition 5.9] The notation Lip_x(Φ) is used in the proof without a definition; it should be defined explicitly as the supremum over states of [Φ(ρ),x]/[ρ,x], or the argument should be rewritten without it.
  5. [Remark 5.12] The sentence 'Using similar calculations as in [5], one can get explicit upper bound for Pauli-type channels...' ends without a period and without a precise statement of the claimed bound; please complete the sentence.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the transport cost and Lipschitz contraction framework is built from new definitions, and the main applications are proved directly or via published external results that are independent of the target claims.

full rationale

The paper defines its transport cost and Lipschitz contraction coefficient in Definitions 3.1 and 3.3, then proves their properties from those definitions. The duality identity (3.11) and the Wasserstein-contraction characterization in Proposition 3.3 are derivations from the dual seminorm, not circular inputs. The applications in Section 4 are checked against independent invariants: Theorem 4.2 computes Cost_S(Efix) and matches the classical expected word length integral, while Theorem 4.6 proves a one-sided Carnot–Carathéodory bound by path integration; in both cases the target quantities are defined independently of the cost formalism. The Section 5 entropy-contraction and mixing-time theorems rely on previously published results, namely [24, Theorem 0.2] for the BMO/Lp comparison, [9] for the BMO–Lipschitz estimate, [16, Corollary 6.8] for the transportation–information inequality, and [17] for the index bound on relative entropy. Although several of these references have overlapping authorship with the present paper, the cited statements are external peer-reviewed theorems with their own proofs and are not restatements of the present conclusions or fitted values; the self-citations are therefore not load-bearing reductions. The strongest skeptical concern—that Proposition 5.9 may not justify the final supremum over the resource set, and that the BMO estimates (5.22)–(5.23) are applied without verifying their mean-zero hypothesis—is a correctness or rigor gap, not a circularity, because the asserted bound does not reduce by construction to its input; it simply may not follow as written. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness claim is imported from the authors' prior work, and no known result is merely renamed. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The paper introduces two new mathematically defined quantities (Cost_L and Lip_L) and an 'expected length' κ(S) as a derived constant. These are not physical entities, but the two quantities have falsifiable handles: they recover known invariants (Theorems 4.2, 4.6) and imply concrete mixing-time bounds (Theorem 5.13). The axioms are mostly standard operator-algebraic background plus explicit domain assumptions; the least secure is the BMO applicability in Section 5.1.3. No free parameters fitted to data appear.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The channel Φ maps the Lipschitz domain A into itself, i.e., Φ(A) ⊆ A.
    Stated in Section 1.2 and used in Definition 3.1 and Proposition 3.3. If Φ(x) leaves A, the seminorm |||Φ(x)|||_L may be undefined.
  • domain assumption Assumption 3.5: there exists a normal conditional expectation E_{S'∩N} onto the commutant of the resource set S.
    Needed for finite Cost_S (Lemma 3.6), the universal upper bounds (Propositions 3.7, 3.12), and the continuity estimates (Proposition 3.15). Existence is equivalent to modular invariance of S'∩N.
  • domain assumption The BMO estimates of [9] and [24] apply to the operators used in Proposition 5.9.
    Equations (5.22) and (5.23) are imported from [24] and [9]; they require a symmetric quantum Markov semigroup and mean-zero operators, conditions not verified in the proof.
  • domain assumption Strict positivity of Φ for the entropy-contraction theorem (Theorem 5.6).
    Lemma 5.2 uses strict positivity to force the optimizer to be full-rank. Remark 5.7 sketches a perturbation for non-strictly-positive channels but does not complete the proof.
  • domain assumption G is a finite group in Theorem 4.2.
    The normalized Haar measure is a probability measure only for finite G, and E_fix in (4.3) is normal only in finite dimension.
  • domain assumption A length-minimizing horizontal path exists in Theorem 4.6.
    The proof selects γ attaining the infimum in d_h(g,e); for general sub-Riemannian manifolds one must use an ε-approximate path.
invented entities (2)
  • Lipschitz cost measure Cost_L(Φ) independent evidence
    purpose: Quantify the minimal cost of implementing a channel as a transportation distance between states.
    Defined in Definition 3.1; Theorem 4.2 shows it equals the expected group word length for the conditional expectation, and Theorem 4.6 shows it upper-bounds the Carnot-Carathéodory distance, giving external benchmarks.
  • Lipschitz contraction coefficient Lip_L(Φ) independent evidence
    purpose: Quantify the contraction ratio of a channel under the Wasserstein L-metric; used to bound entropy contraction and mixing times.
    Defined in Definition 3.1; Proposition 3.3 proves it coincides with the Wasserstein contraction coefficient; Theorem 5.13 uses Lip_L(Φ)<1 to give explicit mixing-time bounds, a falsifiable estimate.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Transportation cost and contraction coefficient for channels on von Neumann algebras." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Q7ARZNLA

@misc{pith2026250604197,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Transportation cost and contraction coefficient for channels on von Neumann algebras},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Q7ARZNLA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.04197}
}
read the original abstract

We present a noncommutative optimal transport framework for quantum channels acting on von Neumann algebras. Our central object is the Lipschitz cost measure, a transportation-inspired quantity that evaluates the minimal cost required to move between quantum states via a given channel. Accompanying this is the Lipschitz contraction coefficient, which captures how much the channel contracts the Wasserstein-type distance between states. We establish foundational properties of these quantities, including continuity, dual formulations, and behavior under composition and tensorization. Applications include recovery of several mathematical quantities including expected group word length and Carnot-Carath\'eodory distance, via transportation cost. Moreover, we show that if the Lipschitz contraction coefficient is strictly less than one, one can get entropy contraction and mixing time estimates for certain classes of non-symmetric channels.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A Wasserstein-type Distance to Measure Deviation from Equilibrium of Quantum Markov Semi- groups

    J. Agredo.“A Wasserstein-type Distance to Measure Deviation from Equilibrium of Quantum Markov Semi- groups”. Open Systems & Information Dynamics20(02): 1350009 (2013)

    work page 2013

  2. [2]

    Quantum Wasserstein distances for quantum permutation groups

    Anshu, D. Jekel, and T. B. Landry.“Quantum Wasserstein distances for quantum permutation groups”, (2025). Available online:https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.19269

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    Resource-Dependent Complexity of Quantum Channels

    R. Araiza, Y. Chen, M. Junge, and P. Wu.“Resource-Dependent Complexity of Quantum Channels”, (2023). Available online:https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.11304

    arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Order p Quantum Wasserstein Distances from Couplings

    E. Beatty and D. Stilck Fran¸ ca.“Order p Quantum Wasserstein Distances from Couplings”. Annales Henri Poincar´ e (2025)

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    Reverse-type Data Processing Inequality

    P. Belzig, L. Gao, G. Smith, and P. Wu.“Reverse-type Data Processing Inequality”, (2024). Available online: https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.19890

    work page arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    A free probability analogue of the Wasserstein metric on the trace-state space

    P. Biane and D. Voiculescu.“A free probability analogue of the Wasserstein metric on the trace-state space”. Geometric & Functional Analysis GAF A11(6): 1125–1138 (2001)

    work page 2001

  7. [7]

    Towards Optimal Transport for Quantum Densities

    E. Caglioti, F. Golse, and T. Paul.“Towards Optimal Transport for Quantum Densities”, (2021). Available online:https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.03256

    arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    Entropy and curvature: beyond the Peres-Tetali conjecture

    P. Caputo, F. M¨ unch, and J. Salez.“Entropy and curvature: beyond the Peres-Tetali conjecture”. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society (2025)

    work page 2025

Show all 39 references
  1. [9]

    BMO-estimates for non-commutative vector valued Lipschitz functions

    M. Caspers, M. Junge, F. Sukochev, and D. Zanin.“BMO-estimates for non-commutative vector valued Lipschitz functions”. Journal of Functional Analysis278(3): 108317 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    The metric aspect of noncommutative geometry

    A. Connes and J. Lott.“The metric aspect of noncommutative geometry”. InNew symmetry principles in quantum field theory, pages 53–93. Springer (1992). 38 R. ARAIZA, M. JUNGE, AND P. WU

    1992

  3. [11]

    The Quantum Wasserstein Distance of Order 1

    G. De Palma, M. Marvian, D. Trevisan, and S. Lloyd.“The Quantum Wasserstein Distance of Order 1”. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory67(10): 6627–6643 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Quantum Optimal Transport with Quantum Channels

    G. De Palma and D. Trevisan.“Quantum Optimal Transport with Quantum Channels”. Annales Henri Poincar´ e 22(10): 3199–3234 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    Lower Bound for Simulation Cost of Open Quantum Systems: Lipschitz Continuity Approach

    Z. Ding, M. Junge, P. Schleich, and P. Wu.“Lower Bound for Simulation Cost of Open Quantum Systems: Lipschitz Continuity Approach”. Communications in Mathematical Physics406(3) (2025)

    2025

  6. [14]

    Dixmier.von Neumann algebras

    J. Dixmier.von Neumann algebras. volume 27, Elsevier (2011)

    2011

  7. [15]

    A View on Optimal Transport from Noncommutative Geometry

    F. D’Andrea.“A View on Optimal Transport from Noncommutative Geometry”. Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications (2010)

    2010

  8. [16]

    Fisher information and logarithmic Sobolev inequality for matrix-valued functions

    L. Gao, M. Junge, and N. LaRacuente.“Fisher information and logarithmic Sobolev inequality for matrix-valued functions”. Annales Henri Poincar´ e21(11): 3409–3478 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    Relative entropy for von Neumann subalgebras

    L. Gao, M. Junge, and N. LaRacuente.“Relative entropy for von Neumann subalgebras”. Internat. J. Math. 31(6): 2050046, 35 (2020)

    2020

  10. [18]

    Relative entropy decay and complete positivity mixing time

    L. Gao, M. Junge, N. LaRacuente, and H. Li.“Relative entropy decay and complete positivity mixing time”, (2023). Available online:https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.11684

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Complete Entropic Inequalities for Quantum Markov Chains

    L. Gao and C. Rouz´ e.“Complete Entropic Inequalities for Quantum Markov Chains”. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis245(1): 183–238 (2022)

    2022

  12. [20]

    Coarse Ricci curvature of quantum channels

    L. Gao and C. Rouz´ e.“Coarse Ricci curvature of quantum channels”. Journal of Functional Analysis 286(8): 110336 (2024)

    2024

  13. [21]

    A Unified Approach to Quantum Contraction and Correlation Coefficients

    I. George and M. Tomamichel.“A Unified Approach to Quantum Contraction and Correlation Coefficients”, (2025). Available online:https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.15281

    2025

  14. [22]

    Carnot–Carath´ eodory Spaces Seen from Within

    M. Gromov.“Carnot–Carath´ eodory Spaces Seen from Within ”. In A. Bella ¨ ıche and J.-J. Risler, editors,Sub- Riemannian Geometry, volume 144 ofProgress in Mathematics, pages 79–323. Birkh¨ auser (1996)

    1996

  15. [23]

    Contraction coefficients for noisy quantum channels

    F. Hiai and M. B. Ruskai.“Contraction coefficients for noisy quantum channels”. Journal of Mathematical Physics57(1) (2016)

    2016

  16. [24]

    BMO spaces associated with semigroups of operators

    M. Junge and T. Mei.“BMO spaces associated with semigroups of operators”. Mathematische Annalen 352(3): 691–743 (2012)

    2012

  17. [25]

    A noncommutative version of the John-Nirenberg theorem

    M. Junge and M. Musat.“A noncommutative version of the John-Nirenberg theorem”. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society359(1): 115–142, (2007)

    2007

  18. [26]

    On the translocation of masses

    L. V. Kantorovich.“On the translocation of masses”. Dokl. Akad. Nauk. USSR (NS)37: 199–201 (1942)

    1942

  19. [27]

    Wasserstein Complexity of Quantum Circuits

    L. Li, K. Bu, D. E. Koh, A. Jaffe, and S. Lloyd.“Wasserstein Complexity of Quantum Circuits”, (2022). Available online:https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.06306

    2022 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Monge.M´ emoire sur la th´ eorie des d´ eblais et des remblais

    G. Monge.M´ emoire sur la th´ eorie des d´ eblais et des remblais. De l’Imprimerie Royale (1781)

  21. [29]

    A Geometric Approach to Quantum Circuit Lower Bounds

    M. A. Nielsen.“A Geometric Approach to Quantum Circuit Lower Bounds”. Quantum Information and Com- putation6(3): 213–262 (2006)

    2006

  22. [30]

    Optimal control, geometry, and quantum computing

    M. A. Nielsen, M. R. Dowling, M. Gu, and A. C. Doherty.“Optimal control, geometry, and quantum computing”. Phys. Rev. A73: 062323 (2006)

    2006

  23. [31]

    Quantum Computation as Geometry

    M. A. Nielsen, M. R. Dowling, M. Gu, and A. C. Doherty.“Quantum Computation as Geometry”. Science 311(5764): 1133–1135 (2006)

    2006

  24. [32]

    Paulsen.Completely Bounded Maps and Operator Algebras

    V. Paulsen.Completely Bounded Maps and Operator Algebras. Cambridge University Press (2003)

    2003

  25. [33]

    Metrics on state spaces

    M. A. Rieffel.“Metrics on state spaces”. Documenta Mathematica4: 559–600 (1999)

    1999

  26. [34]

    Compact quantum metric spaces

    M. A. Rieffel.“Compact quantum metric spaces”. Contemporary Mathematics365: 315–330 (2004)

    2004

  27. [35]

    Optimal quantum algorithm for Gibbs state preparation

    C. Rouz´ e, D. S. Fran¸ ca, and´Alvaro M. Alhambra.“Optimal quantum algorithm for Gibbs state preparation ”, (2024). Available online:https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.04885

    2024

  28. [36]

    Sakai.C*-algebras and W*-algebras

    S. Sakai.C*-algebras and W*-algebras. Springer Science & Business Media (2012)

    2012

  29. [37]

    Quasi-relative entropy: the closest separable state and reversed Pinsker inequality

    A. Vershynina.“Quasi-relative entropy: the closest separable state and reversed Pinsker inequality”.Entropy Inequalities, Quantum Information and Quantum Physicsworkshop, (2021). Available online:https://helper. ipam.ucla.edu/publications/eqp2021/eqp2021_16802.pdf

    2021

  30. [38]

    Exponential Relative Entropy Decay Along Quantum Markov Semigroups

    M. Wirth.“Exponential Relative Entropy Decay Along Quantum Markov Semigroups”, (2025). Available online: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.07549

    2025 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Non-commutative metric topology on matrix state space

    W. Wu.“Non-commutative metric topology on matrix state space”. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society134(2): 443–453 (2006). TRANSPORTATION COST AND CONTRACTION COEFFICIENT FOR CHANNELS ON VON NEUMANN ALGEBRAS 39 Department of Mathematics, IQUIST, University of Illin...

    2006

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.