REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 80 references
Quantum Walks: First Hitting Times with Weak Measurements
T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read This paper argues that for a phase-damping weak-measurement protocol, the expected first detected return time of a continuous-time quantum walk equals the strong-measurement return time divided by the coupling parameter η…
desk verdict Two exact results that hold up, a scaling law the body honestly calls a conjecture, and an abstract that runs ahead of the proof — referee it, but make the abstract match the body. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The load-bearing object is the pseudo-completeness relation $K_\text{yes}+K_\text{no}=1+f(\eta)P$ with $f(\eta)=\sqrt{\eta}+\sqrt{1-\eta}-1$, satisfied by the phase-damping Kraus operators (Eq. 10). This identity lets the authors replace the two-qubit weak measurement by rescaled projectors $P_\eta=\sqrt{\eta}\,P$ and $Q_\eta=Q+\sqrt{1-\eta}\,P$ acting on the original Hilbert space, so the weak first-return amplitude $\hat a^\eta_n(t)=P_\eta U(t)(Q_\eta U(t))^{n-1}P$ fits the spectral recurrence formalism developed for projective measurements. A telescoping identity for the detection probabilities, $p_n(\eta,t)=\|\tilde U_\eta^{n-1}|\psi\rangle\|^2-\|\tilde U_\eta^{n}|\psi\rangle\|^2$ with $\tilde U_\eta=Q_\eta U(t)$, yields the closed formula (25) for $\tau_N(\eta,t)$; the $\eta$-dependence of this formula is what produces $1/\eta$ in the Zeno and two-level analyses.
What would settle it
On a triangle graph (three-site ring, $L=3$), compute $\tau_\infty(\eta,t)$ exactly from Eqs. (28)-(29) at a non-exceptional time such as $t=0.9$ for $\eta\in\{0.05,0.1,\ldots,1\}$ and test whether $\tau_\infty(\eta,t)=\tau_\infty(1,t)/\eta$ holds to machine precision; any residual beyond $\sim10^{-12}$ would falsify the conjectured general law. Alternatively, on a two-level system implement the weak measurement with an amplitude-damping channel instead of phase damping and check whether the inverse-$\eta$ scaling still occurs; the paper's mechanism predicts it will not.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
On its own terms, the paper's central finding is the inverse-$\eta$ scaling law of Eq. (⋆): for the phase-damping weak measurement with Kraus operators $K_\text{yes}=\mathrm{diag}(0,\sqrt{\eta})$, $K_\text{no}=\mathrm{diag}(1,\sqrt{1-\eta})$, the mean first hitting time after infinitely many measurements obeys $\tau^{\mathrm{weak}}_\infty(\eta,t)=\tau^{\mathrm{strong}}_\infty(t)/\eta$, with $\tau^{\mathrm{strong}}_\infty$ the corresponding projective-measurement value. This is verified exactly in the Zeno limit (Eq. 34) and for the two-level system, where $\tau^{\mathrm{strong}}_\infty(t)=1$ at $t=k\pi$ and $2$ otherwise, so $\tau^{\mathrm{weak}}_\infty(t,\eta)=1/\eta$ or $2/\eta$. For general graphs the authors state that analytical, numerical, and quantum-computational evidence supports the relation, while a rigorous proof is left open. Because $\tau^{\mathrm{strong}}_\infty$ is integer-valued for rank-one projections, the weak measurement fractionalizes the quantized return time; the exceptional sampling times at which $\tau^{\mathrm{strong}}_\infty$ jumps remain unchanged by the measurement strength.
Load-bearing premise
The whole derivation hangs on the single identity $K_\text{yes}+K_\text{no}=1+f(\eta)P$ that characterizes the phase-damping weak measurement; if the physical measurement is realized by any other channel, the mapping to modified projectors breaks down and the $1/\eta$ scaling has no reason to hold.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- Knowing $\eta$ and measuring the weak return time directly yields the strong-measurement return time $\tau^{\mathrm{strong}}_\infty(t)$; conversely, a known $\tau^{\mathrm{strong}}_\infty$ predicts the weak return time for any coupling.
- The exceptional sampling times, where $\tau^{\mathrm{strong}}_\infty$ jumps because of spectral degeneracies of the walk's Hamiltonian, are independent of $\eta$, so weak monitoring locates those resonances with less disturbance.
- For rings of length $L$, the weak return time crosses the classical random-walk value $L$ at $\eta'(L)=1/2+(1/L)$ for even $L$ and $1/2+1/(2L)$ for odd $L$, so couplings below $\eta'(L)$ make weak monitoring slower than classical return.
- The $1/\eta$ relation is not restricted to localized initial states: superpositions and time-reversal-breaking Peierls phases preserve it, according to the numerical evidence in the paper.
- On a two-level system with 20 weak measurements, the experimental data track the finite-depth formula (25) with an average deviation near 2%, consistent with the processor's two-qubit gate error rates.
Reading between the lines
- If the inverse-$\eta$ law holds for every finite graph, it suggests a general 'detection inefficiency' factorization: the phase-damping weak measurement acts on recurrence statistics like a geometric waiting time of mean $1/\eta$ superimposed on the coherent detection process, a picture that would extend to other first-arrival observables such as transition times.
- A direct test of the mechanism would replace the controlled-$R_y$ rotation by a different dilation, e.g., an amplitude-damping channel: the pseudo-completeness relation fails there, so the paper's own logic predicts the $1/\eta$ scaling should break down; observing that would confirm that the identity (11) is the true source of the law.
- The threshold $\eta'(L)$ computed for rings gives experimentalists a practical rule: to outperform a classical random walk in detection speed with weak monitoring, the coupling must exceed roughly $1/2$, independent of ring size for large $L$.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. This paper studies first detected recurrence (hitting) times of continuous-time quantum walks under repeated weak measurements. The weak measurement is implemented by a controlled RY rotation on an ancilla qubit, which is equivalent to a phase-damping channel. The authors extend the recurrence formalism of Grünbaum et al. and Bourgain et al. to this setting by introducing modified operators Pη = √ηP and Qη = Q + √(1−η)P, which satisfy the pseudo-completeness relation Pη + Qη = 1 + f(η)P. Within this framework they derive a finite-N formula for the expected return time (Eq. 25), a generating-function/integral representation (Eqs. 27–32), exact results in the Zeno limit (Eq. 34) and for the two-level system (Eq. 35), and they report numerical simulations and IBM quantum-hardware experiments for two-level, benzene, and other graphs. The body explicitly labels the general inverse-η relation τ_weak∞ = (1/η)τ_strong∞ as an unproven conjecture with strong evidence, while the abstract presents it as a definite finding.
Significance. The exact results for the Zeno limit and the two-level system are clean, and the extension of the pure-state recurrence formalism to a non-projective measurement satisfying pseudo-completeness is a useful contribution. The paper also includes explicit IBM experimental data and a reproducible-looking circuit formulation, which strengthens the practical relevance. If the general inverse-η scaling were proven, it would provide a compact and physically appealing bridge between weak and strong monitored recurrence. In its present form, however, the paper establishes a formalism, two exact special cases, and a well-supported conjecture rather than the general law announced in the abstract. The numerical evidence, while suggestive, is not enough to close the gap without a spectral argument or a clearly stated class of unitaries for which the scaling is proven.
major comments (3)
- [Section IV.3, Eq. (⋆)] The paper's headline result, τ_weak∞(η,t) = (1/η) τ_strong∞(t), is proved only in the Zeno limit (Eq. 34, Lemma A.9) and for the two-level system (Eq. 35). The body itself states that a rigorous proof for all unitary operators would be desirable. The telescoping identity (A.4) is exact but does not by itself force the ratio τ_weak/τ_strong to equal 1/η; an additional spectral mechanism is needed. The numerical evidence in Figs. 7–8 uses N=2,000 with ten η values and no error bars or N→∞ extrapolation, and the benzene formula in §IV.2.2 likewise assumes (⋆). The abstract nevertheless reports the inverse-η scaling as a definite finding. Please either provide a proof, for general unitaries or for a clearly stated class such as rings, or downgrade the abstract, title, and conclusions so that (⋆) is presented as a conjecture with strong numerical and experimental support.
- [Section III.1, Eqs. (10)–(18)] The pseudo-completeness relation Pη + Qη = 1 + f(η)P, Eq. (18), is essential to the pure-state embedding and is used in every subsequent derivation, including Lemma A.5, the Zeno limit, and the two-level result. The authors correctly note that a POVM not satisfying this relation cannot be canonically embedded. This restricts the proven content to the phase-damping channel implemented by the controlled RY gate. The abstract and conclusions use the unqualified phrase 'weak measurements'; since Section V explicitly leaves other couplings such as XX coupling open, the claimed scaling should be stated as a property of this specific protocol rather than of weak measurements in general.
- [Appendix A.2, Corollary A.6] The proof that ∥tildeU_η^N |ψ⟩∥ tends to 0 has a gap. From the assumption ∥tildeU_η |tildeψ⟩∥² = 1 the argument derives P U |tildeψ⟩ = 0 and hence a zero detection probability at the next step, but this does not by itself imply ∥tildeψ⟩∥ < 1 as claimed. A contraction argument or a spectral-radius bound for tildeU_η on the relevant subspace is needed. The statement R∞(η,t) = 1 is load-bearing for the N→∞ formulas (23) and (26), so this step should be repaired or replaced.
minor comments (4)
- [Section III.1] There are typographical issues such as 'an weak measurement' and 'decays reciprocal with η'; these should be corrected.
- [Section III.1, Eq. (16)] The notation K_−(η) and K_+(η) is introduced in Eq. (16) without a definition, while Eqs. (10) use Kyes and Kno; please align the notation and state explicitly that Pη and Qη are the modified measurement operators acting on the system Hilbert space.
- [Appendix C] The expression for g(t,x,η) is written with z in the numerator and denominator although the function is defined with variable x; clarify whether x and z are identified or correct the variable names.
- [Section IV.2.1] The IBM experimental comparison in Fig. 4 is reported as an average deviation around 2%, but no error bars or statistical details are given for the hardware data; please state the number of shots, the error-bar procedure, and the definition of the reported deviation.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity: the inverse-η scaling is derived exactly for the Zeno and two-level cases, and the general claim is presented as evidence-based rather than obtained by fitting or by self-citation.
full rationale
The paper's central quantity, τ_weak∞(η,t) = (1/η) τ_strong∞(t), is not constructed from itself. The Zeno limit result (Eq. 34) follows from the phase-damping Kraus operators (Eq. 10), giving p_n(η,0)=η(1−η)^{n−1} and hence τ∞(η,0)=1/η by a direct geometric-series computation (Lemma A.9). The two-level result (Eq. 35) is computed symbolically from the modified first-return amplitude operator via the vectorization formula (Eq. 31), and the strong-measurement limit τ∞(t) is independently taken from Friedman et al. [31] only as the η=1 check. For benzene and other graphs, the paper states explicitly that Eq. (⋆) has 'strong analytical, numerical and quantum-computational evidence' but that 'a rigorous proof for all unitary operators would be desirable'; this is a candid limitation, not circularity. The numerics in Figs. 7 and 8 compare weak-measurement values τN(η,t) computed from Eq. (25) with independently computed strong-measurement values τ_strong^N; no parameter is fitted to enforce the 1/η law. The reliance on the pseudo-completeness relation (Eq. 18) is a structural assumption that restricts the protocol to phase-damping measurements, with the paper explicitly noting that other POVMs cannot be canonically embedded; this is a scope limitation rather than a circular step. The recurrence framework of Grünbaum et al. [15,22] and Bourgain et al. [22] is prior external mathematics, and citations to the authors' own earlier work are used as benchmarks or background, not as the proof of the scaling law. No definitional identification, fitted-input-as-prediction, or self-citation chain forces the stated result.
Assumptions & free parameters
assumptions (6)
- domain assumption Finite-dimensional Hilbert space for the quantum walk on a finite graph
- domain assumption The monitored quantum walk uses stroboscopic measurements at constant rate with unitary evolution U(t)=e^{-iHt} between measurements
- domain assumption The weak measurement is a phase-damping channel with Kraus operators K_yes=diag(0,√η), K_no=diag(1,√(1-η))
- ad hoc to paper Pseudo-completeness relation K_yes + K_no = 1 + f(η)P
- standard math The recurrence formalism of Grünbaum et al. [15] and Bourgain et al. [22] (Schur functions, generating functions, spectral characterization) is valid for the weak-measurement operators defined in (16)
- standard math The strong-measurement first-return times for two-level and ring systems, taken from [31], are correct
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Quantum Walks: First Hitting Times with Weak Measurements." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5FZHMWBC
@misc{pith2026250621168,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Quantum Walks: First Hitting Times with Weak Measurements},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5FZHMWBC}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.21168}
}
read the original abstract
We study the first detected recurrence time problem of continuous-time quantum walks on graphs. While previous works have employed projective measurements to determine the first return time, we implement a protocol based on weak measurements on a dilated system, enabling minimally invasive monitoring throughout the evolution. To achieve this, we extend the theoretical framework and complement it with both numerical simulations and experimental investigations on an IBM quantum computer. Despite the implementation of a generalized measurement, our modified formalism of weak recurrence provides a description purely within the Hilbert space of the quantum system. Our results reveal that the first hitting time scales inversely with the coupling parameter between the ancilla and the quantum system.
Figures
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
State Recurrence and Subspace Recurrence We consider the first detected return time problem [26, 31]. Contrary to classical random walks, where the observer can detect the position of the walker with- out interfering with the system’s dynamics, a quantum walk must be subjected to repeated measurements. We will monitor the quantum system stroboscopically f...
-
[2]
III, we will consider the first hitting time with weak measurements
Generalized Quantum Measurements In Sec. III, we will consider the first hitting time with weak measurements. Here, we repeat the basic background for operator-valued measurements. Generalizing the quantum measurement from projection-valued measurements (PVMs) on a Hilbert space to positive operator-valued measurements (POVMs) on a dilated system is the u...
-
[3]
First Hitting Time For a stochastic process with initial state |ψ⟩ ∈SV , the detection probability pn ≡ pn(t) is referred to the probability to detect the quantum walker after n ∈ N steps [22] pn(t) := ∥ˆan(t) |ψ⟩∥2. (3) Then, the overall return probability RN is defined as the total probability that the process returns to its initial state after N steps,...
-
[4]
Quantum stochastic walks: A gen- eralization of classical random walks and quantum walks,
J. D. Whitfield, C. A. Rodr ´ ıguez-Rosario, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, “Quantum stochastic walks: A gen- eralization of classical random walks and quantum walks,” Phys. Rev. A , vol. 81, p. 022323, 2010
work page 2010
-
[5]
W eak Measurements To the purpose of simplicity, we will describe first hitting times through weak measurements solely by us- ing subnormalized pure states and projection-valued 4 measurements. By doing so, we can utilize the spec- tral characterization of recurrence developed in [15] for our approach of measuring weakly. If we are able to track the actio...
-
[6]
One iteration in our weakly monitored quantum walk consists of three steps
W.l.o.g., we initialize the ancilla qubit in state |0⟩ and the system qubit in state |1⟩. One iteration in our weakly monitored quantum walk consists of three steps. At first, the unitary operator U (t) is applied to the register of d qubits. Secondly, the controlled RY gate is coupled to the control qubit which is to be mea- sured. The control qubit is p...
-
[7]
W eak First Return Event
-
[8]
with probability one. The first hitting time of a quantum walk characterizes the expected time, which a quantum particle takes to evolve through a lattice and hit its initial site for the first time. The phrases hitting time, return time, and recurrence time are used synonymously. Classical first hitting times on graphs [9, 10] are utilized for instance i...
arXiv 2025
Show all 80 references
-
[9]
It is em- phasized that Pη and Qη characterize a binary mea- surement, as the small Proposition A.4 shows
Weak First Return Amplitude Operator We analyze the first hitting time depending on η ∈ (0, 1] by applying the spectral description of quantum recurrence [15, 22–24] to weak measurements. It is em- phasized that Pη and Qη characterize a binary mea- surement, as the small Propo...
-
[10]
(25) Details are presented in Lemma A.5 and complemented by Corollary A.7 and A.8
First Hitting Time after N Weak Measurements Similarly to the above weak first return amplitude operator (19) and return probability (20), we have for the weak first hitting time after measuring maximally N times: τN (η, t) := PN n=1 n pn(η, t) RN (η, t) (24) By employing the ...
-
[11]
(23) yields R∞(η, t) = 1
First Hitting Time after Infinitely Many Measurements In the limit of infinitely many measurements, Eq. (23) yields R∞(η, t) = 1. Then, (24) becomes τ∞(η, t) := ∞X n=1 n pn(η, t) def. = ∞X n=1 n ∥ˆaη n(t) |ψ⟩∥2. (26) For this limit, the Laplace transform of the first return op...
-
[12]
Analytical Results Equations (24) and (30) allow an analytical discus- sion for both the Zeno limit and the minimal, two-level system
-
[13]
This freezing phenomenon is known as quantum Zeno effect [45]
Zeno Dynamics If the rate, at which a quantum walker is measured, is too high, there is no unitary evolution, but the walker is frozen at its initial state. This freezing phenomenon is known as quantum Zeno effect [45]. Mathematically, this limit is obtained by sending t to 0,...
-
[14]
Without loss of generality, we measure the vertex labeled with 0, as displayed in Fig
Two Level System The minimal example consists of a graph with two vertices and one edge connecting them. Without loss of generality, we measure the vertex labeled with 0, as displayed in Fig. 4. The Hamilton operator is given by H = −σx ≡ − 0 1 1 0 . The two non-degenerate eig...
-
[15]
Numerical and Experimental Results
-
[16]
1 on a superconducting quantum processor for the two-level system
Two Level System on an IBM Quantum Computer We implement the quantum circuits shown in Fig. 1 on a superconducting quantum processor for the two-level system. The readout assignment 9 FIG. 5: Benzene ring: expected first return time of a MCTQW on Benzene with (a) N = 10, (b) N...
-
[17]
The complete graph K6 subjected to FIG
Benzene Ring The first return time problem for strongly monitored quantum walks on Benzene-type rings was extensively studied in [31]. The complete graph K6 subjected to FIG. 6: (a) Benzene ring encoded into a 4-qubit ba- sis. This is the (quantum) system on which a MC- TQW is...
-
[18]
The 1 η -Decay of the First Hitting Time Numerical computation showed that the leading or- der in which the expected return time decays as η goes from 1 to 0, behaves like 1 η . In the limit of N → ∞, the 1 η behavior is very sharp, which indicates τ∞(η, t) = 1 η τ∞(t, 1), whe...
-
[19]
Exponential algorithmic speedup by a quantum walk,
A. M. Childs, R. Cleve, E. Deotto, E. Farhi, S. Gut- mann, and D. A. Spielman, “Exponential algorithmic speedup by a quantum walk,” in Proceedings of the thirty-fifth annual ACM symposium on Theory of com- puting, pp. 59–68, 2003
2003
-
[20]
Quantum random walks: an introduc- tory overview,
J. Kempe, “Quantum random walks: an introduc- tory overview,” Contemporary Physics, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 307–327, 2003. 12
2003
-
[21]
Discrete quantum walks hit exponentially faster,
J. Kempe, “Discrete quantum walks hit exponentially faster,” Probability theory and related fields , vol. 133, no. 2, pp. 215–235, 2005
2005
-
[22]
Quantum random-walk search algorithm,
N. Shenvi, J. Kempe, and K. B. Whaley, “Quantum random-walk search algorithm,” Physical Review A , vol. 67, no. 5, p. 052307, 2003
2003
-
[23]
Universal computation by quantum walk,
A. M. Childs, “Universal computation by quantum walk,” Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 102, p. 180501, 2009
2009
-
[24]
Review on quantum walk computing: Theory, implementation, and appli- cation,
X. Qiang, S. Ma, and H. Song, “Review on quantum walk computing: Theory, implementation, and appli- cation,” Intelligent Computing , 2024
2024
-
[25]
Probing measurement-induced ef- fects in quantum walks via recurrence,
T. Nitsche, S. Barkhofen, R. Kruse, L. Sansoni, M. ˇStefaˇ n´ ak, A. G´ abris, V. Potoˇ cek, T. Kiss, I. Jex, and C. Silberhorn, “Probing measurement-induced ef- fects in quantum walks via recurrence,” Science Ad- vances, vol. 4, no. 6, p. eaar6444, 2018
2018
-
[26]
Target search problems,
D. Grebenkov, R. Metzler, and G. Oshanin, “Target search problems,” in Target Search Problems , pp. 1– 29, Springer, 2024
2024
-
[27]
Redner, A guide to first-passage processes
S. Redner, A guide to first-passage processes . Cam- bridge university press, 2001
2001
-
[28]
First-passage processes in cellular biology,
S. Iyer-Biswas and A. Zilman, “First-passage processes in cellular biology,” Advances in chemical physics , vol. 160, pp. 261–306, 2016
2016
-
[29]
Mean first passage time for a random walker and its application to chemical kinetics,
S. K. Kim, “Mean first passage time for a random walker and its application to chemical kinetics,” The Journal of Chemical Physics , vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 1057– 1067, 1958
1958
-
[30]
The- oretical framework for quantum networks,
G. Chiribella, G. M. D’Ariano, and P. Perinotti, “The- oretical framework for quantum networks,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 80, p. 022339, 2009
2009
-
[31]
Hitting time for the continuous quantum walk,
M. Varbanov, H. Krovi, and T. A. Brun, “Hitting time for the continuous quantum walk,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 78, no. 2, p. 022324, 2008
2008
-
[32]
Recurrence for discrete time uni- tary evolutions,
F. A. Gr¨ unbaum, L. Vel´ azquez, A. H. Werner, and R. F. Werner, “Recurrence for discrete time uni- tary evolutions,” Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 320, no. 2, pp. 543–569, 2013
2013
-
[33]
First- detection time of a quantum state under random prob- ing,
D. A. Kessler, E. Barkai, and K. Ziegler, “First- detection time of a quantum state under random prob- ing,” Phys. Rev. A , vol. 103, p. 022222, 2021
2021
-
[34]
Exploit- ing dynamic quantum circuits in a quantum algo- rithm with superconducting qubits,
A. D. C´ orcoles, M. Takita, K. Inoue, S. Lekuch, Z. K. Minev, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, “Exploit- ing dynamic quantum circuits in a quantum algo- rithm with superconducting qubits,” Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 127, p. 100501, 2021
2021
-
[35]
Quantum fourier transform using dynamic cir- cuits,
E. B¨ aumer, V. Tripathi, A. Seif, D. Lidar, and D. S. Wang, “Quantum fourier transform using dynamic cir- cuits,” Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 133, p. 150602, 2024
2024
-
[36]
Restart expedites quantum walk hitting times,
R. Yin and E. Barkai, “Restart expedites quantum walk hitting times,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 130, no. 5, p. 050802, 2023
2023
-
[37]
Quantum re- setting in continuous measurement induced dynamics of a qubit,
V. Dubey, R. Chetrite, and A. Dhar, “Quantum re- setting in continuous measurement induced dynamics of a qubit,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, vol. 56, no. 15, p. 154001, 2023
2023
-
[38]
¨Uber Potenzreihen, die im Innern des Ein- heitskreises beschr¨ ankt sind.,
J. Schur, “ ¨Uber Potenzreihen, die im Innern des Ein- heitskreises beschr¨ ankt sind.,” Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik , vol. 147, 1917
1917
-
[39]
Quantum recurrence of a subspace and operator-valued schur functions,
J. Bourgain, F. Gr¨ unbaum, L. Vel´ azquez, and J. Wilkening, “Quantum recurrence of a subspace and operator-valued schur functions,” Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 329, pp. 1031–1067, 2014
2014
-
[40]
A generalization of Schur functions: applications to Nevanlinna func- tions, orthogonal polynomials, random walks and uni- tary and open quantum walks,
F. A. Gr¨ unbaum and L. Vel´ azquez, “A generalization of Schur functions: applications to Nevanlinna func- tions, orthogonal polynomials, random walks and uni- tary and open quantum walks,” Advances in Mathe- matics, vol. 326, pp. 352–464, 2018
2018
-
[41]
Quantum markov chains: recurrence, schur func- tions and splitting rules,
F. Gr¨ unbaum, C. Lardizabal, and L. Vel´ azquez, “Quantum markov chains: recurrence, schur func- tions and splitting rules,” in Annales Henri Poincar´ e, vol. 21, pp. 189–239, Springer, 2020
2020
-
[42]
Measurement-induced quantum walks on an ibm quantum computer,
S. Tornow and K. Ziegler, “Measurement-induced quantum walks on an ibm quantum computer,” Phys. Rev. Res., vol. 5, p. 033089, 2023
2023
-
[43]
First hitting times on a quantum com- puter: Tracking vs. local monitoring, topological ef- fects, and dark states,
Q. Wang, S. Ren, R. Yin, K. Ziegler, E. Barkai, and S. Tornow, “First hitting times on a quantum com- puter: Tracking vs. local monitoring, topological ef- fects, and dark states,” Entropy, vol. 26, no. 10, 2024
2024
-
[44]
Restart uncertainty relation for monitored quantum dynam- ics,
R. Yin, Q. Wang, S. Tornow, and E. Barkai, “Restart uncertainty relation for monitored quantum dynam- ics,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 122, no. 1, p. e2402912121, 2025
2025
-
[45]
Bulk-edge corre- spondence of one-dimensional quantum walks,
C. Cedzich, F. A. Gr¨ unbaum, C. Stahl, L. Vel´ azquez, A. H. Werner, and R. F. Werner, “Bulk-edge corre- spondence of one-dimensional quantum walks,” Jour- nal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , vol. 49, no. 21, p. 21LT01, 2016
2016
-
[46]
The topological classification of one-dimensional symmetric quantum walks,
C. Cedzich, T. Geib, F. A. Gr¨ unbaum, C. Stahl, L. Vel´ azquez, A. H. Werner, and R. F. Werner, “The topological classification of one-dimensional symmetric quantum walks,” in Annales Henri Poincar´ e, vol. 19, pp. 325–383, Springer, 2018
2018
-
[47]
Quantum walks in external gauge fields,
C. Cedzich, T. Geib, A. Werner, and R. Werner, “Quantum walks in external gauge fields,” Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 60, no. 1, 2019
2019
-
[48]
Quan- tum walks: The first detected passage time problem,
H. Friedman, D. A. Kessler, and E. Barkai, “Quan- tum walks: The first detected passage time problem,” Physical Review E , vol. 95, no. 3, p. 032141, 2017
2017
-
[49]
Von Neumann, Mathematical foundations of quan- tum mechanics: New edition
J. Von Neumann, Mathematical foundations of quan- tum mechanics: New edition . Princeton university press, 2018
2018
-
[50]
M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum computation and quantum information. Cambridge university press, 2010
2010
-
[51]
Quantum walks with infinite hitting times,
H. Krovi and T. A. Brun, “Quantum walks with infinite hitting times,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 74, no. 4, p. 042334, 2006
2006
-
[52]
Positive functions on c*-algebras,
W. F. Stinespring, “Positive functions on c*-algebras,” Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society , vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 211–216, 1955
1955
-
[53]
R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson, Topics in matrix anal- ysis. Cambridge university press, 1994
1994
-
[54]
Experimental realization of a measurement-induced entanglement phase transition on a superconducting quantum processor,
J. M. Koh, S.-N. Sun, M. Motta, and A. J. Minnich, “Experimental realization of a measurement-induced entanglement phase transition on a superconducting quantum processor,” arXiv preprint 2203.04338, 2022
2022 arXiv
-
[55]
Measurement-induced phase transitions in the dynamics of entanglement,
B. Skinner, J. Ruhman, and A. Nahum, “Measurement-induced phase transitions in the dynamics of entanglement,” Physical Review X, vol. 9, no. 3, p. 031009, 2019
2019
-
[56]
Topological transition in 13 measurement-induced geometric phases,
V. Gebhart, K. Snizhko, T. Wellens, A. Buchleitner, A. Romito, and Y. Gefen, “Topological transition in 13 measurement-induced geometric phases,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , vol. 117, no. 11, pp. 5706–5713, 2020
2020
-
[57]
Weak- measurement-induced asymmetric dephasing: Mani- festation of intrinsic measurement chirality,
K. Snizhko, P. Kumar, N. Rao, and Y. Gefen, “Weak- measurement-induced asymmetric dephasing: Mani- festation of intrinsic measurement chirality,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 127, no. 17, p. 170401, 2021
2021
-
[58]
Large fluc- tuations of the first detected quantum return time,
R. Yin, K. Ziegler, F. Thiel, and E. Barkai, “Large fluc- tuations of the first detected quantum return time,” Physical Review Research , vol. 1, no. 3, p. 033086, 2019
2019
-
[59]
Phase change during a cyclic quantum evolution,
Y. Aharonov and J. Anandan, “Phase change during a cyclic quantum evolution,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 58, no. 16, p. 1593, 1987
1987
-
[60]
Berry’s phase and aharonov- anandan’s phase,
Z. Wu and J. Wang, “Berry’s phase and aharonov- anandan’s phase,” Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications , vol. 232, no. 1-2, pp. 201–206, 1996
1996
-
[61]
The aharonov– anandan phase and geometric double-quantum excita- tion in strongly coupled nuclear spin pairs,
C. Bengs, M. Sabba, and M. H. Levitt, “The aharonov– anandan phase and geometric double-quantum excita- tion in strongly coupled nuclear spin pairs,” The Jour- nal of Chemical Physics , vol. 158, no. 12, 2023
2023
-
[62]
Quantum zeno effect,
W. M. Itano, D. J. Heinzen, J. J. Bollinger, and D. J. Wineland, “Quantum zeno effect,” Physical Review A, vol. 41, no. 5, p. 2295, 1990
1990
-
[63]
Quantum walks: The mean first detected transition time,
Q. Liu, R. Yin, K. Ziegler, and E. Barkai, “Quantum walks: The mean first detected transition time,” Phys. Rev. Res., vol. 2, p. 033113, 2020
2020
-
[64]
Dynamical decoupling for superconduct- ing qubits: A performance survey,
N. Ezzell, B. Pokharel, L. Tewala, G. Quiroz, and D. A. Lidar, “Dynamical decoupling for superconduct- ing qubits: A performance survey,” Phys. Rev. Appl. , vol. 20, p. 064027, 2023
2023
-
[65]
Quantized recurrence time in unital iterated open quantum dynamics,
P. Sinkovicz, Z. Kurucz, T. Kiss, and J. K. Asb´ oth, “Quantized recurrence time in unital iterated open quantum dynamics,” Phys. Rev. A , vol. 91, p. 042108, 2015
2015
-
[66]
Convenient peierls phase choice for periodic atomistic systems under magnetic field,
A. Cresti, “Convenient peierls phase choice for periodic atomistic systems under magnetic field,” Phys. Rev. B, vol. 103, p. 045402, 2021
2021
-
[67]
Computable measure of entanglement,
G. Vidal and R. F. Werner, “Computable measure of entanglement,” Physical Review A , vol. 65, no. 3, p. 032314, 2002
2002
-
[68]
Quantifying entanglement,
V. Vedral, M. B. Plenio, M. A. Rippin, and P. L. Knight, “Quantifying entanglement,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 78, no. 12, p. 2275, 1997
1997
-
[69]
A comparison of entan- glement measures,
J. Eisert and M. B. Plenio, “A comparison of entan- glement measures,” Journal of Modern Optics , vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 145–154, 1999
1999
-
[70]
Classical information theory of networks,
F. Radicchi, D. Krioukov, H. Hartle, and G. Bianconi, “Classical information theory of networks,” Journal of Physics: Complexity , vol. 1, no. 2, p. 025001, 2020. Appendix A: Recurrence by W eak Measurements
2020
-
[71]
The goal of such an embedding is to keep N ∈ N as small as possible in order to minimize computational resources
Encoding of the First Return Event In order to implement monitored quantum walks on real quantum hardware, one must give a precise encoding of states into qubit-Hilbert spaces of dimension d = 2 N . The goal of such an embedding is to keep N ∈ N as small as possible in order t...
-
[72]
W eak Measurements: Subnormalized States and Subspace Recurrence a. Shear Mapping of the Projection Operators By Proposition A.2, we can now say how the orthogonal projections are stretched to those linear mappings that represent the weak measurement. The transformation matrix...
-
[73]
(A.3), we start by computing the left side of (A.3) and conclude the right
Lemma A.5 In order to show Eq. (A.3), we start by computing the left side of (A.3) and conclude the right. ˆaη n + ˜U n η P = PηU ˜U n−1 η P + ˜U n η P = PηU ˜U n−1 η P + ˜Uη ˜U n−1 η P = PηU + ˜Uη ˜U n−1 η P = (PηU + QηU ) ˜U n−1 η P = (Pη + Qη) U ˜U n−1 η P = √ηP + (1 − P ) ...
-
[74]
∥a∥2 = − ˜U n−1 η |ψ⟩ 2 + ˜U n η |ψ⟩ 2 + 2 g(η) η ∥ˆaη n |ψ⟩∥2,
-
[75]
∥b∥2 = f 2(η) η ∥ˆaη n |ψ⟩∥2,
-
[76]
19 Details are presented in Section B 2
2 Re ⟨a, b⟩ = 2g(η)f (η) η ∥ˆaη n |ψ⟩∥2. 19 Details are presented in Section B 2. For simplicity, we define h(η) := 1 η 2g(η) + f 2(η) + 2g(η)f (η) = 2. Then, we find by combining all three expressions: ∥ˆaη n |ψ⟩∥2 = − ˜U n−1 η |ψ⟩ 2 + ˜U n η |ψ⟩ 2 + 2 g(η) η ∥ˆaη n |ψ⟩∥2 + f...
-
[77]
Details to B 1
A few Details a. Details to B 1
-
[78]
It corresponds to the η = 1 projection-valued measure- ment
Such an expression was already computed in [22]. It corresponds to the η = 1 projection-valued measure- ment. However, we repeat the computation to follow closely what will change in the case of our weak measurement protocol. ∥a∥2 = (U ˜U n−1 η − ˜U n η ) |ψ⟩ 2 = U ˜U n−1 η |ψ...
-
[79]
Hence, we have ∥b∥2 = f 2(η) η ∥ˆaη n |ψ⟩∥2
Again, since |ψ⟩ ∈SV : b = f (η)P U˜U n−1 η |ψ⟩ = f (η) 1√η √ηP U˜U n−1 η P |ψ⟩ = f (η)√η PηU ˜U n−1 η P | {z } =ˆaη n |ψ⟩ = f (η)√η ˆaη n |ψ⟩ . Hence, we have ∥b∥2 = f 2(η) η ∥ˆaη n |ψ⟩∥2
-
[80]
The expression for b was computed in the above step 2. Compute a and combine: a = U ˜U n−1 η |ψ⟩ −˜U n η |ψ⟩ = U − ˜Uη ˜U n−1 η |ψ⟩ = (1 − Qη) U ˜U n−1 η |ψ⟩ = (1 − Qη)| {z } =g(η)P U ˜U n−1 η P |ψ⟩ = g(η)P U˜U n−1 η P |ψ⟩ = g(η)√η √ηP U˜U n−1 η P |ψ⟩ = g(η)√η PηU ˜U n−1 η P |...
Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.