pith. sign in

arxiv: 2510.18623 · v3 · submitted 2025-10-21 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.dis-nn· cond-mat.stat-mech· physics.comp-ph

Optimal quantum reservoir learning in proximity to universality

Moein N. Ivaki , Matias Karjula , Tapio Ala-Nissila This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 05:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.dis-nncond-mat.stat-mechphysics.comp-ph
keywords quantum reservoir computingnonstabilizer resourcesClifford circuitsentanglement spectrumconditional-T gateslearnabilityscalabilitytunable quantum dynamics
0
0 comments X p. Extension

The pith

By replacing a fraction of Clifford gates with conditional-T gates, quantum reservoirs gain tunable learnability and scalability.

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

The paper examines the transition from classically simulable to complex quantum dynamics in the context of reservoir computing. It proposes a random circuit model on N qubits in which a controllable fraction p of the gates are switched from Clifford to nonstabilizing conditional-T type. The central finding is that reservoir performance on time-based tasks tracks the growth in entanglement spectrum features and nonstabilizer resources as p increases. At the same time, the anti-flatness of the output states is used to confirm that the system avoids the kind of measure concentration that would block learning when the number of qubits grows large while keeping depth ratio fixed. This gives a practical knob for building quantum reservoirs that are both powerful and trainable.

Core claim

We establish a direct correspondence between the reservoir's performance on temporal processing tasks and its entanglement spectrum statistics and long-range nonstabilizer resource content. To assess scalability, we study the scaling of the anti-flatness of states in the large-N limit at a fixed circuit depth ratio d/N. We demonstrate that the learnability and scalability of the reservoir can be continuously controlled by the parameter p, allowing us to navigate from classically tractable to maximally expressive quantum dynamics.

What carries the argument

The tunable random circuit reservoir where a fraction p of Clifford gates are probabilistically replaced by conditional-T gates.

If this is right

  • Increasing the parameter p enhances the long-range nonstabilizer content and thereby improves task performance.
  • The anti-flatness measure at fixed d/N acts as a witness that learning remains feasible even as system size grows.
  • Reservoir functionality can be dialed continuously between classical and quantum regimes.
  • These results are independent of specific circuit architecture.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Hardware implementations could use this p-tuning to adapt to different noise levels or task difficulties.
  • The connection between nonstabilizer resources and learnability may extend to other quantum machine learning models.
  • Future work might explore whether an optimal p exists that maximizes performance per resource cost.

Load-bearing premise

Anti-flatness of states in the large-N limit reliably signals the absence of concentration of measure that would prevent learning.

What would settle it

Large-scale numerical simulations in which the learning error fails to decrease with rising p or shows no relation to the computed anti-flatness values.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.18623 by Matias Karjula, Moein N. Ivaki, Tapio Ala-Nissila.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The study of the boundary between classically simulable and computationally complex quantum dynamics is fundamental to understanding which physical resources may enable enhanced information-processing capabilities. We investigate this within the framework of quantum reservoir computing by introducing a tunable $N$-qubit random circuit model, where a fraction $p$ of Clifford gates are probabilistically substituted with nonstabilizing conditional-$\hat{T}$ gates. We establish a direct correspondence between the reservoir's performance on temporal processing tasks and its entanglement spectrum statistics and long-range nonstabilizer resource content. To assess scalability, we study the scaling of the anti-flatness of states in the large-$N$ limit at a fixed circuit depth ratio $d/N \sim \mathcal{O}(1)$. This is taken as a witness to concentration of measures, a known impediment to learning in thermalizing systems. We demonstrate that the learnability and scalability of the reservoir can be continuously controlled by the parameter $p$, allowing us to navigate from classically tractable to maximally expressive quantum dynamics. These architecture-agnostic results provide a general strategy for designing tunable and expressive quantum reservoirs, highlighting how certain nonclassical properties control average-case intrinsic learnability and functionality.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces a tunable N-qubit random circuit model for quantum reservoir computing in which a fraction p of Clifford gates are probabilistically replaced by nonstabilizing conditional-T gates. It reports a direct correspondence between reservoir performance on temporal processing tasks and the entanglement spectrum statistics together with long-range nonstabilizer resource content. Scalability is assessed via the scaling of state anti-flatness in the large-N limit at fixed circuit depth ratio d/N ∼ O(1), interpreted as a witness to concentration-of-measure effects. The central claim is that the parameter p continuously controls learnability and scalability, enabling navigation from classically tractable to maximally expressive quantum dynamics in an architecture-agnostic manner.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the work would provide a concrete, continuously tunable handle on the trade-off between classical simulability and quantum expressivity in reservoir computing. Linking task performance to specific nonclassical resources (entanglement spectrum and nonstabilizer content) while using anti-flatness scaling as a proxy for large-N barriers offers a practical design principle for quantum machine-learning architectures that optimize both efficiency and capability.

major comments (2)
  1. [Scalability and large-N limit analysis] The scalability argument rests on anti-flatness growth (for small p) in the N→∞ limit at fixed d/N serving as a reliable witness to concentration-of-measure effects that impede learning. While finite-N performance is shown to track entanglement/nonstabilizer statistics, no direct evidence is provided that rising anti-flatness produces measurable degradation in reservoir task error or capacity as N increases at fixed depth ratio. This link is load-bearing for the claim of continuous control via p (see the scalability and large-N analysis sections).
  2. [Correspondence between performance and resources] The asserted direct correspondence between performance metrics and entanglement spectrum/long-range nonstabilizer content is established at finite N, but the extrapolation to the large-N regime where anti-flatness is analyzed assumes these same mechanisms dominate scalability without additional verification (e.g., task performance at progressively larger N for varying p).
minor comments (1)
  1. [Methods or scaling section] The definition and precise formula for anti-flatness should be stated explicitly in the main text rather than relying solely on references, to aid readers in reproducing the scaling analysis.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address the major comments below, providing clarifications and indicating planned revisions to enhance the presentation of our scalability analysis and resource correspondences.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Scalability and large-N limit analysis] The scalability argument rests on anti-flatness growth (for small p) in the N→∞ limit at fixed d/N serving as a reliable witness to concentration-of-measure effects that impede learning. While finite-N performance is shown to track entanglement/nonstabilizer statistics, no direct evidence is provided that rising anti-flatness produces measurable degradation in reservoir task error or capacity as N increases at fixed depth ratio. This link is load-bearing for the claim of continuous control via p (see the scalability and large-N analysis sections).

    Authors: We agree that direct evidence linking anti-flatness growth to task performance degradation at large N would strengthen the argument. However, simulating full reservoir tasks at large N is computationally infeasible with current resources. We have chosen anti-flatness as a proxy because it is a well-established indicator of concentration-of-measure effects in quantum many-body systems, which are known to impact learnability. Our finite-N data shows that as anti-flatness increases with N for small p, the performance metrics degrade accordingly. In the revised manuscript, we will add a dedicated subsection discussing the validity of this proxy, including references to theoretical works on concentration of measure, and present scaling plots of key metrics up to the largest feasible N to support the extrapolation. This revision will make the assumptions more explicit. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Correspondence between performance and resources] The asserted direct correspondence between performance metrics and entanglement spectrum/long-range nonstabilizer content is established at finite N, but the extrapolation to the large-N regime where anti-flatness is analyzed assumes these same mechanisms dominate scalability without additional verification (e.g., task performance at progressively larger N for varying p).

    Authors: The correspondence between task performance and the entanglement spectrum as well as nonstabilizer content is indeed primarily established through finite-N simulations, as described in the results section. For the large-N regime, we posit that these resource measures continue to be the dominant factors, given that anti-flatness itself is influenced by the buildup of these nonclassical resources. To address the referee's concern, we will revise the large-N analysis section to include a more rigorous justification for the extrapolation, perhaps by showing how the resource measures scale and correlate with anti-flatness across increasing N. While we cannot provide task performance data at arbitrarily large N due to exponential simulation costs, the consistent behavior across the studied range supports our conclusion that p provides continuous control. We believe this clarification will resolve the issue without altering the core claims. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; performance, entanglement statistics, and anti-flatness scaling computed independently

full rationale

The paper computes reservoir performance on temporal tasks separately from entanglement spectrum statistics, long-range nonstabilizer content, and anti-flatness scaling in the large-N limit at fixed d/N. The claimed direct correspondence and continuous control via p are presented as observational results from varying the Clifford-to-nonstabilizing gate substitution fraction, not as definitions or fits that reduce one quantity to another by construction. Anti-flatness is invoked as a witness to concentration of measures based on known properties of thermalizing systems rather than derived from task error or capacity. No self-definitional loops, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations that collapse the central claims are identifiable from the derivation structure. The architecture-agnostic strategy for tunable reservoirs follows from these independent measurements.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the assumption that anti-flatness witnesses concentration effects and that performance correlates directly with entanglement and nonstabilizer statistics; p is the explicit control parameter. No other free parameters or invented entities are stated in the abstract.

free parameters (1)
  • p
    Fraction of Clifford gates replaced by conditional-T gates; used to tune between regimes.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5751 in / 1157 out tokens · 43222 ms · 2026-05-18T05:04:59.334741+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 92 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Cerezo, G

    M. Cerezo, G. Verdon, H.-Y. Huang, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Challenges and opportunities in quantum machine learning, Nature computational science2, 567 (2022)

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    J. R. McClean, S. Boixo, V. N. Smelyanskiy, R. Bab- bush, and H. Neven, Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes, Nature communications9, 4812 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Larocca, S

    M. Larocca, S. Thanasilp, S. Wang, K. Sharma, J. Bia- monte, P. J. Coles, L. Cincio, J. R. McClean, Z. Holmes, and M. Cerezo, Barren plateaus in variational quantum computing, Nature Reviews Physics7, 174 (2025)

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    Entanglement and Classical Simulability in Quantum Extreme Learning Machines

    A. De Lorenzis, M. Casado, N. L. Gullo, T. Lux, F. Plastina, and A. Riera, Behind the scenes of the quantum extreme learning machines, arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.06873 (2025)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    Deshpande, M

    A. Deshpande, M. Hinsche, S. Najafi, K. Sharma, R. Sweke, and C. Zoufal, Dynamic parameterized quan- tum circuits: expressive and barren-plateau free, arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.05760 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Does provable absence of barren plateaus imply classical simula- bility? arXiv:2312.09121, 2023

    M. Cerezo, M. Larocca, D. Garc´ ıa-Mart´ ın, N. L. Diaz, P. Braccia, E. Fontana, M. S. Rudolph, P. Bermejo, A. Ijaz, S. Thanasilp,et al., Does provable absence of barren plateaus imply classical simulability? or, why we need to rethink variational quantum computing, arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.09121 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Cerezo, A

    M. Cerezo, A. Sone, T. Volkoff, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Cost function dependent barren plateaus in shal- low parametrized quantum circuits, Nature communica- tions12, 1791 (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Quantum Convolutional Neural Networks are Effectively Classically Simulable

    P. Bermejo, P. Braccia, M. S. Rudolph, Z. Holmes, L. Cincio, and M. Cerezo, Quantum convolutional neu- ral networks are (effectively) classically simulable, arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.12739 (2024)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  9. [9]

    Huang and P

    P.-W. Huang and P. Rebentrost, Post-variational quan- tum neural networks, arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.10560 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  10. [10]

    Nakajima and I

    K. Nakajima and I. Fischer,Reservoir computing (Springer, 2021)

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    Mujal, R

    P. Mujal, R. Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, J. Nokkala, J. Garc´ ıa-Beni, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zambrini, Oppor- tunities in quantum reservoir computing and extreme learning machines, Advanced Quantum Technologies4, 2100027 (2021)

    work page 2021

  12. [12]

    Thanasilp, S

    S. Thanasilp, S. Wang, M. Cerezo, and Z. Holmes, Expo- nential concentration in quantum kernel methods, Nature communications15, 5200 (2024)

    work page 2024

  13. [13]

    Xiong, G

    W. Xiong, G. Facelli, M. Sahebi, O. Agnel, T. Chotibut, S. Thanasilp, and Z. Holmes, On fundamental aspects of quantum extreme learning machines, Quantum Machine Intelligence7, 20 (2025)

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum computation and quantum information(Cambridge university press, 2010)

    work page 2010

  15. [15]

    A. W. Harrow and A. Montanaro, Quantum computa- tional supremacy, Nature549, 203 (2017)

    work page 2017

  16. [16]

    Bravyi and A

    S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, Universal quantum computa- tion with ideal clifford gates and noisy ancillas, Phys. Rev. A71, 022316 (2005)

    work page 2005

  17. [17]

    Leone, S

    L. Leone, S. F. Oliviero, Y. Zhou, and A. Hamma, Quan- tum chaos is quantum, Quantum5, 453 (2021)

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    Webb, The clifford group forms a unitary 3-design, Quantum Info

    Z. Webb, The clifford group forms a unitary 3-design, Quantum Info. Comput.16, 1379–1400 (2016)

    work page 2016

  19. [19]

    A. A. Mele, Introduction to haar measure tools in quan- tum information: A beginner’s tutorial, Quantum8, 1340 (2024)

    work page 2024

  20. [20]

    H. Shen, P. Zhang, Y.-Z. You, and H. Zhai, Information scrambling in quantum neural networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 200504 (2020)

    work page 2020

  21. [21]

    Y. Wu, P. Zhang, and H. Zhai, Scrambling ability of quantum neural network architectures, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, L032057 (2021)

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    Holmes, A

    Z. Holmes, A. Arrasmith, B. Yan, P. J. Coles, A. Al- brecht, and A. T. Sornborger, Barren plateaus preclude learning scramblers, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 190501 (2021)

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    Palacios, R

    A. Palacios, R. Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, M. C. Soriano, G. L. Giorgi, and R. Zambrini, Role of coherence in many-body quantum reservoir computing, Communications Physics 7, 369 (2024)

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    T. L. Patti, K. Najafi, X. Gao, and S. F. Yelin, Entangle- ment devised barren plateau mitigation, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 033090 (2021)

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    Ortiz Marrero, M

    C. Ortiz Marrero, M. Kieferov´ a, and N. Wiebe, Entanglement-induced barren plateaus, PRX Quantum 2, 040316 (2021)

    work page 2021

  26. [26]

    Fujii and K

    K. Fujii and K. Nakajima, Harnessing disordered- ensemble quantum dynamics for machine learning, Phys. Rev. Appl.8, 024030 (2017)

    work page 2017

  27. [27]

    Kobayashi, K

    K. Kobayashi, K. Fujii, and N. Yamamoto, Feedback- driven quantum reservoir computing for time-series anal- ysis, PRX Quantum5, 040325 (2024)

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    F. Hu, S. A. Khan, N. T. Bronn, G. Angelatos, G. E. Rowlands, G. J. Ribeill, and H. E. T¨ ureci, Overcoming the coherence time barrier in quantum machine learn- ing on temporal data, Nature communications15, 7491 (2024)

    work page 2024

  29. [29]

    McCaul, J

    G. McCaul, J. S. Totero Gongora, W. Otieno, S. Savel’ev, A. Zagoskin, and A. G. Balanov, Minimal quantum reser- voirs with hamiltonian encoding, Chaos: An Interdisci- plinary Journal of Nonlinear Science35(2025)

    work page 2025

  30. [30]

    Settino, L

    J. Settino, L. Salatino, L. Mariani, F. D’Amore, M. Channab, L. Bozzolo, S. Vallisa, P. Barill` a, A. Poli- cicchio, N. Lo Gullo, A. Giordano, C. Mastroianni, and F. Plastina, Memory-augmented hybrid quantum reser- voir computing, Phys. Rev. Appl.24, 024019 (2025)

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    Huang, S

    H.-Y. Huang, S. Choi, J. R. McClean, and J. Preskill, The vast world of quantum advantage, arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.05720 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    Schuld and N

    M. Schuld and N. Killoran, Is quantum advantage the right goal for quantum machine learning?, PRX Quan- tum3, 030101 (2022)

    work page 2022

  33. [33]

    Li and S

    X. Li and S. Luo, Optimality of t-gate for generating magic resource, Communications in Theoretical Physics 75, 045101 (2023)

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    T. Haug, L. Aolita, and M. Kim, Probing quantum com- plexity via universal saturation of stabilizer entropies, Quantum9, 1801 (2025)

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    Bejan, C

    M. Bejan, C. McLauchlan, and B. B´ eri, Dynamical magic transitions in monitored clifford+tcircuits, PRX Quan- tum5, 030332 (2024)

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    A. Gu, S. F. Oliviero, and L. Leone, Magic-induced computational separation in entanglement theory, PRX Quantum6, 020324 (2025)

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    Niroula, C

    P. Niroula, C. D. White, Q. Wang, S. Johri, D. Zhu, 7 C. Monroe, C. Noel, and M. J. Gullans, Phase transition in magic with random quantum circuits, Nature physics 20, 1786 (2024)

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    Hinsche, M

    M. Hinsche, M. Ioannou, A. Nietner, J. Haferkamp, Y. Quek, D. Hangleiter, J.-P. Seifert, J. Eisert, and R. Sweke, Onetgate makes distribution learning hard, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 240602 (2023)

    work page 2023

  39. [39]

    Bravyi and D

    S. Bravyi and D. Maslov, Hadamard-free circuits expose the structure of the clifford group, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory67, 4546 (2021)

    work page 2021

  40. [40]

    M. P. Fisher, V. Khemani, A. Nahum, and S. Vijay, Random quantum circuits, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics14, 335 (2023)

    work page 2023

  41. [41]

    X. Mi, P. Roushan, C. Quintana, S. Mandra, J. Mar- shall, C. Neill, F. Arute, K. Arya, J. Atalaya, R. Bab- bush,et al., Information scrambling in quantum circuits, Science374, 1479 (2021)

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    Gottesman, Surviving as a quantum computer in a classical world, Textbook manuscript preprint (2016)

    D. Gottesman, Surviving as a quantum computer in a classical world, Textbook manuscript preprint (2016)

    work page 2016

  43. [43]

    Aaronson and D

    S. Aaronson and D. Gottesman, Improved simulation of stabilizer circuits, Phys. Rev. A70, 052328 (2004)

    work page 2004

  44. [44]

    Zhou, Z.-C

    S. Zhou, Z.-C. Yang, A. Hamma, and C. Chamon, Single T gate in a Clifford circuit drives transition to universal entanglement spectrum statistics, SciPost Phys.9, 087 (2020)

    work page 2020

  45. [45]

    Tirrito, P

    E. Tirrito, P. S. Tarabunga, G. Lami, T. Chanda, L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, M. Dalmonte, M. Collura, and A. Hamma, Quantifying nonstabilizerness through entan- glement spectrum flatness, Phys. Rev. A109, L040401 (2024)

    work page 2024

  46. [46]

    True and A

    S. True and A. Hamma, Transitions in entanglement complexity in random circuits, Quantum6, 818 (2022)

    work page 2022

  47. [47]

    A. M. Projansky, J. T. Heath, and J. D. Whitfield, En- tanglement spectrum of matchgate circuits with universal and non-universal resources, Quantum8, 1432 (2024)

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    Nahum, J

    A. Nahum, J. Ruhman, S. Vijay, and J. Haah, Quantum entanglement growth under random unitary dynamics, Phys. Rev. X7, 031016 (2017)

    work page 2017

  49. [49]

    Kim and D

    H. Kim and D. A. Huse, Ballistic spreading of entan- glement in a diffusive nonintegrable system, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 127205 (2013)

    work page 2013

  50. [50]

    A. T. Rezakhani, Characterization of two-qubit perfect entanglers, Phys. Rev. A70, 052313 (2004)

    work page 2004

  51. [51]

    Zanardi, C

    P. Zanardi, C. Zalka, and L. Faoro, Entangling power of quantum evolutions, Phys. Rev. A62, 030301 (2000)

    work page 2000

  52. [52]

    Or´ us, A practical introduction to tensor networks: Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states, Annals of physics349, 117 (2014)

    R. Or´ us, A practical introduction to tensor networks: Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states, Annals of physics349, 117 (2014)

    work page 2014

  53. [53]

    Y. Y. Atas, E. Bogomolny, O. Giraud, and G. Roux, Distribution of the ratio of consecutive level spacings in random matrix ensembles, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 084101 (2013)

    work page 2013

  54. [54]

    Oganesyan and D

    V. Oganesyan and D. A. Huse, Localization of interacting fermions at high temperature, Phys. Rev. B75, 155111 (2007)

    work page 2007

  55. [55]

    Chamon, A

    C. Chamon, A. Hamma, and E. R. Mucciolo, Emer- gent irreversibility and entanglement spectrum statistics, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 240501 (2014)

    work page 2014

  56. [56]

    Shaffer, C

    D. Shaffer, C. Chamon, A. Hamma, and E. R. Mucciolo, Irreversibility and entanglement spectrum statistics in quantum circuits, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: The- ory and Experiment2014, P12007 (2014)

    work page 2014

  57. [57]

    Kullback and R

    S. Kullback and R. A. Leibler, On information and suf- ficiency, The annals of mathematical statistics22, 79 (1951)

    work page 1951

  58. [58]

    Leone, S

    L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, and A. Hamma, Stabilizer r´ enyi entropy, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 050402 (2022)

    work page 2022

  59. [59]

    Wang, Z.-C

    C. Wang, Z.-C. Yang, T. Zhou, and X. Chen, Magic tran- sition in monitored free fermion dynamics, arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.10688 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    P. S. Tarabunga and T. Haug, Efficient mutual magic and magic capacity with matrix product states, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.07230 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    Efficient witnessing and testing of magic in mixed quantum states

    T. Haug and P. S. Tarabunga, Efficient witnessing and testing of magic in mixed quantum states, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.18098 (2025)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  62. [62]

    P. S. Tarabunga, E. Tirrito, T. Chanda, and M. Dal- monte, Many-body magic via pauli-markov chains—from criticality to gauge theories, PRX Quantum4, 040317 (2023)

    work page 2023

  63. [63]

    Qian and J

    D. Qian and J. Wang, Quantum nonlocal nonstabilizer- ness, Phys. Rev. A111, 052443 (2025)

    work page 2025

  64. [64]

    Andreadakis and P

    F. Andreadakis and P. Zanardi, An exact link be- tween nonlocal magic and operator entanglement, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.09360 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Dowling, K

    N. Dowling, K. Modi, and G. A. White, Bridging en- tanglement and magic resources through operator space, arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.18679 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    P. R. N. Falc˜ ao, P. Sierant, J. Zakrzewski, and E. Tirrito, Magic dynamics in many-body localized systems, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.07468 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  67. [67]

    Ahmadi and E

    A. Ahmadi and E. Greplova, Quantifying non- stabilizerness via information scrambling, SciPost Phys. 16, 043 (2024)

    work page 2024

  68. [68]

    N. D. Varikuti, S. Bandyopadhyay, and P. Hauke, Im- pact of clifford operations on non-stabilizing power and quantum chaos, arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.14793 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  69. [69]

    Turkeshi, E

    X. Turkeshi, E. Tirrito, and P. Sierant, Magic spread- ing in random quantum circuits, Nature Communications 16, 2575 (2025)

    work page 2025

  70. [70]

    Odavi´ c, M

    J. Odavi´ c, M. Viscardi, and A. Hamma, Stabilizer en- tropy in nonintegrable quantum evolutions, Phys. Rev. B112, 104301 (2025)

    work page 2025

  71. [71]

    Szombathy, A

    D. Szombathy, A. Valli, C. P. Moca, J. Asb´ oth, L. Farkas, T. Rakovszky, and G. Zar´ and, Spectral properties ver- sus magic generation int-doped random clifford circuits, arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.15912 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  72. [72]

    M. N. Ivaki, A. J. Szuminsky, A. Lazarides, A. Zagoskin, G. McCaul, and T. Ala-Nissila, Dynamical learning and quantum memory with non-hermitian many-body sys- tems, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.07676 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  73. [73]

    Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, G

    R. Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, G. L. Giorgi, J. Nokkala, M. C. So- riano, and R. Zambrini, Dynamical phase transitions in quantum reservoir computing, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 100502 (2021)

    work page 2021

  74. [74]

    M. N. Ivaki, A. Lazarides, and T. Ala-Nissila, Quantum reservoir computing on random regular graphs, Phys. Rev. A112, 012622 (2025)

    work page 2025

  75. [75]

    Caruso, V

    F. Caruso, V. Giovannetti, C. Lupo, and S. Mancini, Quantum channels and memory effects, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1203 (2014)

    work page 2014

  76. [76]

    Kobayashi and Y

    K. Kobayashi and Y. Motome, Edge of many-body quantum chaos in quantum reservoir computing, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.17547 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  77. [77]

    Suzuki, Q

    Y. Suzuki, Q. Gao, K. C. Pradel, K. Yasuoka, and N. Ya- mamoto, Natural quantum reservoir computing for tem- poral information processing, Scientific reports12, 1353 (2022). 8

    work page 2022

  78. [78]

    A. F. Atiya and A. G. Parlos, New results on recurrent network training: unifying the algorithms and accelerat- ing convergence, IEEE transactions on neural networks 11, 697 (2000)

    work page 2000

  79. [79]

    F. G. Brand˜ ao, W. Chemissany, N. Hunter-Jones, R. Kueng, and J. Preskill, Models of quantum complexity growth, PRX Quantum2, 030316 (2021)

    work page 2021

  80. [80]

    Ippoliti and W

    M. Ippoliti and W. W. Ho, Solvable model of deep ther- malization with distinct design times, Quantum6, 886 (2022)

    work page 2022

Showing first 80 references.