pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.10122 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-11 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: unknown

Unitary Designs from Two Chaotic Hamiltonians and a Random Pauli Operation

Ning Sun , Pengfei Zhang
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 16:30 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords unitary designschaotic HamiltoniansPauli spectrumtemporal ensemblequantum randomnessqubit systemsnon-stabilizernessframe potential
0
0 comments X

The pith

Two chaotic Hamiltonians separated by one random Pauli generate unitary designs in long-time qubit evolution.

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

The paper shows that unitary designs, which approximate the statistical properties of fully random unitaries up to certain moments, arise from evolving qubits under just two distinct chaotic Hamiltonians for long times with a single random Pauli operation placed between the two intervals. This matters because prior results required at least three separate chaotic Hamiltonians to achieve the same mixing when using only Hamiltonian quenches, so the new protocol reduces the number of distinct evolutions needed. The mechanism relies on the universal Pauli spectrum of chaotic Hamiltonians, a property that describes how Pauli operators spread under chaotic dynamics and combines with the inserted Pauli to produce the required averaging. Numerical simulations with Gaussian unitary ensemble Hamiltonians and random spin models confirm that the frame potential and other design indicators approach the expected design values, while also tracking how finite evolution times and system sizes slow the convergence.

Core claim

The temporal ensemble generated by two long-time evolutions under distinct chaotic Hamiltonians on a qubit system, interrupted by a random Pauli operator, forms a unitary design. This holds because chaotic Hamiltonians exhibit a universal Pauli spectrum that ensures sufficient operator spreading; when combined with the intermediate random Pauli, the overall averaging matches the moments of the Haar measure up to the design order. The result is verified through explicit calculations on GUE Hamiltonians and random spin models, with additional analysis of how finite-time and finite-size effects modify the approach to the design limit.

What carries the argument

The universal Pauli spectrum of chaotic Hamiltonians, which governs the distribution of Pauli operator expectations under chaotic time evolution and supplies the mixing needed to reach design properties when one random Pauli is inserted between two such evolutions.

If this is right

  • Unitary designs become accessible using only two Hamiltonian quenches instead of three in chaotic qubit systems.
  • The protocol supplies a concrete dynamical route to approximate Haar-random unitaries without engineered circuits.
  • Finite-time and finite-size corrections can be systematically quantified and reduced by extending evolution durations or system sizes.
  • The same construction applies across different chaotic models, including GUE and random spin Hamiltonians.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This construction may lower experimental overhead for generating quantum randomness in near-term devices that can implement tunable chaotic Hamiltonians.
  • It points toward a broader connection between non-stabilizerness measures and the emergence of design properties in chaotic dynamics.
  • Similar reductions in the number of required evolutions might be testable in higher-dimensional or multi-qubit systems with analogous spectra.

Load-bearing premise

Chaotic Hamiltonians always possess a universal Pauli spectrum whose combination with one random Pauli is sufficient to produce the full mixing for unitary designs after sufficiently long evolution times.

What would settle it

Numerical or experimental measurement showing that the frame potential of the two-Hamiltonian-plus-Pauli ensemble remains above the design value even in the long-time limit for large systems would falsify the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.10122 by Ning Sun, Pengfei Zhang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The realization of unitary designs is of fundamental interest in quantum science and typically requires the ability to implement structured quantum circuits. Recent developments have explored the possibility of generating unitary designs using only a small number of quantum quenches, in which the evolution during each interval is governed by a static Hamiltonian. In particular, it has been established that at least three chaotic Hamiltonians are required when only Hamiltonian evolutions are employed. In this work, we propose the emergence of unitary designs in the temporal ensemble of qubit systems evolved under two distinct chaotic Hamiltonians for sufficiently long times, supplemented by an intermediate random Pauli operation inserted between them. This result follows from the universal Pauli spectrum of chaotic Hamiltonians, a central concept in the study of non-stabilizerness. Our theoretical predictions are verified numerically using explicit examples, including Gaussian unitary ensemble Hamiltonians and random spin models. We further investigate finite-time and finite-size corrections to the protocol. Our results provide new insights into the dynamical generation of quantum randomness and offer a new route toward realizing unitary designs in chaotic systems.

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 / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that unitary designs arise in the temporal ensemble of qubit evolutions under two distinct chaotic Hamiltonians separated by a single random Pauli operator. This is argued to follow from the universal Pauli spectrum property of chaotic Hamiltonians (contrasting with prior results requiring three Hamiltonians), with theoretical predictions supported by numerical simulations on GUE Hamiltonians and random spin models, plus analysis of finite-time and finite-size corrections.

Significance. If the central derivation holds, the result reduces the number of required chaotic Hamiltonians for design generation and connects unitary design formation to non-stabilizerness concepts via the Pauli spectrum. The explicit numerical verification on concrete models (GUE and spin chains) and the treatment of finite-time effects provide concrete evidence and practical guidance, strengthening the contribution to dynamical quantum randomness.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (Theoretical construction): The step asserting that the universal Pauli spectrum of each chaotic Hamiltonian, combined with one random Pauli, suffices to produce matching Haar moments for the ensemble {U_{H1}(t1) P U_{H2}(t2)} over long times is stated but not derived in detail. Explicit bounds or moment calculations showing how the spectrum guarantees the required mixing for k-designs (including any dependence on k) are needed, as this is load-bearing for the central claim.
  2. [§4.1] §4.1 (Numerical verification): The reported convergence to design properties for the GUE and spin-model examples lacks a clear statement of the design order k being tested and the precise distance measure (e.g., frame potential or diamond norm) used; without this, it is difficult to assess whether the numerics confirm the theoretical prediction for general k or only low-order cases.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract and introduction should explicitly define the order k of the unitary design being claimed, rather than leaving it implicit.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions (e.g., Figs. 3 and 4) would benefit from stating the system size, number of samples, and what the shaded regions represent.
  3. [Introduction] A brief comparison table or paragraph contrasting the two-Hamiltonian-plus-Pauli protocol with the three-Hamiltonian protocol from prior work would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We are grateful to the referee for their thorough review and constructive feedback, which will help strengthen the clarity and rigor of our manuscript. We address each major comment below and will incorporate revisions to expand the theoretical details and clarify the numerical analysis.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: §3 (Theoretical construction): The step asserting that the universal Pauli spectrum of each chaotic Hamiltonian, combined with one random Pauli, suffices to produce matching Haar moments for the ensemble {U_{H1}(t1) P U_{H2}(t2)} over long times is stated but not derived in detail. Explicit bounds or moment calculations showing how the spectrum guarantees the required mixing for k-designs (including any dependence on k) are needed, as this is load-bearing for the central claim.

    Authors: We thank the referee for identifying this gap in the presentation. The manuscript relies on the established universal Pauli spectrum property of chaotic Hamiltonians to conclude that the two-Hamiltonian ensemble with one intervening random Pauli matches Haar moments, but we agree that an explicit derivation would make the argument self-contained. In the revised manuscript, we will expand §3 with a detailed moment calculation: we will expand the k-th moment of the ensemble explicitly in the Pauli basis, show that the universality condition (spectrum approaching that of a fully random Pauli string) forces all non-identity contributions to average to zero, and derive explicit bounds on the deviation from the Haar moment that vanish as t → ∞ for any fixed k. These bounds will depend on k through the number of Pauli strings and the spectral gap of the chaotic Hamiltonians. The revised text will also include a short appendix with the full expansion for small k to illustrate the general pattern. revision: yes

  2. Referee: §4.1 (Numerical verification): The reported convergence to design properties for the GUE and spin-model examples lacks a clear statement of the design order k being tested and the precise distance measure (e.g., frame potential or diamond norm) used; without this, it is difficult to assess whether the numerics confirm the theoretical prediction for general k or only low-order cases.

    Authors: We agree that the numerical section would benefit from explicit specification of k and the metric. In the revision we will state in §4.1 that the simulations verify 2-design properties (k = 2) using the frame potential (the second-moment distance to the Haar ensemble) as the quantitative measure. The reported convergence plots track this quantity for both GUE Hamiltonians and random spin chains, showing it approaches the exact Haar value with increasing evolution time, consistent with the finite-time corrections we already analyze. While the underlying theory holds for arbitrary fixed k, the numerics are restricted to k = 2 for computational tractability; we will add a sentence noting that higher k would require correspondingly longer times, as quantified by the bounds to be added in §3. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation relies on independent universal Pauli spectrum concept

full rationale

The paper states that the emergence of unitary designs follows from the universal Pauli spectrum of chaotic Hamiltonians, described as an established central concept in non-stabilizerness studies rather than defined within this work. No equations or steps in the abstract or described content reduce the target result (unitary design in the temporal ensemble {U_{H1}(t1) P U_{H2}(t2)}) to a self-definition, fitted input renamed as prediction, or self-citation chain that is load-bearing and unverified. Numerical verification on explicit models (GUE Hamiltonians, random spin models) and discussion of finite-time/size corrections provide independent content. The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks and does not exhibit any of the enumerated circular patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based on abstract only; the result depends on the domain assumption that chaotic Hamiltonians exhibit a universal Pauli spectrum allowing the two-Hamiltonian-plus-Pauli construction to reach designs.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Chaotic Hamiltonians possess a universal Pauli spectrum
    Invoked as the central theoretical foundation for why two evolutions plus one Pauli suffice.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5475 in / 1188 out tokens · 31017 ms · 2026-05-10T16:30:43.939856+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Fast Scramblers

    Y. Sekino and L. Susskind, Fast Scramblers, JHEP 10, 065, arXiv:0808.2096 [hep-th]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2096

  2. [2]

    Black holes as mirrors: quantum information in random subsystems

    P. Hayden and J. Preskill, Black holes as mirrors: Quan- tum information in random subsystems, JHEP 09, 120 , arXiv:0708.4025 [hep-th]

    work page Pith review arXiv

  3. [3]

    Kitaev, talk given at fundamental physics prize sym- posium (2014)

    A. Kitaev, talk given at fundamental physics prize sym- posium (2014)

    2014

  4. [4]

    S. H. Shenker and D. Stanford, Black holes and the but- terfly effect, JHEP 03, 067 , arXiv:1306.0622 [hep-th]

    work page Pith review arXiv

  5. [5]

    S. H. Shenker and D. Stanford, Stringy effects in scram- bling, JHEP 05, 132 , arXiv:1412.6087 [hep-th]

    work page Pith review arXiv

  6. [6]

    A bound on chaos

    J. Maldacena, S. H. Shenker, and D. Stanford, A bound on chaos, JHEP 08, 106 , arXiv:1503.01409 [hep-th]

    work page Pith review arXiv

  7. [7]

    D. A. Roberts, D. Stanford, and L. Susskind, Localized shocks, JHEP 03, 051 , arXiv:1409.8180 [hep-th]

    work page Pith review arXiv

  8. [8]

    M. Srednicki, The approach to thermal equilibrium in quantized chaotic systems, Journal of Physics A Mathematical General 32, 1163 (1999) , arXiv:cond- mat/9809360 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    work page arXiv 1999

  9. [9]

    J. M. Deutsch, Quantum statistical mechanics in a closed system, Phys. Rev. A 43, 2046 (1991)

    2046

  10. [10]

    A. M. Kaufman, M. E. Tai, A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, R. Schittko, P. M. Preiss, and M. Greiner, Quan- tum thermalization through entanglement in an iso- lated many-body system, Science 353, aaf6725 (2016) , arXiv:1603.04409 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2016

  11. [11]

    D. P. DiVincenzo, D. W. Leung, and B. M. Terhal, Quantum data hiding, IEEE Trans. Info. Theor. 48, 580 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0103098

    work page arXiv 2002

  12. [12]

    Dankert, R

    C. Dankert, R. Cleve, J. Emerson, and E. Livine, Exact and approximate unitary 2-designs and their application to fidelity estimation, Phys. Rev. A 80, 012304 (2009)

    2009

  13. [13]

    Ambainis and J

    A. Ambainis and J. Emerson, Quantum t-designs: t-wise independence in the quantum world (2007), arXiv:quant- ph/0701126

    work page arXiv 2007

  14. [14]

    Emerson, E

    J. Emerson, E. Livine, and S. Lloyd, Convergence con- ditions for random quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. A 72, 060302 (2005) , arXiv:quant-ph/0503210

    work page arXiv 2005

  15. [15]

    A. J. Scott, Optimizing quantum process tomography with unitary 2-designs, J. Phys. A 41, 055308 (2008) , arXiv:0711.1017 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2008

  16. [16]

    D. A. Roberts and B. Yoshida, Chaos and complexity by design, JHEP 04, 121 , arXiv:1610.04903 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv

  17. [17]

    Cotler, N

    J. Cotler, N. Hunter-Jones, J. Liu, and B. Yoshida, Chaos, Complexity, and Random Matrices, JHEP 11, 048, arXiv:1706.05400 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  18. [18]

    Webb, The clifford group forms a unitary 3-design (2016), arXiv:1510.02769 [quant-ph]

    Z. Webb, The Clifford group forms a unitary 3-design, Quant. Inf. Comput. 16, 1379 (2016) , arXiv:1510.02769 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2016

  19. [19]

    Zhu, Multiqubit clifford groups are unitary 3-designs, Phys

    H. Zhu, Multiqubit clifford groups are unitary 3-designs, Phys. Rev. A 96, 062336 (2017)

    2017

  20. [20]

    A. I. Larkin and Y. N. Ovchinnikov, Quasiclassical method in the theory of superconductivity, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics (1969)

    1969

  21. [21]

    D. A. Abanin et al. , Observation of constructive interfer- ence at the edge of quantum ergodicity, Nature 646, 825 (2025), arXiv:2506.10191 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    Vardhan and J

    S. Vardhan and J. Wang, Free mutual information and higher-point OTOCs (2025), arXiv:2509.13406 [quant- ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    Guo, Thermalization and irreversibility of an iso- lated quantum system (2025), arXiv:2503.04152 [quant- ph]

    X.-Y. Guo, Thermalization and irreversibility of an iso- lated quantum system (2025), arXiv:2503.04152 [quant- ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    Liu and P

    Z. Liu and P. Zhang, Distinguishing Coherent and Inco- herent Errors in Multi-Round Time-Reversed Dynamics via Scramblons (2026), arXiv:2601.04856 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  25. [25]

    X.-L. Qi, E. J. Davis, A. Periwal, and M. Schleier-Smith, Measuring operator size growth in quantum quench ex- periments (2019), arXiv:1906.00524 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  26. [26]

    Huang, R

    H.-Y. Huang, R. Kueng, and J. Preskill, Predicting many properties of a quantum system from very few measure- ments, Nature Phys. 16, 1050 (2020) , arXiv:2002.08953 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  27. [27]

    Elben, S

    A. Elben, S. T. Flammia, H.-Y. Huang, R. Kueng, J. Preskill, B. Vermersch, and P. Zoller, The randomized measurement toolbox, Nature Rev. Phys. 5, 9 (2023) , arXiv:2203.11374 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  28. [28]

    Arute, K

    F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. S. L. Brand˜ ao, D. A. Buell, B. Burkett, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, R. Collins, W. Courtney, A. Dunsworth, E. Farhi, B. Foxen, A. G. Fowler, C. Gidney, M. Giustina, R. Graff, K. Guerin, S. Habegger, M. P. Harrigan, M. J. Hart- mann, A. K. Ho, M. Hoffmann, T. Hua...

    2019

  29. [29]

    Zhong, H

    H.-S. Zhong, H. Wang, Y.-H. Deng, M.-C. Chen, L.-C. Peng, Y.-H. Luo, J. Qin, D. Wu, X. Ding, Y. Hu, P. Hu, X. Yang, W.-J. Zhang, H. Li, Y. Li, X. Jiang, L. Gan, G. Yang, L. You, Z. Wang, L. Li, N.-L. Liu, C. Lu, and J.- W. Pan, Quantum computational advantage using pho- tons, Science 370, 1460 (2020)

    2020

  30. [30]

    L. S. Madsen, F. Laudenbach, M. F. Askarani, F. Rortais, T. Vincent, J. F. F. Bulmer, F. M. Miatto, L. Neuhaus, L. G. Helt, M. J. Collins, A. E. Lita, T. Gerrits, S. W. Nam, V. Vaidya, M. Menotti, I. Dhand, Z. Vernon, N. Quesada, and J. Lavoie, Quantum computational ad- vantage with a programmable photonic processor, Nature 606, 75 (2022)

    2022

  31. [31]

    Emerson, Y

    J. Emerson, Y. S. Weinstein, M. Saraceno, S. Lloyd, and D. G. Cory, Pseudo-Random Unitary Operators for Quantum Information Processing, Science 302, 2098 (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0410087

    work page arXiv 2098

  32. [32]

    Dankert, Efficient Simulation of Random Quantum States and Operators , Other thesis (2005), arXiv:quant- 6 ph/0512217

    C. Dankert, Efficient Simulation of Random Quantum States and Operators , Other thesis (2005), arXiv:quant- 6 ph/0512217

    work page arXiv 2005

  33. [33]

    Gross, K

    D. Gross, K. Audenaert, and J. Eisert, Evenly distributed unitaries: On the structure of unitary designs, J. Math. Phys. 48, 052104 (2007) , arXiv:quant-ph/0611002

    work page arXiv 2007

  34. [34]

    Roy and A

    A. Roy and A. J. Scott, Unitary designs and codes, Des. Codes Cryptogr. 53, 13 (2009) , arXiv:0809.3813 [math.CO]

    work page arXiv 2009

  35. [35]

    F. G. S. L. Brand˜ ao, A. W. Harrow, and M. Horodecki, Efficient quantum pseudorandomness, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 170502 (2016)

    2016

  36. [36]

    F. G. S. L. Brand˜ ao, A. W. Harrow, and M. Horodecki, Local Random Quantum Circuits are Approximate Polynomial-Designs, Commun. Math. Phys. 346, 397 (2016), arXiv:1208.0692 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2016

  37. [37]

    F. G. Brand˜ ao, W. Chemissany, N. Hunter-Jones, R. Kueng, and J. Preskill, Models of quantum complexity growth, PRX Quantum 2, 030316 (2021)

    2021

  38. [38]

    Schuster, J

    T. Schuster, J. Haferkamp, and H.-Y. Huang, Random unitaries in extremely low depth, Science 389, adv8590 (2025), arXiv:2407.07754 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Z.-Y. Hou, C. Cao, and Z.-C. Yang, Stabilizer Entangle- ment Enhances Magic Injection (2025), arXiv:2503.20873 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    Zhang, S

    Y. Zhang, S. Vijay, Y. Gu, and Y. Bao, De- signs from magic-augmented Clifford circuits (2025), arXiv:2507.02828 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Vermersch, A

    B. Vermersch, A. Elben, M. Dalmonte, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Unitary n-designs via random quenches in atomic hubbard and spin models: Application to the measurement of r´ enyi entropies,Phys. Rev. A 97, 023604 (2018)

    2018

  42. [42]

    Onorati, O

    E. Onorati, O. Buerschaper, M. Kliesch, W. Brown, A. H. Werner, and J. Eisert, Mixing properties of stochastic quantum Hamiltonians, Commun. Math. Phys. 355, 905 (2017), arXiv:1606.01914 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2017

  43. [43]

    S.-K. Jian, G. Bentsen, and B. Swingle, Linear growth of circuit complexity from Brownian dynamics, JHEP 08, 190, arXiv:2206.14205 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv

  44. [44]

    Tiutiakina, A

    A. Tiutiakina, A. De Luca, and J. De Nardis, Frame potential of Brownian SYK model of Majorana and Dirac fermions, JHEP 01, 115 , arXiv:2306.11160 [cond- mat.dis-nn]

    work page arXiv

  45. [45]

    S. Guo, M. Sasieta, and B. Swingle, Complexity is not enough for randomness, SciPost Phys. 17, 151 (2024) , arXiv:2405.17546 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  46. [46]

    Y.-N. Zhou, R. L¨ owenberg, and J. Sonner, Realiz- ing Unitary k-designs with a Single Quench (2025), arXiv:2511.13829 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    Three Hamiltonians are Sufficient for Unitary $k$-Design in Temporal Ensemble

    Y.-N. Zhou, T.-G. Zhou, and J. Sonner, Three Hamil- tonians are Sufficient for Unitary k-Design in Temporal Ensemble (2026), arXiv:2604.04205 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  48. [48]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.01124 , year=

    M. Beverland, E. Campbell, M. Howard, and V. Kli- uchnikov, Lower bounds on the non-Clifford resources for quantum computations, Quantum Sci. Technol. 5, 035009 (2020) , arXiv:1904.01124 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  49. [49]

    Turkeshi, A

    X. Turkeshi, A. Dymarsky, and P. Sierant, Pauli spectrum and nonstabilizerness of typical quantum many-body states, Phys. Rev. B 111, 054301 (2025) , arXiv:2312.11631 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    Bravyi and A

    S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, Universal quantum computa- tion with ideal clifford gates and noisy ancillas, Phys. Rev. A 71, 022316 (2005)

    2005

  51. [51]

    Bravyi and J

    S. Bravyi and J. Haah, Magic-state distillation with low overhead, Phys. Rev. A 86, 052329 (2012)

    2012

  52. [52]

    Veitch, C

    V. Veitch, C. Ferrie, D. Gross, and J. Emerson, Negative quasi-probability as a resource for quantum computation, New J. Phys. 14, 113011 (2012) , arXiv:1201.1256 [quant- ph]

    work page arXiv 2012

  53. [53]

    Emerson, D

    J. Emerson, D. Gottesman, S. A. H. Mousavian, and V. Veitch, The resource theory of stabilizer quan- tum computation, New J. Phys. 16, 013009 (2014) , arXiv:1307.7171 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2014

  54. [54]

    H. Wang, C. Liu, P. Zhang, and A. M. Garc ´ ıa-Garc ´ ıa, Entanglement transition and replica wormholes in the dissipative Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model, Phys. Rev. D 109, 046005 (2024) , arXiv:2306.12571 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  55. [55]

    Y. V. Fyodorov, Introduction to the Random Ma- trix Theory: Gaussian Unitary Ensemble and Beyond, arXiv e-prints , math-ph/0412017 (2004) , arXiv:math- ph/0412017 [math-ph]

    work page arXiv 2004

  56. [56]

    Wei et al

    D. Wei et al. , Quantum gas microscopy of Kardar-Parisi- Zhang superdiffusion, Science 376, abk2397 (2022) , arXiv:2107.00038 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2022

  57. [57]

    Geier, N

    S. Geier, N. Thaicharoen, C. Hainaut, T. Franz, A. Salzinger, A. Tebben, D. Grimshandl, G. Z¨ urn, and M. Weidem¨ uller, Floquet Hamiltonian Engineer- ing of an Isolated Many-Body Spin System (2021), arXiv:2105.01597 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2021

  58. [58]

    Garttner, J.G

    M. G¨ arttner, J. G. Bohnet, A. Safavi-Naini, M. L. Wall, J. J. Bollinger, and A. M. Rey, Measuring out-of-time- order correlations and multiple quantum spectra in a trapped ion quantum magnet, Nature Phys. 13, 781 (2017), arXiv:1608.08938 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2017

  59. [59]

    M. K. Joshi, F. Kranzl, A. Schuckert, I. Lovas, C. Maier, R. Blatt, M. Knap, and C. F. Roos, Observing emergent hydrodynamics in a long-range quantum magnet, Science 376, 720 (2022) , arXiv:2107.00033 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  60. [60]

    Zuet al., Nature597, 45 (2021), arXiv:2104.07678 [quant-ph]

    C. Zu et al. , Emergent hydrodynamics in a strongly in- teracting dipolar spin ensemble, Nature 597, 45 (2021) , arXiv:2104.07678 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  61. [61]

    S. W. Morgan, B. V. Fine, and B. Saam, Universal Long- time Behavior of Nuclear Spin Decays in a Solid, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 067601 (2008) , arXiv:0805.1751 [cond- mat.stat-mech]

    work page arXiv 2008

  62. [62]

    J. J. Sakurai and J. Napolitano, Modern Quantum Me- chanics, 3rd ed., Quantum physics, quantum information and quantum computation (Cambridge University Press, 2020)

    2020

  63. [63]

    We expect that other finite-size corrections are sublead- ing compared with the contribution arising from finite p0, since they are not enhanced by a factor of (k!)2, as confirmed by the numerical results