Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 35 references

Robustness of periodicity in Grover walks under a magnetic vector potential

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For a periodic Grover walk on a finite graph, a small magnetic vector potential on one edge makes the walk, over many periods, converge to a continuous-time quantum walk; this paper derives the effective Hamiltonian and the subspace where p

desk verdict Genuinely new first-order perturbation result for periodic Grover walks under magnetic flux, but the printed definition of B∂Xa is not a subspace and the odd-cycle example contradicts Theorem 3.2 as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.14797 v1 pith:JIL4ZYMD submitted 2026-07-16 quant-ph math-phmath.COmath.MP

Hiroto Sekido , Etsuo Segawa This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phmath-phmath.COmath.MP MSC 81Q9905C50
keywords Groverwalkquantumperiodicitymagneticvectorpotentialcontinuous-timeeffectiveHamiltoniangraphspectrarobustness
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Grover walks on finite graphs can be exactly periodic, but real systems are subject to perturbations. This paper studies the simplest local perturbation available in the quantum-graph formalism: a magnetic vector potential of strength β placed on one reference edge. Its central claim is that for a τ-periodic Grover walk the perturbed evolution over one period is I + iβτH + O(β^2), so that the state after ⌈t/β⌉ periods converges, as β→0, to the continuous-time quantum walk generated by τH. H is built from the graph's degenerate eigenvalues and a geometric area term at the reference edge, and its kernel decomposes into three subspaces, one of which is the graph's cycle space. The paper interprets the fraction dim ker H / |A| as a robustness coefficient for periodicity, and computes it for paths, cycles, and complete bipartite graphs.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is a first-order expansion. The potential changes U_0 to U_β = U_0 + iβσU_0 + O(β^2), where σ is +1 on the reference edge and −1 on its reverse. Because the walk is τ-periodic, U_β^τ = I + iβ Σ_{j=0}^{τ−1} U_0^j σ U_0^{−j} + O(β^2). Periodicity makes all cross-eigenvalue terms cancel, so only diagonal blocks survive; those vanish for λ=±1 and for simple eigenvalues. For a degenerate λ≠±1 with two relevant eigenvectors f_1,f_2, the block is i E_{λ_T}(a,a)√(1−λ_T^2) [[0,1],[−1,0]]. The determinant E_{λ_T}(a,a) of f_1,f_2 at the two endpoints fixes the effective frequency and gives τH.

What would settle it

Take a small τ-periodic graph such as C_4 or K_{2,2}, choose a generic initial state, and compare the discrete-time state after ⌈t/β⌉ periods under U_β^τ with e^{-iτtH} for a decreasing sequence β→0; if the norm difference does not converge to zero, Theorem 3.1 fails. Independently, one can check Definition 3.1 algebraically: the set {f: supp f ∩ {o(a),t(a)} ≠ ∅} is not a linear subspace (two endpoint-supported vectors can sum to a vector supported elsewhere), so the dimension κ used in Theorem 3.2 must be read as the dimension of the eigenspace's image on the two endpoint coordinates; an eige

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the main discovery is Theorem 3.1: if G induces a τ-periodic Grover walk, a magnetic vector potential of strength β on a reference edge a makes the state after ⌈t/β⌉ periods converge, as β→0, to the continuous-time solution of −i∂_t ψ_t = τH ψ_t. Theorem 3.2 adds that H has nonzero eigenvalues ∓E_{λ_T}(a,a)√(1−λ_T^2), coming only from degenerate eigenvalues λ_T of the discriminant matrix, and that ker H = S_sim ⊕ T_per ⊕ L^⊥. E_{λ_T}(a,a) is the determinant, at the two endpoints of a, of the two relevant eigenvectors — the area of the parallelogram they span. Eigenvalues ±1 and all simple eigenvalues contribute nothing to H, so only non-simple eigenvalues shape the

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that each eigenvalue of the discriminant matrix contributes at most a two-dimensional 'endpoint-relevant' space; as printed in Definition 3.1, that space is the set of vectors whose support merely intersects {o(a),t(a)}, which is not closed under addition or scalar multiplication, so the dimension κ and the two-vector basis entering H are only meaningful under a corrected definition (the rank of the eigenspace restricted to the two endpoint coordin

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every τ-periodic Grover walk has a universal small-flux limit: the discrete-time walk over many periods becomes the continuous-time walk generated by τH, connecting the two quantum-walk paradigms through a perturbation expansion.
  • The robustness coefficient R_p = dim kerH/|A| can be computed from spectral degeneracies of the discriminant matrix; paths have R_p=1, even cycles have R_p=1/m, and odd cycles R_p=1/(2m+1), so simple spectra are the most stable.
  • The kernel decomposition kerH = S_sim ⊕ T_per ⊕ L^⊥ exposes three sources of robustness: simple eigenvalues, eigenvectors supported away from the reference edge, and the graph's cycle space; since dim L^⊥ = |E|−|V|+1, edge-rich graphs can be robust for a different reason than spectrally simple graphs.
  • The effective eigenfrequencies are ±E_{λ_T}(a,a)√(1−λ_T^2), so the rate at which periodicity degrades is controlled by a local geometric area at the reference edge rather than by global graph size alone.
  • For trees such as the path P_n, H=0 to first order, so periodicity is robust to leading order in the magnetic flux and the graph remains essentially periodic even under the perturbation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Extending the paper's logic, the same first-order expansion should apply to any small local unitary perturbation of a periodic quantum walk, not only a magnetic phase, so a continuous-time limit may be a general phenomenon in discrete-time quantum walks.
  • A testable consequence of the robustness formula is that among periodic graphs with the same number of edges, those with more degenerate eigenvalues should have smaller R_p; the paper's P_n/C_n/K_{n,n} table is consistent with this but does not prove it.
  • The robustness measure depends on the choice of reference edge, since H changes when the flux is placed elsewhere; comparing effective Hamiltonians for different reference edges on the same graph would quantify how the continuous-time limit and R_p vary with the gauge choice.
  • The geometric reading of E_{λ_T}(a,a) as an area suggests that the frequencies of the emerging continuous-time walk are set by how degenerate eigenvectors project onto the two flux-carrying vertices, a feature that could be probed numerically on graphs with movable degenerate subspaces.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper considers the effect of a magnetic vector potential, supported on a single reference edge, on the discrete-time Grover walk on a finite graph whose unperturbed walk is τ-periodic. The central claim is that the stroboscopic full-period evolution U_β^τ admits the expansion U_β^τ = I + iβτH + O(β²), so that, after ⌈t/β⌉ full periods, the state converges as β→0 to the solution of the continuous-time Schrödinger equation generated by τH. A Hermitian matrix H is constructed from eigenspaces of the discriminant T whose restriction to the two endpoints of the reference edge is two-dimensional. The paper further defines a robustness measure Rp = dim kerH/|A|, claims an explicit spectral formula for H, and tests the theory on cycles, complete bipartite graphs, and paths.

Significance. If the main theorem is correct, the paper offers a genuinely novel mechanism: small magnetic flux on one edge converts the discrete-time periodic Grover walk into an effective continuous-time quantum walk, with a Hamiltonian expressed directly in terms of the spectral data of the underlying graph. The derivation is parameter-free and uses established spectral mapping theorems; the limiting statement is explicit and falsifiable through the examples. However, as printed, the formal definition of the key spectral classification is mathematically undefined, and the main spectral formula contains a factor error that propagates into the examples. These issues are repairable, but they are load-bearing rather than cosmetic.

major comments (4)
  1. [Definition 3.1, Eq. (3.1), Theorem 3.2] Definition 3.1 defines B_{∂X_a} = {f∈C^V | supp f ∩ ∂X_a ≠ ∅}, which is not a linear subspace, yet the paper uses dim(ker(T−λ_T I)∩B_{∂X_a}) and writes this intersection as {f_1,f_2} in (3.1). The intersection of an eigenspace with this set is not a subspace; if the restriction to the two endpoints has rank 2 and the eigenspace has dimension >2, there are more than two linearly independent vectors in the set-theoretic intersection. The intended invariant is the rank of the restriction map from ker(T−λ_T I) to C^{∂X_a}, equivalently dim(ker(T−λ_T I)/(ker(T−λ_T I)∩B^⊥_{∂X_a})). Since the classification κ∈{0,1,2}, the definition of H, and the decomposition kerH=S_sim⊕T_per⊕L^⊥ all rest on this notion, the definition must be repaired.
  2. [Theorem 3.2, Eq. (3.2); Lemma 4.4, Eqs. (4.3)–(4.6)] The eigenvalue formula µ±_{λ_T} = ∓E_{λ_T}(a,a)√(1−λ_T²) is inconsistent with Definition 3.2 and with the final expression for H in Lemma 4.4. The correct formula is µ±_{λ_T} = ∓E_{λ_T}(a,a)/√(1−λ_T²). For C5, the printed formula gives nonzero eigenvalues of magnitude (1/5)sin²θ ≈ 0.181, whereas the H built from Definition 3.2 has eigenvalues ±1/5 = ±0.2. The proof contains the corresponding factor inversion: consistency of (4.3) with Lemma 2.3 requires M_σ^{(λ,λ)} = iE_{λ_T}(a,a)/√(1−λ_T²)[[0,1],[-1,0]], not iE√(1−λ_T²). This is load-bearing for the claimed spectrum, for Rp, and for Table 1.
  3. [Proposition 5.1] The printed formula for the cycle graph C_n with odd n is wrong. For C5, the proof's own summation gives H' with diagonal 4/25 and off-diagonal −1/25, i.e., (5I−J)/25, which has a one-dimensional kernel in each orientation block, so dim kerH=2 and Rp=1/5 as in Table 1. The displayed formula (diag (n−2)/n², off-diag −2/n²) gives (5I−2J)/25, which is nonsingular and contradicts Theorem 3.2 and Table 1. For odd n the diagonal should be (n−1)/n² and the off-diagonal −1/n²; the even-n formula appears correct. This must be corrected for the main example to support the claimed classification.
  4. [Table 1 and Section 1.2 (K_{n,n} row)] The K_{n,n} row of Table 1 is internally inconsistent. According to Lemma 2.2, dim L^⊥ = dim C_+ + dim C_- = (n−1)² + ((n−1)²+dim ker(T+I)) = 2(n−1)²+1 for K_{n,n}, not 2(n−1). Moreover, the listed Rp = 2(n²−2)/n² does not equal (dimS_sim+dimT_per+dimL^⊥)/|A| using the table's own dimensions. The asymptotic chain lim_{n→∞} Rp(K_{n,n})=1 requires an L^⊥ contribution of order n², so the Table and the surrounding robustness discussion need to be reconciled.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 5.3] The path graph is stated to be 2(n−1)-periodic in the introduction to the example, but Proposition 5.3 and its proof use period 2n. These must be reconciled, and the period should be checked against the cited reference.
  2. [Definition 3.2] The heading says 'Harmitian H'; this should be 'Hermitian H'.
  3. [Lemma 4.4, displayed algebra] The derivation of (4.6) contains garbled factors: the line following (4.5) has the square-root factor in the wrong position, and (4.3) is typeset with an unclear 'q' symbol. The final expression (4.6) is correct, but the intermediate displayed equations should be cleaned up.
  4. [Section 1.2 vs Definition 3.1] The informal description in Section 1.2 says B_{∂X_a} is the 'subspaces of vectors supported on the end points', while Definition 3.1 defines a set of vectors whose support intersects the endpoints. The terminology 'supported on' usually means support contained in the set; this discrepancy adds to the formal problem and should be fixed.
  5. [Proposition 5.1 proof] The ceiling notation 'l n/2 −1 m' is poorly typeset and should be written as ⌈n/2−1⌉. Also, in the eigenvalue computation for T on the cycle, the text writes μ_k = 2cos(2πk/n); for the discriminant T (which is half the adjacency matrix of the 2-regular cycle) the eigenvalue should be cos(2πk/n). This typo should be corrected to avoid confusion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main asymptotic expansion is derived from the model and prior spectral lemmas, not fitted or presupposed.

full rationale

The central derivation is not circular. U_β is defined directly in Definition 2.1 from the magnetic phase factors, with no fitted parameters. Lemma 4.4 expands S_β in powers of β and uses the τ-periodicity condition λ^τ=1 of U_0 to reduce the first-order term to τ Σ_λ P_λ σ P_λ; the matrix H of Definition 3.2 is then shown by direct matrix-element computation (eqs. 4.3–4.6) to equal that coefficient. Theorem 3.1 is therefore a genuine asymptotic expansion of the discrete-time dynamics, not a restatement of the definition of H. Theorem 3.2 follows from the same expression by diagonalizing the 2×2 blocks, and the kernel decomposition is obtained from a dimension count; none of these steps presupposes the conclusion. The periodicity criteria and spectral mapping lemmas are cited from [11,14,21], but they are parameter-free published theorems about U_0 and T and do not contain the perturbed result; under the stated review criteria that is independent support, not load-bearing self-citation. The only notable defect is that B∂Xa is defined as a support-intersection set rather than a linear subspace, so “dim(ker(T−λ_T I)∩B∂Xa)” is not literally a dimension; that is a mathematical gap in the classification affecting Theorem 3.2 and the examples, but it is a correctness issue, not circularity, and therefore does not raise the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No numerical parameters are fitted: β is a small perturbation parameter sent to zero, τ is the input period, and H is constructed from the eigenvectors of the discriminant. The main additional assumption is the formally ill-defined subspace B_{∂X_a}, which functions as an implicit restriction-rank construction.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Spectral mapping theorem for Grover walks (Lemma 2.2)
    Used to express eigenvectors of U_0 via ∂^*_λ and to identify L^⊥; cited from [11] without proof.
  • domain assumption Periodicity characterization: G is periodic iff all eigenvalues of U_0 are roots of unity (Lemma 2.1)
    Used to ensure (λ/λ')^τ=1 so cross terms vanish in the first-order expansion; cited from [21].
  • domain assumption The magnetic vector potential model U_β=S_βC is the quantum-graph induced walk (Proposition 2.1)
    Bridges the perturbation to physical magnetic vector potentials; cited from [12,13,32].
  • ad hoc to paper B_{∂X_a} behaves like a linear subspace in Definition 3.1
    The set {supp(f)∩∂X_a≠∅} is not closed under addition, yet the paper uses dim(ker∩B_{∂X_a}); the intended restriction-to-endpoints interpretation is not stated.
  • standard math For each eigenspace of T, one can choose a real orthonormal basis with at most two basis vectors having nonzero endpoint values
    Follows from the fact that evaluation at two vertices has rank at most 2; used to construct f_1^{(λ_T)} and f_2^{(λ_T)}.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Robustness of periodicity in Grover walks under a magnetic vector potential." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JIL4ZYMD

@misc{pith2026260714797,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Robustness of periodicity in Grover walks under a magnetic vector potential},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JIL4ZYMD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.14797}
}
read the original abstract

We study the effect of magnetic vector potentials on periodic Grover walks on finite graphs. The magnetic vector potential is introduced through the framework of quantum graphs, which induces the Grover walk as a special case. We regard the vector potential as a perturbation of a periodic Grover walk and investigate the robustness of its periodicity. Our analysis reveals that the response to such perturbations depends on the spectral structure of the underlying graph. In particular, when the graph possesses at least one non-simple eigenvalue, we derive a Hermitian matrix that characterizes the robustness of its periodicity. As a consequence, we show that the perturbed dynamics is asymptotically described by a continuous-time quantum walk generated by this Hermitian matrix.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.14797 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. H on C5 : The left figure represents Hδi = 3 25 δi − 2 25 (δi+1 + δi+2 + δi+3 + δi+4) (i ∈ Z5). H on C6 : The right figure repre￾sents Hδj = 1 9 δj − 1 18 (δj+2 + δj+4) (j ∈ Z6). Proof. Since Cn is vertex-transitive, we may assume without loss of general￾ity that the reference edge a satisfies o(a) = 0 and t(a) = 1. The eigenvalues of T(Cn) with multiplicity greater than one are µk = 2 cos  2πk n  , k = 1, . . . ,… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Configurations of directed edges corresponding to the entries of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Values of the entries of H corresponding to each edge configuration. in this order. The only eigenvalue of T with multiplicity greater than 1 is 0. An orthonormal basis of the corresponding eigenspace is given by 1 √ 2            1 −1 0 0 . . . 0 0k            , 1 √ 6            1 1 −2 0 . . . 0 0k            , . . . , 1 p k(k − 1)            1 1 1 1 . . . −(k −… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Ambainis (2004).Quantum search algorithms, ACM SIGACT News, 35, 22-35

    A. Ambainis (2004).Quantum search algorithms, ACM SIGACT News, 35, 22-35

    2004

  2. [2]

    Albeverio, F

    A. Albeverio, F. Gesztesy, R. Høegh-Krohn and H. Holden (2005).Solv- able Models in Quantum Mechanics, American Mathematical Society

    2005

  3. [3]

    Berkolaiko and P

    G. Berkolaiko and P. Kuchment (2013).Introduction to Quantum Graphs, American Mathematical Society

    2013

  4. [4]

    S. D. Berry and J. B. Wang (2010).Quantum-walk-based search and centrality, Physical Review A,82, 042333

    2010

  5. [5]

    S. D. Berry and J. B. Wang (2011).Two-particle quantum walks: Entan- glement and graph isomorphism testing, Physical Review A,83, 042317. 32

    2011

  6. [6]

    A. E. Brouwer and W. H. Haemers (2011).Spectra of Graphs, Springer

    2011

  7. [7]

    Chan and H

    A. Chan and H. Zhan (2023).Pretty good state transfer in discrete-time quantum walks, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 56, 165305

    2023

  8. [8]

    A. M. Childs (2010).On the relationship between continuous- and discrete-time quantum walk, Communications in Mathematical Physics, 294, 581-603

    2010

Show all 35 references
  1. [9]

    Exner and P

    P. Exner and P. ˇSeba (1989).Free quantum motion on a branching graph, Reports on Mathematical Physics,28, 7-26

    1989

  2. [10]

    Gnutzmann and U

    S. Gnutzmann and U. Smilansky (2006).Quantum graphs: Applications to quantum chaos and universal spectral statistics, Advances in Physics, 55, 527-625

    2006

  3. [11]

    Higuchi, N

    Yu. Higuchi, N. Konno, I. Sato and E. Segawa (2014).Spectral and asymptotic properties of Grover walks on crystal lattices, Journal of Functional Analysis,267, 4197-4235

    2014

  4. [12]

    Higuchi, N

    Yu. Higuchi, N. Konno, I. Sato and E. Segawa (2013).Quantum graph walks I: Mapping to quantum walks, Yokohama Mathematical Journal, 59, 33-55

    2013

  5. [13]

    Higuchi, N

    Yu. Higuchi, N. Konno, I. Sato and E. Segawa (2013).Quantum graph walks II: Quantum walks on graph coverings, Yokohama Mathematical Journal,59, 57-90

    2013

  6. [14]

    Higuchi, N

    Yu. Higuchi, N. Konno, I. Sato and E. Segawa (2017).Periodicity of the discrete-time quantum walk on a finite graph, Interdisciplinary Informa- tion Sciences,23, 75-86

    2017

  7. [15]

    Higuchi and E

    Y. Higuchi and E. Segawa (2025).Comfortability of quantum walks on embedded graphs on surfaces, arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.06765

    2025 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Higuchi and T

    Yu. Higuchi and T. Shirai (2001).Weak Bloch property for discrete mag- netic Schr¨ odinger operators, Nagoya Mathematical Journal,161, 127- 154

    2001

  9. [17]

    Kempe (2003).Quantum random walks: an introductory overview, Contemporary Physics,44, 307-327

    J. Kempe (2003).Quantum random walks: an introductory overview, Contemporary Physics,44, 307-327. 33

    2003

  10. [18]

    Kottos and U

    T. Kottos and U. Smilansky (1999).Periodic Orbit Theory and Spectral Statistics for Quantum Graphs, Annals of Physics,274, 76-124

    1999

  11. [19]

    Kubota, H

    S. Kubota, H. Matsubara and E. Segawa (2026).Entanglement entropy in two-particle Grover walks on graphs, arXiv:2607.09066

    2026 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Kubota and E

    S. Kubota and E. Segawa (2022).Perfect state transfer in Grover walks between states associated to vertices of a graph, Linear Algebra and its Applications,646, 238–251

    2022

  13. [21]

    Kubota, H

    S. Kubota, H. Sekido and H. Yata (2021).Periodicity of quantum walks defined by mixed paths and mixed cycles, Linear Algebra and its Appli- cations,630, 15-38

    2021

  14. [22]

    Kubota, H

    S. Kubota, H. Sekido, H. Yata and K. Yoshino (2025).Strongly regular and strongly walk-regular graphs that admit perfect state transfer, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.02530

    2025

  15. [23]

    Kubota, H

    S. Kubota, H. Sekido and K. Yoshino (2025).Regular graphs to induce even periodic Grover walks, Discrete Mathematics,348, 114345

    2025

  16. [24]

    Kuchment (2004).Quantum graphs: I

    P. Kuchment (2004).Quantum graphs: I. Some basic structures, Waves in Random Media,14, S107-S128

    2004

  17. [25]

    Mohseni, P

    M. Mohseni, P. Rebentrost, S. Lloyd and A. Aspuru-Guzik (2008). Environment-assisted quantum walks in photosynthetic energy transfer, The Journal of chemical physics,129, 11B603

    2008

  18. [26]

    Portugal (2013).Quantum Walks and Search Algorithms, Springer

    R. Portugal (2013).Quantum Walks and Search Algorithms, Springer

    2013

  19. [27]

    Saito and E

    K. Saito and E. Segawa (2026).A method of approximation of dis- crete Schr¨ odinger equation with the normalized Laplacian by discrete- time quantum walk on graphs, Reviews in Mathematical Physics,38, 2550012

    2026

  20. [28]

    Severini and G

    S. Severini and G. Tanner (2004).Regular quantum graphs, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General,37, 6675-6686

    2004

  21. [29]

    ˇStefaˇ n´ ak and S

    M. ˇStefaˇ n´ ak and S. Skoup´ y (2017).Perfect state transfer by means of discrete-time quantum walk on complete bipartite graphs, Quantum In- formation Processing,16, 72. 34

    2017

  22. [30]

    ˇStefaˇ n´ ak and S

    M. ˇStefaˇ n´ ak and S. Skoup´ y (2024).Search and state transfer between hubs by quantum walks, Physical Review A,110, 022422

    2024

  23. [31]

    F. W. Strauch (2006).Connecting the discrete and continuous-time quantum walks, Physical Review A,74, 030301

    2006

  24. [32]

    G. K. Tanner (2006).From quantum graphs to quantum random walks, inNon-Linear Dynamics and Fundamental Interactions, Springer, pp. 69–87

    2006

  25. [33]

    Yamagami, E

    T. Yamagami, E. Segawa, T. Mihana, A. R¨ ohm, R. Horisaki and M. Naruse (2023).Bandit algorithm driven by a classical random walk and a quantum walk, Entropy,25, 843

    2023

  26. [34]

    Yoshie (2019).Periodicities of Grover walks on distance-regular graphs, Graphs and Combinatorics,35, 1305-1321

    Y. Yoshie (2019).Periodicities of Grover walks on distance-regular graphs, Graphs and Combinatorics,35, 1305-1321

    2019

  27. [35]

    Zhan (2022).The average search probabilities of discrete-time quan- tum walks, Quantum Information Processing,21, 336

    H. Zhan (2022).The average search probabilities of discrete-time quan- tum walks, Quantum Information Processing,21, 336. 35

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.