Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 89 references

Interacting Quantum Symmetric Exclusion Process

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-31 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read A tunable mesoscopic scaling of interactions lets quantum coherence loops survive in interacting diffusive transport with a density-dependent mass.

desk verdict Clean extension of QSSEP that isolates a mesoscopic window where interactions mass the coherence loops while leaving density hydro linear; the only real soft spot is the unproven multi-replica factorization. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.28255 v1 pith:56MTQEUP submitted 2026-07-30 cond-mat.stat-mech math-phmath.MPquant-ph

Denis Bernard , Friedrich Hübner , Stefano Scopa This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mechmath-phmath.MPquant-ph PACS 05.60.Gg05.40.-a05.70.Ln03.65.Yz
keywords quantumexclusionprocessmacroscopicfluctuationtheorycoherenceloopsmesoscopicscalinginteractingdiffusionkineticallyconstrainedmodelsstochastictransport
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

This paper introduces the Interacting Quantum Symmetric Exclusion Process, a lattice model of charged particles that hop with Brownian amplitudes dressed by the occupations of neighbouring sites. Without interactions the model recovers coherent diffusive transport; with order-one interactions it recovers classical nonlinear diffusion and its macroscopic fluctuation theory. By scaling the interaction strength with the lattice mesh so that a finite coherence length remains in the continuum limit, the authors obtain a mesoscopic regime that is coherent at short distances and incoherent at long ones. In that regime the density field still obeys ordinary linear diffusion, while multi-replica coherence loops obey a hydrodynamic equation with an extra density-dependent mass term fixed by the microscopic dressing. The construction therefore supplies an analytically controlled description of quantum-coherence fluctuations inside interacting diffusive systems, something standard fluctuating hydrodynamics does not capture.

What carries the argument

The mesoscopic scaling λ ∼ λ∗ = N^{−1+α/2} together with the closed massive hydrodynamic equation for n-replica coherence loops (main-text Eq. 18 and its multi-replica extension), whose density-dependent mass is assembled from the microscopic interaction coefficients via two explicit contributions a⁽¹⁾ and a⁽²⁾.

What would settle it

Exact or large-scale numerics of the two-point coherence loop g₂(x,y) for the short-range dressing at several densities, checking whether its spatial decay length matches the predicted m²[n̄] = 2c_λ σ₀(n̄)[2−σ₀(n̄)] and whether the non-Gaussian residual Γ₂ is slaved to that same mass.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the mesoscopic scaling where the interaction strength vanishes as λ ∼ N^{−1+α/2}, single-replica density hydrodynamics remains that of the non-interacting quantum exclusion process, while multi-replica coherence loops acquire a finite, density-dependent square mass m²[n̄] fixed by the microscopic kinetic dressing. The resulting massive loop equation interpolates between coherent QSSEP behaviour below the local coherence length ξ ∼ 1/m and classical MFT-like behaviour above it, thereby encoding fluctuations of quantum coherences in interacting diffusive systems.

Load-bearing premise

Away from contact points, density dressings factorize against coherence loops at leading order in system size, so that mixed density-coherence correlators close without generating new independent objects.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Interactions strong enough to produce nonlinear density diffusion also erase macroscopic coherences; weaker interactions can still control coherence-loop physics while leaving density hydrodynamics linear.
  • The same mass that damps coherence loops also sources the leading departure from realization-wise Gaussianity of the quantum state.
  • Higher-replica loops obey the same massive structure with the identical density-dependent mass on every leg, so the coherence length is replica-independent at this scaling.
  • The framework supplies a concrete microscopic route toward a quantum mesoscopic fluctuation theory that includes coherent fluctuations beyond ordinary MFT.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same kinetic-dressing construction should map onto the slow sector of other noisy interacting spin chains besides the dephased XXZ example already cited, giving a practical diagnostic for when coherence survives in those systems.
  • Once a continuum path-integral formulation exists, large-deviation principles for rare coherent events become accessible beyond the cumulant hierarchy treated here.
  • Measuring the density dependence of the coherence length in a cold-atom or circuit realization of facilitated hopping would directly test the predicted mass m²[n̄].
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces the Interacting Quantum Symmetric Exclusion Process (IQSEP), a kinetically dressed deformation of QSSEP in which stochastic nearest-neighbour hopping amplitudes depend on occupations in a subextensive neighbourhood. In the diffusive scaling limit the authors derive single-replica hydrodynamics: for O(1) interactions one obtains nonlinear diffusion with an explicit microscopic diffusivity D[n̄] and MFT mobility σ[n̄]=D[n̄]·2n̄(1−n̄); for vanishing interactions the linear (Q)SSEP hydrodynamics is recovered. By scaling the interaction as λ∼λ∗=N^{−1+α/2} they define a mesoscopic regime in which multi-replica coherence loops obey closed massive hydrodynamic equations (main text Eq. (18), SM Eq. (S104)) with a density-dependent square mass m²[n̄] fixed by the microscopic dressing coefficients b_r. This mass sets a local coherence length that interpolates QSSEP-like coherent behaviour at short scales and classical MFT-like behaviour at long scales. Exact-diagonalization checks at N=8 and continuum solutions of the large-scale equations are presented as qualitative support.

Significance. If the multi-replica closure holds, the work supplies a rare analytically controlled setting in which density-dependent classical fluctuating hydrodynamics and fluctuations of quantum coherences coexist in the same continuum theory, going beyond standard MFT. Strengths include explicit microscopic expressions for D[n̄] and the mass coefficients A_m (SM §§2–4), recovery of the Einstein relation from local equilibrium, a clear RG-style scaling diagram (Fig. 1b), and an honest bootstrap of the factorization ansatz with contact scaling fixing the error exponent (End Matter II). The link to the slow dynamics of the dephased XXZ chain further anchors the construction. These features make the paper a concrete step toward a quantum mesoscopic fluctuation theory for interacting diffusive systems.

major comments (3)
  1. [End Matter II; main text Eq. (21); SM §3.1] The closed massive loop equations (main text Eq. (18); SM Eq. (S104)) rest on the multi-replica factorization of density dressings against coherence loops away from contact (main text Eq. (21); End Matter II; SM §3.1). The error Y is argued to be dynamically stable with exponent fixed by contact scaling (End Matter Eq. (34)), but a rigorous proof is deferred. This is the sole load-bearing soft spot: if the error is larger than O(N^{−n−Σν}) at leading 1/N, the hierarchy does not close and m² cannot be cleanly extracted. The manuscript should state this assumption more prominently in the main text (not only End Matter/SM), spell out which observables would falsify it, and, if possible, add one further self-consistency check (e.g. a three-replica or mixed density–loop correlator) beyond the two-replica sketch.
  2. [SM §3.4 and §4] Power counting for the additional Itô terms d_{ijlm;k} (SM §3.4, Eqs. (S64)–(S68)) treats non-contact contributions as subleading when λ∼λ∗, while contact reductions (S66) are said to cancel against meso-hydro pieces of b at leading order. The cancellation is asserted for the two-replica case and sketched for n>2; a short explicit verification for the short-range dressing (4) that the dangerous O(N^{−n−1+α/2}) contact-reduction channels indeed cancel (or are absorbed into S^{qssep}) would substantially strengthen confidence in the mass term.
  3. [Fig. 2; main text paragraph on numerics] Exact-diagonalization support uses N=8 links (Fig. 2a–b). At this size the separation between microscopic, mesoscopic (|S_N|), and diffusive scales is marginal, and λ∗=1/N is not sharply resolved. The data are consistent with the phase diagram but cannot discriminate the continuum mass equation from finite-size QSSEP. The main text should label the numerics as qualitative only and avoid language that suggests quantitative confirmation of Eq. (18).
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction; Eq. (17)] The definition λ∗=N^{−1+α/2} appears in the introduction and Fig. 1b before α and |S_N| are fully fixed; a one-line reminder when Eq. (17) is introduced would help non-specialist readers.
  2. [Eq. (13)] In Eq. (13) the convention b_0=1/λ is easy to miss; stating it once in the main text (as done in the SM) would avoid confusion when reading D[n̄] for the short-range example.
  3. [Fig. 2] Fig. 2 caption: specify that panels (c)–(d) are continuum solutions of (11) and (18) at the same boundary densities, and give the value of c_λ used in (d).
  4. [Main text; SM §4] Typos / notation: “themesoscopic” (missing space) in the multi-replica paragraph; occasional “It ¯o” spacing in the SM; “S qseep” vs “S qssep” inconsistency in SM §4.
  5. [References] The parallel XXZ work is cited as “to appear” [63]; if a preprint exists by revision time, adding the identifier would help readers.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: mass and transport coefficients are computed from the microscopic dressing; QSSEP self-citations supply the free theory, not the interacting claim.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained for the new content. Single-replica D[n̄] and σ[n̄]=D[n̄]·2n̄(1−n̄) follow from the classical interacting SEP obtained by noise-averaging the microscopic stochastic Hamiltonian, closed by standard MFT cumulant scaling—not by fitting continuum profiles. The mesoscopic scale λ∗=N^{−1+α/2} is fixed by power-counting the interaction corrections a^{(1)}, a^{(2)} so that the dephasing mass stays O(1); m²[n̄] and the Am coefficients are then written explicitly in terms of the microscopic br (SM §§4.1). Multi-replica factorization (Eq. 21) is an openly stated modeling assumption, bootstrapped for dynamical stability of the error Y with contact scaling fixing γ, with a rigorous proof deferred—it is a soft spot for correctness, not a circular definition of the mass. Prior QSSEP papers are cited for the free Laplacian, contact source Sqssep, and replica loop structure; that is program continuity (λ=0 recovers QSSEP by construction of the model) and does not force the interacting mass or the scaling diagram. N=8 ED is qualitative support only, not a fit recycled as prediction. Score 1 only for ordinary self-citation of the free theory; central interacting claims do not reduce to inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

Results rest on the stochastic QSSEP framework, classical MFT large-deviation scaling for density cumulants, a new multi-replica factorization ansatz, subextensive kinetic dressing, and diffusive continuum limit. No numerical fits enter the central PDEs; free parameters are model choices (λ scaling, support size, bare D0, boundary densities).

free parameters (3)
  • Interaction scaling prefactor c_λ = λ²/λ∗² = O(1), example plots use λ=2/N etc.
    O(1) constant fixing how close the microscopic λ sits to the mesoscopic window; sets overall mass strength but is not fitted to data.
  • Bare diffusion D0 and dressing coefficients b_r (or short-range λ form) = D0=1 in numerics; short-range example Eq. (4)
    Microscopic model inputs chosen by hand; D[n̄] and m² are then derived, not fitted.
  • Support exponent α in |S_N|=O(N^α) = α=0 in main numerics
    Chooses interaction range class; enters λ∗=N^{−1+α/2}. Not fitted.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption MFT-type scaling of connected density cumulants: ⟨⟨n̂_{i1}…n̂_{in}⟩⟩_c ∼ N^{1−n} for distinct sites, used to close single-replica hierarchy (main text after Eq. 9; SM §2).
    Standard for classical diffusive lattice gases; applied here to the noise-averaged classical interacting SEP.
  • ad hoc to paper Multi-replica factorization of density polynomials against coherence loops away from contacts, with error O(N^{−n−Σν}) fixed by contact scaling (Eq. 21; End Matter II).
    Not proved; bootstrapped from equations of motion. Load-bearing for closed loop PDEs.
  • standard math Itô stochastic calculus for the unitary noise increments and quadratic variation dW^k dW̄^l = δ_{kl} dt (model definition Eq. 2).
    Standard continuous-time stochastic quantum dynamics as in prior QSSEP.
  • domain assumption Diffusive scaling limit x=i/N, τ=t/N² with subextensive dressing support |S_N|=O(N^α), α<1, and local U(1) conservation.
    Defines the hydrodynamic regime in which continuum equations are claimed.
  • domain assumption Local equilibrium free-energy density remains the SEP Bernoulli form F(n)=n log n+(1−n)log(1−n), so Einstein relation σ=2D/F'' holds (main text after Eq. 15).
    Justified by detailed balance of the noise-averaged classical process w.r.t. uniform measure at fixed particle number.
invented entities (2)
  • IQSEP kinetic dressing P̂_k = √D0 (1+λ p̂_k) with p̂_k a symmetric occupation polynomial on subextensive support independent evidence
    purpose: Encode interaction/dephasing while preserving local U(1) and allowing tunable coherence length
    Model definition; motivated as effective ultra-short-scale scattering and as slow dynamics of noisy XXZ, but the continuum claims are internal to this family.
  • Mesoscopic scaling window λ∗=N^{−1+α/2} and density-dependent coherence mass m²[n̄] in loop hydrodynamics
    purpose: Keep finite ξ in the continuum so interactions affect coherences without nonlinearizing leading density hydro
    Derived scaling construct; independent handle would be measuring ξ(n) or loop profiles in simulations/experiments of noisy interacting chains (parallel XXZ work cited as to-appear).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Interacting Quantum Symmetric Exclusion Process." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/56MTQEUP

@misc{pith2026260728255,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Interacting Quantum Symmetric Exclusion Process},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/56MTQEUP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.28255}
}
read the original abstract

We introduce and solve the Interacting Quantum Symmetric Exclusion Process (IQSEP), a family of models describing the stochastic quantum hopping of charged particles along the edges of a lattice, with hopping amplitudes that depend on the occupations of neighbouring sites. In the absence of interactions, they reduce to the standard quantum simple symmetric exclusion process, exhibiting coherent diffusive transport. For interactions of order one, they capture incoherent diffusive transport and its fluctuations, characterized by density-dependent diffusivity and mobility, making contact with the macroscopic fluctuation theory. By rescaling the interaction strength appropriately with the lattice mesh, we define a mesoscopic scaling regime that retains a finite coherence length in the continuous thermodynamic limit. This regime interpolates between coherent behavior at small length scales and incoherent behavior at large scales. The resulting scaling theory accounts for fluctuations of quantum coherences in interacting diffusive systems, going beyond the scope of standard fluctuating hydrodynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.28255 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Illustration of the IQSEP model: stochastic nearest-neighbor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    T. M. Liggett,Interacting Particle Systems(Springer New York, 1985)

    1985

  2. [2]

    Spohn,Large Scale Dynamics of Interacting Particles(Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1991)

    H. Spohn,Large Scale Dynamics of Interacting Particles(Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1991)

    1991

  3. [3]

    Kipnis and C

    C. Kipnis and C. Landim,Scaling Limits of Interacting Particle Systems, V ol. 320 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999)

    1999

  4. [4]

    Kipnis, S

    C. Kipnis, S. Olla, and S. R. S. Varadhan, Hydrodynamics and large deviation for simple exclusion processes, Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 42, 115–137 (1989)

    1989

  5. [5]

    Bertini, A

    L. Bertini, A. De Sole, D. Gabrielli, G. Jona-Lasinio, and C. Landim, Fluctuations in stationary nonequilibrium states of irreversible pro- cesses, Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 040601 (2001)

    2001

  6. [6]

    Bertini, A

    L. Bertini, A. De Sole, D. Gabrielli, G. Jona-Lasinio, and C. Landim, Macroscopic fluctuation theory for stationary non-equilibrium states, J. Stat. Phys.107, 635–675 (2002)

    2002

  7. [7]

    Bertini, A

    L. Bertini, A. De Sole, D. Gabrielli, G. Jona-Lasinio, and C. Landim, Current fluctuations in stochastic lattice gases, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 030601 (2005)

    2005

  8. [8]

    Bertini, A

    L. Bertini, A. De Sole, D. Gabrielli, G. Jona-Lasinio, and C. Landim, Macroscopic fluctuation theory, Rev. Mod. Phys.87, 593–636 (2015)

    2015

Show all 89 references
  1. [9]

    Derrida, J

    B. Derrida, J. L. Lebowitz, and E. R. Speer, Free energy functional for nonequilibrium systems: An exactly solvable case, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 150601 (2001)

    2001

  2. [10]

    Derrida, Non-equilibrium steady states: fluctuations and large deviations of the density and of the current, J

    B. Derrida, Non-equilibrium steady states: fluctuations and large deviations of the density and of the current, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp. , 7023

  3. [11]

    Derrida, Microscopic versus macroscopic approaches to non- equilibrium systems, J

    B. Derrida, Microscopic versus macroscopic approaches to non- equilibrium systems, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp.2011(01), P01030

    2011

  4. [12]

    Mallick, The exclusion process: A paradigm for non-equilibrium behaviour, Physica A418, 17 (2015)

    K. Mallick, The exclusion process: A paradigm for non-equilibrium behaviour, Physica A418, 17 (2015)

    2015

  5. [13]

    Bernard, Can the macroscopic fluctuation theory be quantized?, J

    D. Bernard, Can the macroscopic fluctuation theory be quantized?, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.54, 433001 (2021). 7

    2021

  6. [14]

    Nahum, S

    A. Nahum, S. Vijay, and J. Haah, Operator spreading in random unitary circuits, Phys. Rev. X8, 021014 (2018)

    2018

  7. [15]

    Khemani, A

    V . Khemani, A. Vishwanath, and D. A. Huse, Operator spreading and the emergence of dissipative hydrodynamics under unitary evolution with conservation laws, Phys. Rev. X8, 031057 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    C. W. von Keyserlingk, T. Rakovszky, F. Pollmann, and S. L. Sondhi, Operator hydrodynamics, otocs, and entanglement growth in systems without conservation laws, Phys. Rev. X8, 021013 (2018)

    2018

  9. [17]

    Rakovszky, F

    T. Rakovszky, F. Pollmann, and C. W. von Keyserlingk, Diffusive hydrodynamics of out-of-time-ordered correlators with charge con- servation, Phys. Rev. X8, 031058 (2018)

    2018

  10. [18]

    Rakovszky, F

    T. Rakovszky, F. Pollmann, and C. W. von Keyserlingk, Sub-ballistic growth of r ´enyi entropies due to diffusion, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 250602 (2019)

    2019

  11. [19]

    M. J. Gullans and D. A. Huse, Entanglement structure of current- driven diffusive fermion systems, Phys. Rev. X9, 021007 (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    McCulloch, J

    E. McCulloch, J. De Nardis, S. Gopalakrishnan, and R. Vasseur, Full counting statistics of charge in chaotic many-body quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 210402 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Bauer, D

    M. Bauer, D. Bernard, and T. Jin, Stochastic dissipative quantum spin chains (I) : Quantum fluctuating discrete hydrodynamics, SciPost Phys.3, 033 (2017)

    2017

  14. [22]

    Bauer, D

    M. Bauer, D. Bernard, and T. Jin, Equilibrium fluctuations in maxi- mally noisy extended quantum systems, SciPost Phys.6, 045 (2019)

    2019

  15. [23]

    Bernard, T

    D. Bernard, T. Jin, and O. Shpielberg, Transport in quantum chains under strong monitoring, EPL121, 60006 (2018)

    2018

  16. [24]

    Open quantum symmetric simple exclusion process, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 080601 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Bernard and L

    D. Bernard and L. Hruza, Exact entanglement in the driven quantum symmetric simple exclusion process, SciPost Phys.15, 175 (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    Hruza and D

    L. Hruza and D. Bernard, Coherent fluctuations in noisy mesoscopic systems, the open quantum ssep, and free probability, Phys. Rev. X 13, 011045 (2023)

    2023

  19. [27]

    Bernard and L

    D. Bernard and L. Hruza, Structured random matrices and cyclic cumulants: A free probability approach, Random Matrices Theory Appl.13, 2450014 (2024)

    2024

  20. [28]

    Bauer, D

    M. Bauer, D. Bernard, P. Biane, and L. Hruza, Bernoulli vari- ables, classical exclusion processes and free probability, Ann. Henri Poincar´e25, 125–172 (2023)

    2023

  21. [29]

    Bernard, T

    D. Bernard, T. Jin, S. Scopa, and S. Wei, Large deviations of den- sity fluctuations in the boundary-driven quantum symmetric simple inclusion process, Phys. Rev. E112, 034106 (2025)

    2025

  22. [30]

    Albert, D

    M. Albert, D. Bernard, T. Jin, S. Scopa, and S. Wei, Universal clas- sical and quantum fluctuations in the large deviations of current of noisy quantum systems: The case of qssep and qssip (2026), arXiv:2601.16883

    2026

  23. [31]

    Bernard, The quantum symmetric simple exclusion process in the continuum and free processes (2026), arXiv:2602.16544

    D. Bernard, The quantum symmetric simple exclusion process in the continuum and free processes (2026), arXiv:2602.16544

    2026

  24. [32]

    Barraquand and D

    G. Barraquand and D. Bernard, Introduction to quantum exclusion processes (2025), arXiv:2507.01570

    2025

  25. [33]

    Costa, P

    J. Costa, P. Ribeiro, and A. D. Luca, Emergence of universality in transport of noisy free fermions (2025), arXiv:2504.00188

    2025 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Alba, Extension of quantum symmetric simple exclusion process model for entanglement spreading in stochastic diffusive quantum systems, Phys

    V . Alba, Extension of quantum symmetric simple exclusion process model for entanglement spreading in stochastic diffusive quantum systems, Phys. Rev. B113, 075145 (2026)

    2026

  27. [35]

    Russotto, F

    A. Russotto, F. Ares, P. Calabrese, and V . Alba, Dynamics of entan- glement fluctuations and quantum mpemba effect in the ν= 1 qssep model, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp.2026(3), 033103

    2026

  28. [36]

    Russotto, F

    A. Russotto, F. Ares, P. Calabrese, and V . Alba, Inhomogeneous quenches and ghd in the ν= 1 qssep model, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp.2026(6), 063102

    2026

  29. [37]

    Minoguchi, J

    Y . Minoguchi, J. Huber, L. Garbe, A. Gambassi, and P. Rabl, Unified interface model for dissipative transport of bosons and fermions, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 207102 (2025)

    2025

  30. [38]

    Funaki, K

    T. Funaki, K. Handa, and K. Uchiyama, Hydrodynamic limit of one- dimensional exclusion processes with speed change, Ann. Probab.19, 245 (1991)

    1991

  31. [39]

    Gonc ¸alves, C

    P. Gonc ¸alves, C. Landim, and C. Toninelli, Hydrodynamic limit for a particle system with degenerate rates, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar ´e Probab. Stat.45, 887 (2009)

    2009

  32. [40]

    Blondel, C

    O. Blondel, C. Erignoux, M. Sasada, and M. Simon, Hydrodynamic limit for a facilitated exclusion process, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar ´e Probab. Stat.56, 667 (2020)

    2020

  33. [41]

    Erignoux, M

    C. Erignoux, M. Simon, and L. Zhao, Mapping hydrodynamics for the facilitated exclusion and zero-range processes, Ann. Appl. Probab. 34, 1524 (2024)

    2024

  34. [42]

    McCulloch, J

    E. McCulloch, J. A. Jacoby, C. von Keyserlingk, and S. Gopalakr- ishnan, Subexponential decay of local correlations from diffusion- limited dephasing, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 190403 (2026)

    2026

  35. [43]

    McCulloch, J

    E. McCulloch, J. A. Jacoby, and S. Gopalakrishnan, Long-lived local quantum coherences from hydrodynamic large deviations (2026), arXiv:2604.27074

    2026 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Kob and H

    W. Kob and H. C. Andersen, Kinetic lattice-gas model of cage effects in high-density liquids and a test of mode-coupling theory of the ideal-glass transition, Phys. Rev. E48, 4364–4377 (1993)

    1993

  37. [45]

    Rossi, R

    M. Rossi, R. Pastor-Satorras, and A. Vespignani, Universality class of absorbing phase transitions with a conserved field, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1803–1806 (2000)

    2000

  38. [46]

    M. J. de Oliveira, Conserved lattice gas model with infinitely many absorbing states in one dimension, Phys. Rev. E71, 016112 (2005)

    2005

  39. [47]

    Gabel, P

    A. Gabel, P. L. Krapivsky, and S. Redner, Facilitated asymmetric exclusion, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 210603 (2010)

    2010

  40. [48]

    J. Baik, G. Barraquand, I. Corwin, and T. Suidan, Facilitated exclusion process, inComputation and Combinatorics in Dynamics, Stochastics and Control(Springer International Publishing, 2018) p. 1–35

    2018

  41. [49]

    Goldstein, J

    S. Goldstein, J. L. Lebowitz, and E. R. Speer, Exact solution of the facilitated totally asymmetric simple exclusion process, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp.2019(12), 123202

    2019

  42. [50]

    Ayyer, S

    A. Ayyer, S. Goldstein, J. L. Lebowitz, and E. R. Speer, Station- ary states of the one-dimensional facilitated asymmetric exclusion process, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar´e Probab. Stat.59, 726 (2023)

    2023

  43. [51]

    Barraquand, O

    G. Barraquand, O. Blondel, and M. Simon, Weakly asymmetric facil- itated exclusion process, Electron. J. Probab.30, 128 (2025)

    2025

  44. [52]

    Da Cunha, C

    H. Da Cunha, C. Erignoux, and M. Simon, Hydrodynamic limit for an open facilitated exclusion process with slow and fast boundaries, Commun. Math. Phys.407, 50 (2026)

    2026

  45. [53]

    Olmos, I

    B. Olmos, I. Lesanovsky, and J. P. Garrahan, Facilitated spin models of dissipative quantum glasses, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 020403 (2012)

    2012

  46. [54]

    Olmos, I

    B. Olmos, I. Lesanovsky, and J. P. Garrahan, Out-of-equilibrium evolution of kinetically constrained many-body quantum systems under purely dissipative dynamics, Phys. Rev. E90, 042147 (2014)

    2014

  47. [55]

    Pancotti, G

    N. Pancotti, G. Giudice, J. I. Cirac, J. P. Garrahan, and M. C. Ba˜nuls, Quantum east model: Localization, nonthermal eigenstates, and slow dynamics, Phys. Rev. X10, 021051 (2020)

    2020

  48. [56]

    D. C. Rose, K. Macieszczak, I. Lesanovsky, and J. P. Garrahan, Hier- archical classical metastability in an open quantum east model, Phys. Rev. E105, 044121 (2022)

    2022

  49. [57]

    Brighi, M

    P. Brighi, M. Ljubotina, and M. Serbyn, Hilbert space fragmenta- tion and slow dynamics in particle-conserving quantum east models, SciPost Phys.15, 093 (2023)

    2023

  50. [58]

    Bertini, C

    B. Bertini, C. De Fazio, J. P. Garrahan, and K. Klobas, Exact quench dynamics of the floquet quantum east model at the deterministic point, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 120402 (2024)

    2024

  51. [59]

    Zadnik and M

    L. Zadnik and M. Fagotti, The folded spin-1/2 xxz model: I. diago- 8 nalisation, jamming, and ground state properties, SciPost Phys. Core 4, 010 (2021)

    2021

  52. [60]

    Zadnik, K

    L. Zadnik, K. Bidzhiev, and M. Fagotti, The folded spin-1/2 xxz model: Ii. thermodynamics and hydrodynamics with a minimal set of charges, SciPost Phys.10, 099 (2021)

    2021

  53. [61]

    Pozsgay, T

    B. Pozsgay, T. Gombor, A. Hutsalyuk, Y . Jiang, L. Pristy ´ak, and E. Vernier, Integrable spin chain with hilbert space fragmentation and solvable real-time dynamics, Phys. Rev. E104, 044106 (2021)

    2021

  54. [62]

    Cardy,Scaling and Renormalization in Statistical Physics(Cam- bridge University Press, 1996)

    J. Cardy,Scaling and Renormalization in Statistical Physics(Cam- bridge University Press, 1996)

    1996

  55. [63]

    Christopoulos, J

    A. Christopoulos, J. Costa, D. Bernard, J. De Nardis, T. Jin, Z. Lenarˇciˇc, and S. Scopa, Non-equilibrium steady state of the quan- tum noisy xxz spin chain via macroscopic fluctuation theory –to appear(2026). 1 Supplementary Material Interacting Quantum Symmetric Exclusion P...

    2026

  56. [64]

    Numerical implementation 1

  57. [65]

    Single-replica hydrodynamics 2

  58. [66]

    Density profile and diffusivity 3

  59. [67]

    Connected density-density correlation 4

  60. [68]

    Multi-replica coherences 6

  61. [69]

    Multi-replica factorization 7

  62. [70]

    QSSEP-like drift and It ¯o contractions 8

  63. [71]

    Additional It ¯o contractions 9

  64. [72]

    Two-replica coherence loop 9

  65. [73]

    Microscopic expression of the mass term 10

  66. [74]

    Discussion of the case withn >2replicas 13

  67. [75]

    2 of the main text

    NUMERICAL IMPLEMENTATION In this section, we describe the numerical method used to generate the microscopic data shown in Fig. 2 of the main text. Throughout the Letter, we consider a chain ofL≡N+ 1sites. The Hilbert space is then the full fermionic Fock space HL = span{|n0, ....

  68. [76]

    (25) of the End Matter, d dt ⟨ ⟨ˆOm⟩ ⟩t = N−1X k=0 ⟨ ⟨ˆPkLqssep k ( ˆOm) ˆPk⟩ ⟩t,(S11) 3 where ˆOm = ˆni1

    SINGLE-REPLICA HYDRODYNAMICS We start from Eq. (25) of the End Matter, d dt ⟨ ⟨ˆOm⟩ ⟩t = N−1X k=0 ⟨ ⟨ˆPkLqssep k ( ˆOm) ˆPk⟩ ⟩t,(S11) 3 where ˆOm = ˆni1 . . .ˆnim is a string of density operators. We then evaluate, Lqssep k (ˆni) = (δk,i −δ k,i−1) (ˆnk+1 −ˆnk) ; Lqssep k (ˆni ...

  69. [77]

    (S11) to a single density operator, ˆOm ≡ˆnj, one finds d dt ⟨ ⟨ˆnj⟩ ⟩=−⟨ ⟨ˆJj − ˆJj−1⟩ ⟩(S17) where ˆJj :=− ˆDj(ˆnj+1 −ˆnj) is the current, and ˆDj := ˆP 2 j

    Density profile and diffusivity Specifying Eq. (S11) to a single density operator, ˆOm ≡ˆnj, one finds d dt ⟨ ⟨ˆnj⟩ ⟩=−⟨ ⟨ˆJj − ˆJj−1⟩ ⟩(S17) where ˆJj :=− ˆDj(ˆnj+1 −ˆnj) is the current, and ˆDj := ˆP 2 j . Since {0,1} ̸∈SN , we can use Eq. (S15), together with the gradient s...

  70. [78]

    To begin with, from Eq

    Connected density-density correlation We now discuss the connected density-density correlation. To begin with, from Eq. (S12) one finds, d dt ⟨ ⟨ˆni ˆnj⟩ ⟩t =− ⟨ ⟨ ˆJi − ˆJi−1 ˆnj⟩ ⟩ − ⟨ ⟨ ˆJj − ˆJj−1 ˆni⟩ ⟩t − δi−1,j −δ ij ⟨ ⟨ˆDi−1(ˆni −ˆni−1)2⟩ ⟩t − δi,j−1 −δ ij ⟨ ⟨ˆDi(ˆni+1...

  71. [79]

    Discrete contact terms.We first look at the discrete contact terms, which are simpler to analyze. These terms are discrete contact=− δi−1,j −δ ij ⟨ ⟨ˆDi−1(ˆni −ˆni−1)2⟩ ⟩t − δi,j−1 −δ ij ⟨ ⟨ˆDi(ˆni+1 −ˆni)2⟩ ⟩t = δij −δ i,j−1 ˆQi − δi,j+1 −δ ij ˆQi−1 =∇ (−) i ∇(−) j ˆCij,(S31)...

  72. [80]

    Since all the cumulants appearing in Eq

    Scaling limit.The scaling N −3 of the discrete contact terms also fixes the scaling of the connected density-density correlation. Since all the cumulants appearing in Eq. (S30) are embedded in a double lattice-derivative, the reference scaling to leading order is set to 1/N; t...

  73. [81]

    Bulk contribution.We now evaluate the bulk contributions in Eq. (S30). There are three such terms involving cumulants of density operators. To leading order in1/N, one can show that ⟨ ⟨ˆDi⟩ ⟩tκ(ˆni+1 −ˆni,ˆnj)t − ⟨ ⟨ˆDi−1⟩ ⟩tκ(ˆni −ˆni−1,ˆnj)t + (i↔j)≃N −3∂x (D[¯n(x;τ)]∂xC2(x,...

  74. [82]

    , in all distinct

    MULTI-REPLICA COHERENCES We now specialize to then-point coherence loop Gi1,i2,...,in (t) :=E[ nY r=1 ⟨ ˆXir,ir+1 ⟩t],(i n+1 ≡i 1)(S41) where, for simplicity, we takei 1, i2, . . . , in all distinct. We consider the scaling gn(x1, . . . , xn;τ) := lim N→∞ N n−1Gi1,i2,...,in (t...

  75. [83]

    (21) of the main text and in Sec

    Multi-replica factorization In the derivation below, we shall use the factorization hypothesis discussed in Eq. (21) of the main text and in Sec. 2 of the End Matter. Before applying the factorization ansatz, we first reduce any overlap between the support of the density polyn...

  76. [84]

    QSSEP-like drift and It ¯o contractions By QSSEP-like terms we refer to the terms a ij;k and c ijlm;k defined above, which reduce to the standard QSSEP dynamics upon settingλ= 0. We start from the Lindbladian part, a ij;k =− 1 2 (δk,i +δ k,i−1 +δ k,j +δ k,j−1 )⟨ ˆPk ˆXij ˆPk⟩t...

  77. [85]

    Drift correction Next, we evaluate the drift correction, b ij;k. A straightforward calculation gives b ij;k =− 1 2 D δk,j−1 ∂ˆni ˆPj−1 ˆPj−1(1−2ˆnj−1) +δ k,j ∂ˆni ˆPj ˆPj(1−2ˆnj+1) +δ k,i−1 ∂ˆnj ˆPi−1 ˆPi−1(1−2ˆni−1) +δ k,i ∂ˆnj ˆPi ˆPi(1−2ˆni+1) ˆXij E t − D (∂ˆni ˆP (¬j) k )...

  78. [86]

    Additional It ¯o contractions Finally, we move to the additional It¯o contractions. After simple algebra, these become d ijlm;k =δk,i⟨ ˆP (¬j) i ˆXi+1,j⟩t⟨ ∂ˆnl ˆP (¬m) i −∂ ˆnm ˆP (¬l) i ℘[ ˆXlm ˆXi,i+1]⟩t −δ k,j−1 ⟨ ˆP (i) j−1 ˆXi,j−1⟩t⟨ ∂ˆnl ˆP (¬m) j−1 −∂ ˆnm ˆP (¬l) j−1 ℘...

  79. [87]

    TWO-REPLICA COHERENCE LOOP We now specialize to the two-replica coherence loopGij(t) :=E[⟨ ˆXij⟩t⟨ ˆXji⟩t], with i̸=j for simplicity. Using the notation introduced in the previous section, and neglecting the contribution of e as discussed above, the equation of motion reads d ...

  80. [88]

    (19) of the main text in terms of the microscopic parameters entering the interaction dressing (1)-(3) of the main text

    Microscopic expression of the mass term In this section, we compute explicitly the mass term in Eq. (19) of the main text in terms of the microscopic parameters entering the interaction dressing (1)-(3) of the main text. We separate the two contributions introduced in Eq. (17)...

  81. [89]

    For the n-replica loop, we label the legs cyclically, r= 1,

    Discussion of the case withn >2replicas In this section, we discuss the generalization of the two-replica result to arbitrary coherence loops. For the n-replica loop, we label the legs cyclically, r= 1, . . . , n, with the rth leg corresponding to ir →i r+1 and in+1 ≡i 1. The ...

Pith tools

Reviewed July 31, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.