Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 60 references

Exploring the Relaxation Landscape of a 2D Quantum Magnet on a 256-Qubit Processor

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A 256-qubit Rydberg atom array reveals a slow-thermalization regime in a 2D quantum magnet that appears exactly where classical tensor-network methods lose numerical control.

desk verdict Plausible new slow-relaxation crossover in the 2D TFIM, honestly reported, but the central claim still lacks a quantitative definition and a clean edge-field scaling check. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.07178 v1 pith:L7P2W6IP submitted 2026-08-07 quant-ph cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Tiago Mendes-Santos , Joseph Vovrosh , Sergi Julià-Farré , Dorian Claveau , Guillaume Villaret , Lucas Béguin , Lucas Leclerc , Laurin Brunner
show 28 more authors
Wladislaw Krinitsin Matthias Hecker Fergus Hayes Boris Albrecht Lilian Bourachot Clémence Briosne-Frejaville Antoine Cornillot Julius de Hond Djibril Diallo Clément Dupays Robin Dupont Thomas Eritzpokhoff Loïc Henriet Lucas Lassablière Arvid Lindberg Yohann Machu Hadriel Mamann Thomas Pansiot Julien Ripoll Bruno Ximenez Henrique Silvério Joseph Tindall Markus Schmitt Markus Heyl Adrien Signoles Constantin Dalyac Antoine Browaeys Alexandre Dauphin
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords quantumsimulationRydbergatomarraystransverse-fieldIsingmodelthermalizationprethermalizationtensornetworksrelaxationdynamicsdynamicalphasetransition
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 reports on a 256-qubit Rydberg-atom array used as an analog quantum simulator to map how the two-dimensional transverse-field Ising model relaxes after a sudden quench. The measurements reveal three distinct relaxation regimes as the transverse field is varied: rapid thermalization near the dynamical phase transition, a long-lived prethermal regime at large transverse field described by an effective XY-type model with U(1) symmetry, and an intermediate crossover regime in which relaxation toward equilibrium is unexpectedly slow. The central claim is that this slowdown is genuine physics of the 2D model, because it appears exactly where state-of-the-art classical tensor-network computations lose numerical control at late times, while the quantum device's results stay consistent from an 8×8 to a 16×16 system. If correct, this would establish analog quantum simulators as discovery platforms for nonequilibrium many-body dynamics that classical methods cannot reach.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing diagnostic is the local classical (Ising) energy $E_{\mathrm{cl}}(i,t)=\sum_j J_{ij}\langle \hat{\sigma}^z_i \hat{\sigma}^z_j\rangle(t)$, built from projective $\hat{\sigma}^z$ measurements of a central site; its time trace distinguishes fast thermalization, slow relaxation, and prethermal plateau. The large-field plateau is explained by an effective Hamiltonian obtained by transforming the Ising interaction into the rotating frame defined by the transverse field and time-averaging over one precession period, which yields the ZY model—a U(1)-symmetric rotated XY model—whose symmetry makes the prethermal expectation value analytically computable. The same projective data also yield the connected correlation function $C_c(r,t)$ as a function of Euclidean distance, whose spatial buildup and enhancement at large field provide the physical signatures of each regime. The tensor-network comparisons (2DTN, MPS, TTN) serve as the independent classical reference that the paper uses to certify early-time dynamics and to identify where classical control is lost.

What would settle it

At $h_x/J \approx 3.5$, compensate the residual edge fields with site-resolved detunings on a 16×16 array and repeat the time-dependent classical-energy measurement; if the slow decay toward the thermal value disappears or steepens significantly, the slowdown is an edge or noise artifact rather than intrinsic dynamics.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

By quenching a fully polarized product state into the short-range ferromagnetic transverse-field Ising Hamiltonian on a square array and measuring the time-dependent classical energy $\sum_j J_{ij}\langle \hat{\sigma}^z_i \hat{\sigma}^z_j\rangle(t)$ of central sites, the authors obtain a relaxation landscape across $h_x/J$. For $h_x/J \approx 2.5$, near the thermal estimate of the dynamical phase transition, correlations thermalize within about one interaction time $1/J$. For $h_x/J = 6.0$, deep in the paramagnetic phase, the system settles into a prethermal plateau that matches the analytic prediction of an effective U(1)-symmetric rotated XY (ZY) model obtained by time-averaging the Ising interaction in the rotating frame of the transverse field. At $h_x/J \approx 3.5$, the correlations decay toward their thermal value only very slowly, a regime the authors say they did not anticipate and do not yet fully explain. The decisive observation is that this slow-relaxation regime coincides with the late-time failure of three independent tensor-network approaches (2D tensor networks, matrix product states, and tree tensor networks), which begin to disagree with each other and lose numerical control, whereas the quantum device's data remain consistent across system sizes.

Load-bearing premise

That the slow relaxation seen at the full 16×16 array size is genuine 2D physics and not an artifact of residual edge fields or device noise, which the paper calibrates only on a 5×5 lattice and acknowledges could still matter for long-range critical correlations.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A slow-relaxation regime in the 2D short-range transverse-field Ising model exists between the rapid-thermalization and prethermal limits, implying that relaxation pathways in 2D quantum magnets are richer than the diffusive hydrodynamic picture suggests.
  • In that crossover regime, current tensor-network simulations do not provide controlled late-time predictions, so analog quantum devices supply data that classical methods cannot yet reproduce.
  • At large transverse field, the effective ZY model quantitatively captures the prethermal plateau and the enhanced connected correlations, providing a route to study 2D XY-type physics with Rydberg arrays.
  • The same QPU protocol can be used as a benchmark for classical numerics on 2D systems: early-time agreement plus cross-size consistency can serve as a practical validity check.
  • The three regimes are already visible in 5×5 exact state-vector simulations, so the qualitative landscape is robust to system size even if the quantitative relaxation rates are not.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the slowdown is tied to the nearby thermal and quantum transitions, the relaxation time should peak or diverge as $h_x/J$ approaches the critical value; this is a testable scaling that the current data only hint at.
  • Because the edge-field and noise models are validated only at 5×5, a direct test of the central claim is to compensate the residual edge fields with local detunings on the 16×16 array and check whether the slow decay persists.
  • The sharp contrast between the failure of tensor networks in this regime and the cross-size consistency of the QPU suggests a practical role for analog simulators as heuristics for when classical 2D simulations should be trusted, not just as replacements for them.
  • The prethermal ZY description implies quasi-long-range order; measuring how the correlation length grows with $h_x/J$ could expose Kosterlitz–Thouless-type physics in a regime that equilibrium probes cannot reach.
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 reports a 256-qubit Rydberg-array study of post-quench relaxation in the two-dimensional transverse-field Ising model, scanning hx/J from the ferromagnetic into the paramagnetic regime. The authors identify three regimes: rapid thermalization near the dynamical phase transition, a slow-relaxation crossover at intermediate hx/J (exemplified by hx/J=3.5), and a prethermal regime at large hx/J governed by an effective U(1)-symmetric ZY model. The prethermal value of the classical energy is derived analytically without fitting, the thermal baselines are obtained from quantum Monte Carlo energy matching, and the short-time dynamics are benchmarked against three tensor-network methods. The central discovery claim is that the slow-relaxation regime is where classical tensor-network methods lose control at late times while the quantum simulation remains consistent across system sizes.

Significance. If the central claim holds, this is an important step toward using analog Rydberg simulators as discovery platforms, since the 2D TFIM is a canonical nonintegrable model and the crossover regime is genuinely hard for current classical methods. The paper has notable strengths: the prethermal plateau prediction is parameter-free and analytically derived from the U(1) symmetry of H_ZY; the QMC thermal baselines are clearly specified; exact L=5 state-vector simulations, a physical noise model, and three independent tensor-network methods provide a substantial consistency check; and the limitations of the L=5 noise/edge benchmarking are stated explicitly in the Methods. The main weakness is that the slow-relaxation discovery rests on a scaling assumptions from L=5 to L=16 for edge fields and noise, and the 'slowdown' is not given a quantitative relaxation-time definition at the QPU scale. These gaps are load-bearing for the headline claim, but they are addressable within the scope of the manuscript.

major comments (4)
  1. [Methods, 'Benchmark of edge effects in the QPU Rydberg Hamiltonian dynamics'; Eqs. (5)-(6)] The central slow-relaxation claim at hx/J=3.5 is not yet protected against the residual edge fields of Eq. (6). The Methods section shows that these fields shift the crossover features toward larger hx/J and states that their 'impact on critical modes with large correlation lengths might remain relevant' at L=16; since hx/J=3.5 lies above the ideal-field estimate h*_t/J≈2.6 and near the edge-shifted threshold, the observed slow decay could be boundary-induced pseudo-critical slowing rather than the clean-model crossover asserted in the abstract. The authors should provide a quantitative test at L=16, for example edge-resolved Ecl profiles that separate bulk from boundary sites, a local-detuning mitigation run, or a finite-size analysis demonstrating that the slowdown persists away from boundary-influenced regions.
  2. [Fig. 4 and 'Benchmarking tensor network approaches against QPU dynamics'] The 'consistent across system sizes' evidence covers only L=8 and L=16 QPU data and has no converged exact late-time reference: the 2DTN, MPS, and TTN curves disagree among themselves for tJ > 1, so they cannot certify the QPU trajectory. Please state quantitatively what 'consistent' means (for example, a tolerance on the difference between the two sizes relative to bootstrapped error bars) and, if possible, include a third QPU size or a converged exact small-system reference in reduced units to support the scaling claim.
  3. [Main text, 'Slowdown of thermalization in the crossover regime'; definition of ~Ecl in Fig. 2D] The slowdown is asserted without a quantitative definition of relaxation time. The only quantitative main-text diagnostic is the time average of Ecl over the chosen window [tmin, tmax] with tminJ=1 and tmaxJ=2, and the text itself concedes that a quantitative characterization requires further scaling analyses. The authors should define a relaxation time (for example, the time at which Ecl first crosses a fixed fraction of the thermal value) and report its hx/J dependence for L=8 and L=16, or transfer the tmax-dependence diagnostic of Methods Fig. 6D to the QPU sizes. Without such a criterion, the 'extended crossover regime' is not sharply distinguished from a transient, nor is it compared quantitatively with the diffusive-hydrodynamics expectation invoked in the Discussion.
  4. [Methods, 'Details on the noise model for all three regimes'] The noise analysis is performed only on a 5x5 lattice, and the text explicitly acknowledges that 'the huge difference in system sizes prevents a direct comparison of this noise analysis (L=5) with the main text QPU data (L=16)'. While dephasing-like noise tends to accelerate correlation decay and is therefore unlikely to fabricate a slowdown, the combined scaling of edge fields and noise from L=5 to L=16 is assumed rather than demonstrated. A bounded error model, or an L=16 noise-injection test in the short-time window where tensor networks are controlled, would materially strengthen the central claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Main text, 'Slowdown of thermalization in the crossover regime'] The sentence beginning 'These competing energy scales are compatible with...' contains a grammatical inversion ('in which despite the transverse field brings the system...'); please rephrase.
  2. [Throughout, time units] The text uses tJ (dimensionless), ns, and 1/J interchangeably. Since hx/(2π)=1 MHz sets the experimental scale, please state once explicitly the value of J in frequency units (or the conversion hx/J ↔ ns) so that the figure axes and all quoted time scales can be cross-checked.
  3. [Main text, 'Floquet prethermalization at large transverse field'; Eq. (2)] The connection between the classical energy Ecl(i)=sum_j J_ij <sz_i sz_j> and the prethermal prediction Ecl_eff=(1/2)sum_{i<j} J_ij should be spelled out with the factor-of-two included; as written, a reader may worry about a missing factor between the local Ecl and the total energy of H_ZY.
  4. [Fig. 6 caption] The notation 'tmax = 4 J 1' in the Fig. 6 caption appears to be a typographical corruption of 'tmax = 4 J^{-1}'; please correct the superscript formatting.
  5. [Methods, 'Two-dimensional tensor networks'] The sentence 'Gates, not to be confused with quantum gates, are applied sequentially' is confusing; renaming these objects to 'two-qubit unitaries' or 'local update operations' would improve clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the prethermal and thermal benchmarks are independently derived, and self-citations are limited to computational tools and prior device work.

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain and found no step where a prediction reduces to an input by construction. The prethermal value of E_cl is derived analytically from the U(1) symmetry of H_ZY (Methods, Eqs. 11-13), with the effective temperature fixed by matching the initial-state energy; no QPU data are used in this derivation. The thermal expectation values are obtained from QMC by solving the energy-conservation condition (Methods, Eq. 14) and then evaluating thermal observables; this is an independent first-principles benchmark, not a fit to the QPU data. The reported DPT location h*_t/J ≈ 2.6 is a QMC crossing estimate, and the observed crossover between h_x/J = 2.5 and 3.0 is a genuine comparison, not a regression. The slow-relaxation claim is supported by the L=16 QPU data and by the mutual disagreement of 2DTN, MPS, and TTN at late times in Fig. 4; the classical simulations are not calibrated to the QPU trajectory. The only extrapolations are the edge-field and noise benchmarks, which the paper explicitly performs at L=5 and cautions may not fully transfer to L=16, stating that their impact on critical modes with large correlation lengths might remain relevant. That is a correctness and robustness caveat, not a circular reduction. Self-citations (e.g., Refs. 29, 31, 57-59) appear for classical numerics software, resource assessments, and prior comparative studies; they do not carry the central claim. The score of 1 reflects the presence of these non-load-bearing self-citations, not any circular step.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities; the ZY model is a known effective Hamiltonian. The main ledger entries are the time-averaging window chosen by hand and the scaling assumptions for noise and edge fields from L=5 to L=16.

free parameters (1)
  • Time-averaging window [t_min, t_max] = t_min J = 1, t_max J = 2
    Used to define time-averaged E_cl and correlations (Figs. 2D, 3E). The qualitative 'dip' signaling the crossover depends on this window; the paper notes quantitative characterization would require further scaling analysis.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The post-quench steady state is thermal, with effective temperature fixed by energy conservation (Eq. 14).
    Used to set thermal baselines and the DPT threshold h*_t/J ~ 2.6; ETH is a standard assumption but not derived here.
  • domain assumption For h_x >> J, the time-averaged secular Hamiltonian H_ZY governs the prethermal dynamics; higher-order Floquet-Magnus terms are neglected.
    This is the basis of the prethermal plateau prediction; justified by perturbation theory but not justified at hx/J=3.5.
  • domain assumption Local errors do not grow with system size, so the L=5 noise analysis transfers to L=16.
    Invoked in the Benchmarking section citing refs [30,42]; if false, the L=16 slow-relaxation signal could be noise-dominated.
  • domain assumption Residual edge fields h_i^z (Eq. 6) are negligible for central-site observables at L=16.
    The Methods acknowledges impact 'might remain relevant' for critical modes, yet central-site averages are used to define all regimes.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Exploring the Relaxation Landscape of a 2D Quantum Magnet on a 256-Qubit Processor." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/L7P2W6IP

@misc{pith2026260807178,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Exploring the Relaxation Landscape of a 2D Quantum Magnet on a 256-Qubit Processor},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/L7P2W6IP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.07178}
}
read the original abstract

How quantum matter relaxes far from equilibrium is a central open problem in many-body physics, and one for which analog quantum simulators are well positioned to move from confirming theory to discovering new physics. Here, we use a two-dimensional Rydberg atom array of 256 qubits to map the relaxation landscape of the two-dimensional transverse-field Ising model across its phase diagram. Beyond the expected rapid thermalization, we identify two further regimes. The first is a prethermal regime whose dynamics are governed by an effective XY model. The second, and most unexpected, is a crossover regime characterized by a slowdown in relaxation. This slowdown occurs precisely where state-of-the-art classical tensor-network methods lose control at late times, whereas the quantum simulation remains consistent across system sizes. These results establish Rydberg atom arrays as a platform for scientific discovery in nonequilibrium quantum many-body dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.07178 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. A shows the propagation Cc(r, t) over time, which reveals qualitatively distinct behavior across the relaxation regimes described in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: compares the post-quench dynamics obtained from the QPU with simulations based on 2DTN, matrix product states (MPS), and tree tensor networks (TTN) for system sizes L = 8 and L = 16. At early times, all three tensor-network approaches produce quantitatively consistent …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Browaeys and T

    A. Browaeys and T. Lahaye, Many-body physics with individually controlled Rydberg atoms, Nature Physics 16, 132 (2020)

    2020

  2. [2]

    Henriet, L

    L. Henriet, L. Beguin, A. Signoles, T. Lahaye, A. Browaeys, G.-O. Reymond, and C. Jurczak, Quantum computing with neutral atoms, Quantum4, 327 (2020). 14

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Jurcevic, H

    P. Jurcevic, H. Shen, P. Hauke, C. Maier, T. Brydges, C. Hempel, B. Lanyon, M. Heyl, R. Blatt, and C. Roos, Direct Observation of Dynamical Quantum Phase Tran- sitions in an Interacting Many-Body System, Physical Review Letters119, 080501 (2017)

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Fläschner, D

    N. Fläschner, D. Vogel, M. Tarnowski, B. S. Rem, D.-S. Lühmann, M. Heyl, J. C. Budich, L. Mathey, K. Seng- stock, and C. Weitenberg, Observation of dynamical vor- tices after quenches in a system with topology, Nature Physics14, 265 (2018)

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Zhang, G

    J. Zhang, G. Pagano, P. W. Hess, A. Kyprianidis, P. Becker, H. Kaplan, A. V. Gorshkov, Z.-X. Gong, and C. Monroe, Observation of a Many-Body Dynamical Phase Transition with a 53-Qubit Quantum Simulator, Nature551, 601 (2017)

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    Scholl, M

    P. Scholl, M. Schuler, H. J. Williams, A. A. Eberharter, D. Barredo, K.-N. Schymik, V. Lienhard, L.-P. Henry, T. C. Lang, T. Lahaye, A. M. Läuchli, and A. Browaeys, Quantum simulation of 2D antiferromagnets with hun- dreds of Rydberg atoms, Nature595, 233 (2021)

    2021

  7. [7]

    Ebadi, T

    S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Se- meghini, A. Omran, D. Bluvstein, R. Samajdar, H. Pich- ler, and W. W. Ho, Quantum phases of matter on a 256- atom programmable quantum simulator, Nature595, 227 (2021)

    2021

  8. [8]

    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)

    2022

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Hsieh, P

    C.Zu, F.Machado, B.Ye, S.Choi, B.Kobrin, T.Mittiga, S. Hsieh, P. Bhattacharyya, M. Markham, D. Twitchen, A. Jarmola, D. Budker, C. R. Laumann, J. E. Moore, and N. Y. Yao, Emergent hydrodynamics in a strongly interacting dipolar spin ensemble, Nature597, 45 (2021)

    2021

  2. [10]

    J. F. Wienand, S. Karch, A. Impertro, C. Schweizer, E. McCulloch, R. Vasseur, S. Gopalakrishnan, M. Aidels- burger, and I. Bloch, Emergence of fluctuating hydrody- namics in chaotic quantum systems, Nature Physics20, 1732 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    Bernien, S

    H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. Keesling, H. Levine, A. Om- ran, H. Pichler, S. Choi, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V. Vuletić, and M. D. Lukin, Probing many- body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator, Nature 551, 579 (2017)

    2017

  4. [12]

    S.DeLéséleuc, V.Lienhard, P.Scholl, D.Barredo, S.We- ber, N. Lang, H. P. Büchler, T. Lahaye, and A. Browaeys, Observation of a symmetry-protected topological phase of interacting bosons with Rydberg atoms, Science365, 775 (2019)

    2019

  5. [13]

    Manovitz, S

    T. Manovitz, S. H. Li, S. Ebadi, R. Samajdar, A. A. Geim, S. J. Evered, D. Bluvstein, H. Zhou, N. U. Koylu- oglu, J. Feldmeier, P. E. Dolgirev, N. Maskara, M. Kali- nowski, S. Sachdev, D. A. Huse, M. Greiner, V. Vuletić, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum coarsening and collective dy- n...

    2025

  6. [14]

    Darbha, A

    S. Darbha, A. Khudorozhkov, P. L. S. Lopes, F. Liu, E. Rrapaj, J. Balewski, M. Hamdan, P. E. Dolgirev, A. Schuckert, K. Klymko, S.-T. Wang, M. D. Lukin, D. Camps, and M. Kornjača, Probing emergent prether- mal dynamics and resonant melting on a programmable quantum simulator (2025)

    2025

  7. [15]

    Polkovnikov, K

    A. Polkovnikov, K. Sengupta, A. Silva, and M. Ven- galattore, Nonequilibrium dynamics of closed interacting quantum systems, Reviews of Modern Physics83, 863 (2011)

    2011

  8. [16]

    Eisert, M

    J. Eisert, M. Friesdorf, and C. Gogolin, Quantum many- body systems out of equilibrium, Nature Physics11, 124 (2015)

    2015

  9. [17]

    W. W. Ho, T. Mori, D. A. Abanin, and E. G. D. Torre, Quantum and classical Floquet prethermalization, An- nals of Physics454, 169297 (2023)

    2023

  10. [18]

    Abanin, W

    D. Abanin, W. De Roeck, W. W. Ho, and F. Huveneers, A Rigorous Theory of Many-Body Prethermalization for Periodically Driven and Closed Quantum Systems, Com- munications in Mathematical Physics354, 809 (2017)

    2017

  11. [19]

    T. Mori, T. N. Ikeda, E. Kaminishi, and M. Ueda, Thermalization and prethermalization in isolated quan- tum systems: a theoretical overview, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics51, 112001 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    C. J. Turner, A. A. Michailidis, D. A. Abanin, M. Serbyn, and Z. Papić, Weak ergodicity breaking from quantum many-body scars, Nature Physics14, 745 (2018)

    2018

  13. [21]

    Mondaini, K

    R. Mondaini, K. R. Fratus, M. Srednicki, and M. Rigol, Eigenstate thermalization in the two-dimensional trans- verse field Ising model, Physical Review E93, 032104 (2016)

    2016

  14. [22]

    J. C. Halimeh, V. Zauner-Stauber, I. P. McCulloch, I. de Vega, U. Schollwöck, and M. Kastner, Prethermal- ization and persistent order in the absence of a thermal phase transition, Physical Review B95, 024302 (2017)

    2017

  15. [23]

    Žunkovič, M

    B. Žunkovič, M. Heyl, M. Knap, and A. Silva, Dynam- ical Quantum Phase Transitions in Spin Chains with Long-Range Interactions: Merging Different Concepts of Nonequilibrium Criticality, Physical Review Letters120, 130601 (2018)

    2018

  16. [24]

    Hashizume, I

    T. Hashizume, I. P. McCulloch, and J. C. Halimeh, Dynamical phase transitions in the two-dimensional transverse-field ising model, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 013250 (2022)

    2022

  17. [25]

    Mitra, T

    A. Mitra, T. Albash, P. D. Blocher, J. Takahashi, A. Miyake, G. Biedermann, and I. H. Deutsch, Macro- properties vs. microstates in the classical simulation of critical phenomena in quench dynamics of 1D Ising mod- els, New Journal of Physics27, 013026 (2025)

    2025

  18. [26]

    K. R. Fratus and M. Srednicki, Eigenstate Thermaliza- tion in Systems with Spontaneously Broken Symmetry, Physical Review E92, 040103 (2015)

    2015

  19. [27]

    Harada and N

    K. Harada and N. Kawashima, Kosterlitz-Thouless tran- sition of quantum XY model in two dimensions, Jour- nal of the Physical Society of Japan67, 2768 (1998), arXiv:cond-mat/9803090

    1998 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Frérot, P

    I. Frérot, P. Naldesi, and T. Roscilde, Entanglement and fluctuations in the XXZ model with power-law interac- tions, Physical Review B95, 245111 (2017)

    2017

  21. [29]

    Vovrosh, S

    J. Vovrosh, S. Julià-Farré, W. Krinitsin, M. Kaicher, F. Hayes, E. Gottlob, A. Kshetrimayum, K. Bidzhiev, S. B. Jäger, M. Schmitt, J. Tindall, C. Dalyac, T. Mendes-Santos, and A. Dauphin, Simulating dynam- ics of the two-dimensional transverse-field Ising model: A comparatives...

    2026

  22. [30]

    Trivedi, A

    R. Trivedi, A. Franco Rubio, and J. I. Cirac, Quantum advantage and stability to errors in analogue quantum simulators, Nature Communications15, 6507 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    Dalyac, S

    C. Dalyac, S. Julià-Farré, L. Leclerc, V. Vitale, B. Al- brecht, L. Béguin, K. Bidzhiev, P. Borta, C. Briosne- 15 Frejaville, D. J. Campbell, D. Claveau, M. Chatti, A. Cornillot, J. de Hond, A. Devi, T. Eritzpokhoff, G. Hercé, F. Hayes, S. Kaghad, A. K. Abhimanyu, L. Lassabliè...

    2026

  24. [32]

    Blatt, and C

    P.Jurcevic, B.P.Lanyon, P.Hauke, C.Hempel, P.Zoller, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Quasiparticle engineering and entanglement propagation in a quantum many-body sys- tem, Nature511, 202 (2014)

    2014

  25. [33]

    C. Chen, G. Emperauger, G. Bornet, F. Caleca, B. Gély, M. Bintz, S. Chatterjee, V. Liu, D. Barredo, N. Y. Yao, T. Lahaye, F. Mezzacapo, T. Roscilde, and A. Browaeys, Spectroscopy of elementary excitations from quench dy- namics in a dipolar XY Rydberg simulator, Science389, 483 (2025)

    2025

  26. [34]

    J.Lux, J.Müller, A.Mitra,andA.Rosch,Hydrodynamic long-time tails after a quantum quench, Physical Review A89, 053608 (2014)

    2014

  27. [35]

    Marino, M

    J. Marino, M. Eckstein, M. S. Foster, and A. M. Rey, Dy- namical phase transitions in the collisionless pre-thermal states of isolated quantum systems: theory and experi- ments, Reports on Progress in Physics85, 116001 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Lerose, J

    A. Lerose, J. Marino, B. Zunkovic, A. Gambassi, and A. Silva, Chaotic dynamical ferromagnetic phase induced by non-equilibrium quantum fluctuations, Physical Re- view Letters120, 130603 (2018)

    2018

  29. [37]

    Lerose, B

    A. Lerose, B. Zunkovic, J. Marino, A. Gambassi, and A. Silva, Impact of non-equilibrium fluctuations on pre- thermal dynamical phase transitions in long-range inter- acting spin chains, Physical Review B99, 045128 (2019)

    2019

  30. [38]

    Michailidis, C

    A. Michailidis, C. Turner, Z. Papić, D. Abanin, and M. Serbyn, Slow Quantum Thermalization and Many- Body Revivals from Mixed Phase Space, Physical Review X10, 011055 (2020)

    2020

  31. [39]

    Schiró and M

    M. Schiró and M. Fabrizio, Quantum quenches in the Hubbard model: Time-dependent mean-field theory and the role of quantum fluctuations, Physical Review B83, 165105 (2011)

    2011

  32. [40]

    Michel, L

    A. Michel, L. Henriet, C. Domain, A. Browaeys, and T. Ayral, Hubbard physics with Rydberg atoms: Using a quantum spin simulator to simulate strong fermionic correlations, Physical Review B109, 174409 (2024)

    2024

  33. [41]

    Julià-Farré, A

    S. Julià-Farré, A. Michel, C. Domain, J. Mikael, J.- C. Lafoucriere, J. Vovrosh, A. Chahlaoui, D. Claveau, G. Villaret, J. d. Hond, L. Henriet, A. Browaeys, T.Ayral,andA.Dauphin,Hybridquantum-classicalana- log simulation of two-dimensional Fermi-Hubbard models with neutral ato...

    2025

  34. [42]

    Trivedi and J

    R. Trivedi and J. I. Cirac, Noise robustness of problem- to-simulator mappings for quantum many-body physics (2025)

    2025

  35. [43]

    F.Benschandet.al.,Observationoffar-from-equilibrium scaling in the transient dynamics of 2d quantum magnets (2026)

    2026

  36. [44]

    Scholl,Quantum simulation of spin models with large arrays of Rydberg atoms, Ph.D

    P. Scholl,Quantum simulation of spin models with large arrays of Rydberg atoms, Ph.D. thesis, Université Paris- Saclay (2021)

    2021

  37. [45]

    Frérot, P

    I. Frérot, P. Naldesi, and T. Roscilde, Multi-speed prethermalization in spin models with power-law decay- ing interactions, Physical Review Letters120, 050401 (2018)

    2018

  38. [46]

    A. W. Sandvik, Stochastic series expansion method for quantum Ising models with arbitrary interactions, Phys- ical Review E68, 056701 (2003)

    2003

  39. [47]

    Merali, I

    E. Merali, I. J. S. De Vlugt, and R. G. Melko, Stochas- tic series expansion quantum Monte Carlo for Rydberg arrays, SciPost Physics Core7, 016 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    Katschke, R

    L. Katschke, R. C. Farrell, U. Borla, L. Pollet, and J. C. Halimeh, Finite-Temperature Dynamical Phase Diagram of the 2+1D Quantum Ising Model (2026)

    2026

  41. [49]

    H. C. Jiang, Z. Y. Weng, and T. Xiang, Accurate De- termination of Tensor Network State of Quantum Lat- tice Models in Two Dimensions, Physical Review Letters 101, 090603 (2008)

    2008

  42. [50]

    Alkabetz and I

    R. Alkabetz and I. Arad, Tensor networks contraction and the belief propagation algorithm, Physical Review Research3, 023073 (2021)

    2021

  43. [51]

    Tindall and M

    J. Tindall and M. Fishman, Gauging tensor networks with belief propagation, SciPost Physics15, 222 (2023)

    2023

  44. [52]

    Tindall, A

    J. Tindall, A. Mello, M. Fishman, M. Stoudenmire, and D. Sels, Dynamics of disordered quantum systems with two-andthree-dimensionaltensornetworks,Science392, 868 (2026)

    2026

  45. [53]

    Verstraete and J

    F. Verstraete and J. I. Cirac, Renormalization algorithms for Quantum-Many Body Systems in two and higher di- mensions (2004)

    2004

  46. [54]

    Lubasch, J

    M. Lubasch, J. I. Cirac, and M.-C. Bañuls, Algorithms forfiniteprojectedentangledpairstates,PhysicalReview B90, 064425 (2014)

    2014

  47. [55]

    M. S. Rudolph and J. Tindall, Simulating and Sampling from Quantum Circuits with 2D Tensor Networks (2025)

    2025

  48. [56]

    Tindall, TensorNetworkQuantumSimulator.jl (2025)

    J. Tindall, TensorNetworkQuantumSimulator.jl (2025)

    2025

  49. [57]

    Bidzhiev, S

    K. Bidzhiev, S. Grava, P. l. Henaff, M. Mendizabal, E. Merhej, and A. Quelle, Efficient Emulation of Neu- tral Atom Quantum Hardware (2025)

    2025

  50. [58]

    Vovrosh, T

    J. Vovrosh, T. Mendes-Santos, H. Mamann, K. Bidzhiev, F. Hayes, B. Ximenez, L. Béguin, C. Dalyac, and A. Dauphin, Resource Assessment of Classical and Quan- tum Hardware for Post-Quench Dynamics, PRX Energy 5, 033007 (2026)

    2026

  51. [59]

    Tausendpfund, W

    N. Tausendpfund, W. Krinitsin, M. Schmitt, and M. Rizzi, TTN.jl – A tree tensor network library for cal- culating groundstates and solving time evolution (2024)

    2024

  52. [60]

    S. d. Léséleuc, D. Barredo, V. Lienhard, A. Browaeys, and T. Lahaye, Analysis of imperfections in the coher- ent optical excitation of single atoms to Rydberg states, Physical Review A97, 053803 (2018)

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.