Recursion Coefficients and Krylov Dynamics in Polynomial Random Matrix Models

Juan F. Pedraza; Le-Chen Qu

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 130 references

Recursion Coefficients and Krylov Dynamics in Polynomial Random Matrix Models

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The leading large-n growth of Lanczos coefficients in any polynomial random matrix model is fixed by the highest-degree monomial of the potential, while the next monomial fixes their limiting value.

desk verdict Useful large-n asymptotics for recursion coefficients of asymmetric polynomial potentials, but the central formula rests on an explicit convergence assumption and the DSSYK transition regions are truncation-sensitive. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.10072 v1 pith:HP4LOES2 submitted 2026-08-10 hep-th math-phmath.MPquant-ph

Juan F. Pedraza , Le-Chen Qu This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thmath-phmath.MPquant-ph MSC 42C0515B5260B20

keywords orthogonalpolynomialsrecursioncoefficientsLanczosrandommatrixtheoryFreudconjecturespreadcomplexitydouble-scaledSYKmodelmomentmethod

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

The paper derives the large-$n$ behavior of the recursion coefficients—equivalently the Lanczos coefficients of Krylov dynamics—for orthogonal polynomials associated with a general polynomial random matrix potential $V(\lambda)=\sum_{m=0}^d w_m\lambda^m$, including asymmetric potentials. It claims that $R_n$ grows like $n^{2/d}$, with a prefactor fixed entirely by the degree $d$ and the top coefficient $w_d$, while $S_n$ tends to $-w_{d-1}/(d\,w_d)$; setting $Nw_d=1$ reproduces Freud's conjecture. The paper also develops a moment recursion method that computes the coefficients efficiently for high-degree potentials by iterating a closed relation among the moments, avoiding the cumbersome discrete string equations. Numerical checks on an asymmetric quartic potential and on the double-scaled SYK model confirm the formulas, and the paper finds that transition regions in the coefficients do not qualitatively change spread complexity, whereas a two-branch structure produces early-time oscillations.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the continuum string equations (2.19), algebraic equations for the continuum recursion functions $R(x)$ and $S(x)$ obtained as the large-$N$ limit of the discrete string equations; under the convergence assumption $R_n/R(x)\to 1$ and $S_n/S(x)\to 1$ with $x=n/N$, the dominant large-$x$ terms give the asymptotic formulas. The second mechanism is the moment recursion (3.3), a total-derivative identity that expresses every higher moment of a polynomial weight in terms of lower moments, which combined with the recursive algorithm (2.23) turns the computation of recursion coefficients for high-degree potentials into a numerically tractable iteration.

What would settle it

For the asymmetric quartic potential $V(\lambda)=\lambda^4+w_3\lambda^3+w_2\lambda^2+w_1\lambda$, compute $R_n$ and $S_n$ by high-precision moment recursion out to $n/N\sim 10^3$ and test whether $R_n/\sqrt{n/(12N)}$ tends to 1 and $S_n$ tends to $-w_3/4$; a stable deviation from either limit would falsify the universal asymptotics.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the large-$n$ limit of the recursion coefficients is universal and simple: for any normalizable polynomial potential of degree $d$, $R_n \sim n^{2/d}\left[N w_d \Gamma(d+1)/(\Gamma(d/2)\Gamma(d/2+1))\right]^{-2/d}$ and $S_n\to -w_{d-1}/(d\,w_d)$. The leading growth is controlled solely by the highest monomial, and the next-highest monomial fixes the limiting value of $S_n$. These formulas follow from the continuum string equations by keeping the dominant terms as $x=n/N\to\infty$ under the assumption that the discrete coefficients converge to the continuum recursion functions. For $Nw_d=1$, the $R_n$ formula reduces to Freud's conjecture, and in the DSSYK model the same framework locates multiple transition regions in $R_n$ while the recursion function stays accurate in the smooth intervals between them.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation assumes that the discrete recursion coefficients settle smoothly onto the continuum recursion functions as $n$ and $N$ grow with $x=n/N$ fixed; if that convergence fails, the asymptotic formulas are not justified.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In any polynomial matrix model of degree $d$, leading Lanczos growth has the universal exponent $2/d$; lower-degree terms and potential asymmetry do not affect the leading growth.
Under $Nw_d=1$, the leading formula is exactly Freud's conjecture, so the paper unifies classical symmetric-potential results and extends them to asymmetric potentials.
The continuum recursion functions remain accurate approximations on smooth intervals, so the parameter space of the models can be classified by the number of gradient catastrophes of the recursion functions.
Transition regions in the recursion coefficients do not by themselves change the qualitative behavior of spread complexity, whereas a two-branch structure of the coefficients introduces early-time oscillations followed by monotonic growth.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper: because the asymptotic formula depends only on the top-degree monomial, the large-$n$ behavior of Lanczos coefficients may be set by the spectral edge of the limiting eigenvalue density rather than by the full shape of the potential.
Beyond the paper: the moment recursion (3.3) could be applied to non-polynomial weights by truncating a high-order polynomial approximation of the potential, with the truncation degree controlling the asymptotic exponent—a sensitivity the paper notes for the DSSYK model.
Beyond the paper: the coincidence between gradient catastrophes and transition regions yields a testable prediction for other potentials: the onset of chaotic-looking oscillations in recursion coefficients should coincide with a turning point of the corresponding continuum string equation.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Two things worth knowing. The paper's real product is the large-n asymptotic for Lanczos/recursion coefficients of polynomial matrix models with asymmetric potentials, Eqs. (3.13)-(3.14). That formula is clean, plausible, and reduces to Freud's conjecture when N w_d = 1, which is a good external sanity check. The second product is the observation that gradient catastrophes in the continuum recursion functions R(x), S(x) track where the discrete coefficients enter chaotic transition regions. That is illustrated for the asymmetric quartic and for truncated DSSYK, and the spread complexity follow-up is honest: transition regions do not qualitatively change the complexity. The moment recursion is not deep - integration by parts plus the classical recursive algorithm - but it is practical for high-degree potentials, and the paper deserves credit for spelling it out. Main soft spot: the asymptotic derivation is conditional. Eq. (3.5) is stated as an assumption, and it is doing the work: the continuum equations (2.19) come from a large-N limit at fixed x = n/N, while the desired statement is n going to infinity at fixed N, or at least along a different order of limits. The paper does not prove that the discrete coefficients converge to those R(x), S(x) functions. Relatedly, (2.19) comes from a one-cut ansatz, so the general claim for all normalizable polynomial potentials in (3.14) is not actually established for multi-cut cases. I do not think this is fatal - the result is likely correct and the quartic numerics support it - but it should be labeled as a conjecture or backed by a reference to the Freud-equation literature, not presented as a derivation. The DSSYK section is the weakest part, exactly as the reader says. The potential is truncated at d = 18, and footnote 2 admits the recursion coefficients are highly sensitive to truncation order, with asymptotics fixed by the highest retained term. So the multiple transition regions at various q are properties of the truncated model until tested against increasing d or the full potential. The authors flag this, so it is not dishonest, but it limits the phenomenological claim. No circularity problem: no fitted parameters, and Freud's conjecture is an external benchmark. The citation pattern is fine; citing the author's own prior work for the continuum equations is appropriate because that is where those equations live. Bottom line: this is a useful methods paper for the Krylov/random-matrix subfield. It deserves a serious referee. I would send it out and ask the authors to soften the general claim, add a convergence argument or pointer, and add a d-dependence check for DSSYK. Not desk-reject material.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies recursion coefficients (equivalently Lanczos coefficients) of orthogonal polynomials associated with random matrix ensembles with polynomial potentials. It proposes a moment recursion method for computing these coefficients, derives large-n asymptotic formulas for general polynomial potentials — claiming R_n ~ n^{2/d}[N w_d Γ(d+1)/(Γ(d/2)Γ(d/2+1))]^{-2/d} and S_n → -w_{d-1}/(d w_d) — and tests these formulas against an asymmetric quartic potential and a truncated Chebyshev model of the double-scaled SYK model. It also connects gradient catastrophes of the continuum recursion functions to 'chaotic transition regions' in the discrete coefficients and computes spread complexity in both models.

Significance. If the asymptotic formulas are correct, they give a simple, parameter-free characterization of the leading large-n growth of Lanczos coefficients for arbitrary polynomial weights, and the R_n result recovers Freud's conjecture under the normalization N w_d = 1. The moment recursion method is a practical technical contribution, and the paper is transparent about the truncation sensitivity in the DSSYK section. The numerical checks for the quartic model across several N values are credible. However, the central asymptotic derivation relies on an unproven convergence assumption, so the paper's main claim is not fully established as stated.

major comments (3)

[Section 3.2, Eq. (3.5)] The asymptotic formulas (3.13)–(3.14) rest on the assumption that R_n/R(x)→1 and S_n/S(x)→1 with x=n/N, together with R(x) diverging and S(x) bounded as x→∞. This assumption is asserted without proof or derivation, and it is not an automatic consequence of the large-N limit used to obtain the continuum string equations (2.19): that limit fixes x and sends N to infinity, whereas (3.5) concerns n→∞ for a fixed value of the ratio x, or equivalently an x→∞ limit. The paper should either prove (or cite a proof of) this convergence for normalizable polynomial potentials, or explicitly present (3.13)–(3.14) as conjectural. As written, the central claim is conditional on an assumption that has only been checked numerically in a narrow set of examples.
[Section 2.2, Eq. (2.19); Section 3.2] The continuum string equations used in the derivation assume a single-interval support for the spectral density (the one-cut ansatz). The paper claims the asymptotic results hold for general polynomial potentials, but it does not state whether the one-cut condition is assumed. For potentials whose equilibrium measure is multi-cut, the derivation of (2.19) is not valid, and no argument is given that (3.13)–(3.14) nevertheless survive. The numerical evidence covers only a one-cut quartic and a symmetric truncated polynomial, so the general claim is not tested outside the one-cut regime.
[Section 5, Eq. (5.3) and footnote 2] The DSSYK analysis truncates the infinite Chebyshev expansion at d=18, and the authors note that the recursion coefficients are highly sensitive to the truncation order, with the large-n asymptotics determined by the highest retained monomial. Consequently, the verification in Fig. 6 tests the truncated polynomial, not the actual DSSYK weight, and the DSSYK section does not provide evidence for the validity of (3.13) for the non-polynomial DSSYK potential. The manuscript should clarify the precise scope of the DSSYK claim, either by adding a truncation-convergence study or by explicitly restricting the claim to the truncated model.

minor comments (5)

[Eq. (3.14)] When w_{d-1}=0, one has S_∞=0, and the expression lim S_n/S_∞ = 1 is undefined; the condition S_∞≠0, or an alternative formulation of the S_n limit, should be stated.
[Section 2.2, after Eq. (2.19)] The remark that for 0<x<1 Eq. (2.19) also describes the average Lanczos coefficients upon reversing the coordinate x→1−x is stated without derivation; since this claim is used again in Section 5, a brief explanation or reference would be helpful.
[Figure 2] Labels such as 'β=√−γ2' are opaque because γ2 is negative; writing β=√(−γ2) would be clearer.
[Section 3.1, Eq. (3.3)] The moment recursion divides by d w_d, so the method requires w_d≠0; this should be stated explicitly.
[Abstract and Introduction] The phrase 'general polynomial potentials' is used, but the paper treats polynomial potentials of finite degree d with leading coefficient w_d and the normalizability condition (2.2); the scope should be qualified accordingly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No load-bearing circularity; the large-n asymptotics are a conditional consequence of the continuum string equations, with only a minor non-load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The central asymptotic result, Eqs. (3.13)-(3.14), is derived by taking the large-x limit of the continuum string equations (2.19), not by fitting parameters to the target quantities. The continuum string equations themselves are presented as the large-N limit of the discrete string equations (2.17), which are derived in Section 2.2 from the orthogonality identities (2.13). No parameter appearing in R_infinity(n) or S_infinity is fitted to the recursion coefficients; the result is conditional on the explicitly stated convergence assumption (3.5), which is acknowledged as an assumption rather than disguised as a prediction. The numerical checks against Freud's conjecture provide an external benchmark, and the quartic and DSSYK tests are consistency checks rather than inputs to the derivation. The only in-family citation is Ref. [12], written by one of the present authors, for the continuum string equations and the Krylov-polynomial interpretation; however, the same equations are also attributed to Ref. [11] by independent authors, and they are standard results in random matrix theory. This self-citation is therefore not load-bearing in the sense required for circularity: the derivation does not reduce to an unverified claim from the authors' previous work. The unproven nature of assumption (3.5) and the limited numerical coverage are correctness risks, not circularity. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained apart from a minor self-citation, so the circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation relies on standard orthogonal polynomial theory plus two specific assumptions: the continuum-limit convergence in Eq (3.5) and the DSSYK truncation at d=18. The only hand-chosen parameter is the truncation order, which the authors admit strongly affects the recursion coefficients. No invented entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)

DSSYK potential truncation order d = 18
The infinite Chebyshev expansion (5.2) is truncated at d=18; footnote 2 states the recurrence coefficients are highly sensitive to the truncation order, so this hand-chosen cutoff is a free parameter on which the DSSYK transition-region results depend.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption The continuum string equations (2.19) correctly describe the large-N limit of the discrete recursion coefficients.
Eq (2.19) is used as the starting point for the asymptotic derivation in Section 3.2 and is quoted from Refs [11,12] rather than proved here.
ad hoc to paper The discrete recursion coefficients converge to the continuum recursion functions as in Eq (3.5), with R(x) divergent and S(x) bounded.
This convergence is stated as an assumption in Section 3.2 and is not proven; it is the bridge between the discrete coefficients and the continuum formulas.
ad hoc to paper The d=18 truncated Chebyshev potential approximates the exact DSSYK potential for the quantities studied.
Section 5 uses d=18; footnote 2 warns that the recurrence coefficients are highly sensitive to truncation order, so this approximation is unsupported for the transition-region structure.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Recursion Coefficients and Krylov Dynamics in Polynomial Random Matrix Models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HP4LOES2

@misc{pith2026260810072,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Recursion Coefficients and Krylov Dynamics in Polynomial Random Matrix Models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HP4LOES2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.10072}
}

abstract

We study the recursion coefficients of orthogonal polynomials and their associated Krylov dynamics in random matrix models with high-degree and possibly asymmetric polynomial potentials. We develop a moment recursion method that, when combined with the recursive algorithm, provides an efficient construction of the recursion coefficients. We also obtain their large-$n$ asymptotic behavior for general asymmetric potentials; for $Nw_d=1$, the leading asymptotic form of $R_n$ reproduces Freud's conjecture. We apply this framework to an asymmetric quartic potential and to the double-scaled Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev (DSSYK) model. In both models, the recursion functions capture the overall qualitative behavior of the recursion coefficients, and the gradient catastrophes of the recursion functions are associated with ``chaotic'' transition regions in the recursion coefficients. For the quartic potential, such regions can occur in both $R_n$ and $S_n$, whereas the DSSYK model can exhibit multiple transition regions in $R_n$, with the recursion function remaining accurate in the smooth intervals between them. Finally, we compute the corresponding spread complexity and find that transition regions do not qualitatively modify its behavior, while a two branch structure produces early time oscillations followed by monotonic growth.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

130 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages

[1]

Demeterfi,Two-dimensional quantum gravity, matrix models and string theory, International Journal of Modern Physics A8(1993) 1185–1244

K. Demeterfi,Two-dimensional quantum gravity, matrix models and string theory, International Journal of Modern Physics A8(1993) 1185–1244

1993
[2]

E. Witten,Two-dimensional gravity and intersection theory on moduli space, inThe Large N Expansion In Quantum Field Theory And Statistical Physics: From Spin Systems to 2-Dimensional Gravity, pp. 871–938. World Scientific, 1993

1993
[3]

Adler, T

M. Adler, T. Shiota and P. van Moerbeke,Random matrices, vertex operators and the virasoro algebra,Physics Letters A208(1995) 67–78

1995
[4]

M¨ uck and Y

W. M¨ uck and Y. Yang,Krylov complexity and orthogonal polynomials,Nucl. Phys. B984 (2022) 115948, [2205.12815]

arXiv 2022
[5]

A. Kar, L. Lamprou, M. Rozali and J. Sully,Random matrix theory for complexity growth and black hole interiors,JHEP01(2022) 016, [2106.02046]

arXiv 2022
[6]

M¨ uck,Black holes and Marchenko-Pastur distribution,Phys

W. M¨ uck,Black holes and Marchenko-Pastur distribution,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 126001, [2403.05241]. – 16 –

arXiv 2024
[7]

Adhikari,Krylov Polynomials and Quantum Query Complexity,2510.11786

K. Adhikari,Krylov Polynomials and Quantum Query Complexity,2510.11786

arXiv
[8]

Alishahiha, S

M. Alishahiha, S. Banerjee and M. J. Vasli,Krylov complexity as a probe for chaos,Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 749, [2408.10194]

arXiv 2025

Show all 130 references

[9]

Balasubramanian, P

V. Balasubramanian, P. Caputa and J. Sim´ on,Variations on a Theme of Krylov, 2511.03775
[10]

O. Lunt, T. Kriecherbauer, K. T.-R. McLaughlin and C. von Keyserlingk,Emergent Random Matrix Universality in Quantum Operator Dynamics,Phys. Rev. X16(2026) 011033, [2504.18311]

2026
[11]

Balasubramanian, J

V. Balasubramanian, J. M. Magan and Q. Wu,Tridiagonalizing random matrices,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 126001, [2208.08452]

2023 arXiv
[12]

Qu,Lanczos meets orthogonal polynomials,JHEP05(2026) 225, [2512.15857]

L.-C. Qu,Lanczos meets orthogonal polynomials,JHEP05(2026) 225, [2512.15857]

2026
[13]

Murugan, H

J. Murugan, H. J. R. Van Zyl and M. Watanabe,Spectral Topology and Universal Krylov Dynamics,2608.07258

arXiv
[14]

Freud,On the coefficients in the recursion formulae of orthogonal polynomials, in Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy

G. Freud,On the coefficients in the recursion formulae of orthogonal polynomials, in Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section A: Mathematical and Physical Sciences, pp. 1–6, JSTOR, 1976

1976
[15]

Brezin, C

E. Brezin, C. Itzykson, G. Parisi and J. B. Zuber,Planar Diagrams,Commun. Math. Phys. 59(1978) 35

1978
[16]

Bessis, C

D. Bessis, C. Itzykson and J. B. Zuber,Quantum field theory techniques in graphical enumeration,Adv. Appl. Math.1(1980) 109–157

1980
[17]

Itzykson and J

C. Itzykson and J. B. Zuber,The Planar Approximation. 2.,J. Math. Phys.21(1980) 411

1980
[18]

Jurkiewicz,Chaotic behavior in one matrix models,Phys

J. Jurkiewicz,Chaotic behavior in one matrix models,Phys. Lett. B261(1991) 260–268

1991
[19]

Senechal,Chaos in the hermitian one-matrix model,International Journal of Modern Physics A7(1992) 1491–1506

D. Senechal,Chaos in the hermitian one-matrix model,International Journal of Modern Physics A7(1992) 1491–1506

1992
[20]

Benassi and A

C. Benassi and A. Moro,Thermodynamic limit and dispersive regularisation in matrix models,Phys. Rev. E101(2020) 052118, [1903.11473]

2020 arXiv
[21]

Deift, T

P. Deift, T. Kriecherbauer, K. T.-R. McLaughlin, S. Venakides and X. Zhou,Strong asymptotics of orthogonal polynomials with respect to exponential weights,Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics: A Journal Issued by the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences52(1999)...

1999
[22]

Bleher and A

P. Bleher and A. Its,Semiclassical asymptotics of orthogonal polynomials, riemann-hilbert problem, and universality in the matrix model,Annals of Mathematics(1999) 185–266

1999
[23]

J. Baik, T. Kriecherbauer, K.-R. McLaughlin and P. D. Miller,Uniform asymptotics for polynomials orthogonal with respect to a general class of discrete weights and universality results for associated ensembles: announcement of results,International Mathematics Research Notices...

2003
[24]

Demeterfi, N

K. Demeterfi, N. Deo, S. Jain and C. I. Tan,Multiband structure and critical behavior of matrix models,Physical Review D42(1990) 4105

1990
[25]

Jurkiewicz,Regularization of one-matrix models,Physics Letters B245(1990) 178–184

J. Jurkiewicz,Regularization of one-matrix models,Physics Letters B245(1990) 178–184

1990
[26]

Lechtenfeld, R

O. Lechtenfeld, R. Ray and A. Ray,Phase diagram and orthogonal polynomials in – 17 – multiple-well matrix models,International Journal of Modern Physics A6(1991) 4491–4515

1991
[27]

Sasaki and H

M. Sasaki and H. Suzuki,Matrix realization of random surfaces,Physical Review D43 (1991) 4015

1991
[28]

Lechtenfeld,Eigenvalue tunneling in matrix models,International Journal of Modern Physics A7(1992) 2335–2354

O. Lechtenfeld,Eigenvalue tunneling in matrix models,International Journal of Modern Physics A7(1992) 2335–2354

1992
[29]

Lechtenfeld,Semiclassical approach to finite-n matrix models,International Journal of Modern Physics A7(1992) 7097–7118

O. Lechtenfeld,Semiclassical approach to finite-n matrix models,International Journal of Modern Physics A7(1992) 7097–7118

1992
[30]

P. A. Clarkson and K. Jordaan,A generalized sextic freud weight,Integral Transforms and Special Functions32(2021) 458–482

2021
[31]

Clarkson,Symmetric orthogonal polynomials,

P. Clarkson,Symmetric orthogonal polynomials,
[32]

P. A. Clarkson, K. Jordaan and A. Loureiro,Generalized higher-order freud weights, Proceedings of the Royal Society A479(2023) 20220788

2023
[33]

P. A. Clarkson, K. Jordaan and A. Loureiro,Symmetric sextic freud weight,Nonlinearity 38(2025) 125011

2025
[34]

J. S. Cotler, G. Gur-Ari, M. Hanada, J. Polchinski, P. Saad, S. H. Shenker et al.,Black Holes and Random Matrices,JHEP05(2017) 118, [1611.04650]

2017 arXiv
[35]

A. M. Garc ´ ıa-Garc ´ ıa, Y. Jia and J. J. M. Verbaarschot,Exact moments of the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model up to order1/N 2,JHEP04(2018) 146, [1801.02696]

2018 arXiv
[36]

Berkooz, M

M. Berkooz, M. Isachenkov, V. Narovlansky and G. Torrents,Towards a full solution of the large N double-scaled SYK model,JHEP03(2019) 079, [1811.02584]

2019 arXiv
[37]

D. E. Parker, X. Cao, A. Avdoshkin, T. Scaffidi and E. Altman,A Universal Operator Growth Hypothesis,Phys. Rev. X9(2019) 041017, [1812.08657]

2019 arXiv
[38]

J. L. F. Barb´ on, E. Rabinovici, R. Shir and R. Sinha,On The Evolution Of Operator Complexity Beyond Scrambling,JHEP10(2019) 264, [1907.05393]

2019 arXiv
[39]

Avdoshkin and A

A. Avdoshkin and A. Dymarsky,Euclidean operator growth and quantum chaos,Phys. Rev. Res.2(2020) 043234, [1911.09672]

2020 arXiv
[40]

Rabinovici, A

E. Rabinovici, A. S´ anchez-Garrido, R. Shir and J. Sonner,Operator complexity: a journey to the edge of Krylov space,JHEP06(2021) 062, [2009.01862]

2021 arXiv
[41]

S.-K. Jian, B. Swingle and Z.-Y. Xian,Complexity growth of operators in the SYK model and in JT gravity,JHEP03(2021) 014, [2008.12274]

2021 arXiv
[42]

Dymarsky and M

A. Dymarsky and M. Smolkin,Krylov complexity in conformal field theory,Phys. Rev. D 104(2021) L081702, [2104.09514]

2021 arXiv
[43]

H¨ ornedal, N

N. H¨ ornedal, N. Carabba, A. S. Matsoukas-Roubeas and A. del Campo,Ultimate Physical Limits to the Growth of Operator Complexity,2202.05006

arXiv
[44]

Balasubramanian, P

V. Balasubramanian, P. Caputa, J. M. Magan and Q. Wu,Quantum chaos and the complexity of spread of states,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 046007, [2202.06957]

2022 arXiv
[45]

Caputa, J

P. Caputa, J. M. Magan, D. Patramanis and E. Tonni,Krylov complexity of modular Hamiltonian evolution,2306.14732

arXiv
[46]

Erdmenger, S.-K

J. Erdmenger, S.-K. Jian and Z.-Y. Xian,Universal chaotic dynamics from Krylov space, JHEP08(2023) 176, [2303.12151]. – 18 –

2023 arXiv
[47]

Craps, O

B. Craps, O. Evnin and G. Pascuzzi,A Relation between Krylov and Nielsen Complexity, Phys. Rev. Lett.132(2024) 160402, [2311.18401]

2024 arXiv
[48]

Huh, H.-S

K.-B. Huh, H.-S. Jeong and J. F. Pedraza,Spread complexity in saddle-dominated scrambling,JHEP05(2024) 137, [2312.12593]

2024 arXiv
[49]

He and H.-Q

P.-Z. He and H.-Q. Zhang,Krylov complexity in the Schr¨ odinger field theory,JHEP03 (2025) 142, [2411.16302]

2025 arXiv
[50]

He and H.-Q

P.-Z. He and H.-Q. Zhang,Probing Krylov complexity in scalar field theory with general temperatures,JHEP11(2024) 014, [2407.02756]

2024 arXiv
[51]

Caputa, H.-S

P. Caputa, H.-S. Jeong, S. Liu, J. F. Pedraza and L.-C. Qu,Krylov complexity of density matrix operators,2402.09522

arXiv
[52]

Baggioli, K.-B

M. Baggioli, K.-B. Huh, H.-S. Jeong, K.-Y. Kim and J. F. Pedraza,Krylov complexity as an order parameter for quantum chaotic-integrable transitions,Phys. Rev. Res.7(2025) 023028, [2407.17054]

2025 arXiv
[53]

Craps, O

B. Craps, O. Evnin and G. Pascuzzi,Multiseed Krylov complexity,2409.15666

arXiv
[54]

Huh, H.-S

K.-B. Huh, H.-S. Jeong, L. A. Pando Zayas and J. F. Pedraza,Krylov complexity in mixed phase space,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) L121902, [2412.04963]

2025 arXiv
[55]

Caputa, B

P. Caputa, B. Chen, R. W. McDonald, J. Sim´ on and B. Strittmatter,Spread Complexity Rate as Proper Momentum,2410.23334

arXiv
[56]

Zhai, L.-H

K.-H. Zhai, L.-H. Liu and H.-Q. Zhang,The generalized CV conjecture of Krylov complexity,2412.08925

arXiv
[57]

Nandy, T

P. Nandy, T. Pathak, Z.-Y. Xian and J. Erdmenger,Krylov space approach to singular value decomposition in non-Hermitian systems,Phys. Rev. B111(2025) 064203, [2411.09309]

2025 arXiv
[58]

Li and L.-H

T. Li and L.-H. Liu,Krylov complexity of thermal state in early universe,2408.03293
[59]

Balasubramanian, R

V. Balasubramanian, R. N. Das, J. Erdmenger and Z.-Y. Xian,Chaos and integrability in triangular billiards,J. Stat. Mech.2025(2025) 033202, [2407.11114]

2025 arXiv
[60]

Bhattacharya and A

A. Bhattacharya and A. Jana,Quantum chaos and complexity from string scattering amplitudes,2408.11096

arXiv
[61]

Bhattacharya, R

A. Bhattacharya, R. N. Das, B. Dey and J. Erdmenger,Spread complexity and localization in PT-symmetric systems,Phys. Rev. B110(2024) 064320, [2406.03524]

2024 arXiv
[62]

Bhattacharya, P

A. Bhattacharya, P. P. Nath and H. Sahu,Speed limits to the growth of Krylov complexity in open quantum systems,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) L121902, [2403.03584]

2024 arXiv
[63]

S. E. Aguilar-Gutierrez,Towards complexity in de Sitter space from the doubled-scaled Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,JHEP10(2024) 107, [2403.13186]

2024 arXiv
[64]

Baggioli, K.-B

M. Baggioli, K.-B. Huh, H.-S. Jeong, X. Jiang, K.-Y. Kim and J. F. Pedraza,Quantum Chaos Diagnostics for non-Hermitian Systems from Bi-Lanczos Krylov Dynamics, 2508.13956
[65]

Craps, G

B. Craps, G. Pascuzzi, J. F. Pedraza, L.-C. Qu and S.-M. Ruan,Explicit Connections Between Krylov and Nielsen Complexity,2511.15799

arXiv
[66]

Evnin,Analytic and numerical toolkit for the Anderson model in one dimension,Phys

O. Evnin,Analytic and numerical toolkit for the Anderson model in one dimension,Phys. Rev. B112(2025) L180203, [2507.06903]. – 19 –

2025
[67]

Fu, H.-S

Y. Fu, H.-S. Jeong, K.-Y. Kim and J. F. Pedraza,Toward Krylov-based holography in double-scaled SYK,JHEP05(2026) 056, [2510.22658]

2026 arXiv
[68]

He, L.-H

P.-Z. He, L.-H. Liu, H.-Q. Zhang and Q.-Q. Jiang,Krylov complexity and Wightman power spectrum with positive chemical potentials in Schr¨ odinger field theory,2509.14742
[69]

Zhai, L.-H

K.-H. Zhai, L.-H. Liu and H.-Q. Zhang,Inflationary power spectrum from the Lanczos algorithm,Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 1096, [2505.20595]

2025
[70]

Caputa and G

P. Caputa and G. Di Giulio,Local quenches from a Krylov perspective,JHEP07(2025) 164, [2502.19485]

2025
[71]

Caputa, G

P. Caputa, G. Di Giulio and T. Q. Loc,Symmetry-Resolved Spread Complexity, 2509.12992
[72]

Caputa, G

P. Caputa, G. Di Giulio and T. Q. Loc,Growth of block-diagonal operators and symmetry-resolved Krylov complexity,Phys. Rev. Res.7(2025) 043055, [2507.02033]

2025
[73]

Miyaji, S.-M

M. Miyaji, S.-M. Ruan, S. Shibuya and K. Yano,Non-perturbative overlaps in JT gravity: from spectral form factor to generating functions of complexity,JHEP06(2025) 251, [2502.12266]

2025 arXiv
[74]

Takahashi, P

K. Takahashi, P. Nandy and A. del Campo,Krylov Complexity Under Hamiltonian Deformations and Toda Flows,2510.19436

arXiv
[75]

Miyaji, S

M. Miyaji, S. Mori and K. Okuyama,Finite N bulk Hilbert space in ETH matrix model for double-scaled SYK. Null states, state-dependence and Krylov state complexity,JHEP08 (2025) 084, [2505.13194]

2025
[76]

Demulder, M

S. Demulder, M. Knysh and A. Rolph,Krylov exponents and power spectra for maximal quantum chaos: an EFT approach,2508.05444
[77]

Alishahiha and M

M. Alishahiha and M. J. Vasli,Krylov distribution,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 126004, [2602.06150]

2026
[78]

Chowdhury and A

A. Chowdhury and A. P. Mahapatra,Polynomial Initial-State Jumps and Christoffel Transforms in Krylov Complexity,2607.05294

arXiv
[79]

Li and H.-B

T. Li and H.-B. Fu,Circuit and Krylov complexity of primordial perturbations of modified gravity in inflation,2607.09408

arXiv
[80]

De Ro, A

N. De Ro, A. S´ anchez-Garrido and J. Sonner,From phase space to Krylov space, one shell at a time,2607.12585

arXiv
[81]

Nunez and D

C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury,Krylov Complexity andc-function along RG Flows, 2608.02715

arXiv
[82]

Nandy, A

P. Nandy, A. S. Matsoukas-Roubeas, P. Mart ´ ınez-Azcona, A. Dymarsky and A. del Campo, Quantum Dynamics in Krylov Space: Methods and Applications,2405.09628

arXiv
[83]

Baiguera, V

S. Baiguera, V. Balasubramanian, P. Caputa, S. Chapman, J. Haferkamp, M. P. Heller et al.,Quantum complexity in gravity, quantum field theory, and quantum information science,Phys. Rept.1159(2026) 1–77, [2503.10753]

2026
[84]

Rabinovici, A

E. Rabinovici, A. S´ anchez-Garrido, R. Shir and J. Sonner,Krylov Complexity,2507.06286

arXiv
[85]

Bessis, C

D. Bessis, C. Itzykson and J. Zuber,Quantum field theory techniques in graphical enumeration,Advances in Applied Mathematics1(1980) 109–157

1980
[86]

P. H. Ginsparg,Matrix models of 2-d gravity, 12, 1991.hep-th/9112013. – 20 –

1991 arXiv
[87]

Eynard, T

B. Eynard, T. Kimura and S. Ribault,Random matrices,1510.04430

arXiv
[88]

P. M. Bleher,Lectures on random matrix models: the riemann–hilbert approach, inRandom Matrices, Random Processes and Integrable Systems, pp. 251–349. Springer, 2011

2011
[89]

P. H. Ginsparg and G. W. Moore,Lectures on 2-D gravity and 2-D string theory, in Theoretical Advanced Study Institute (TASI 92): From Black Holes and Strings to Particles, pp. 277–469, 10, 1993.hep-th/9304011

1993 arXiv
[90]

Livan, M

G. Livan, M. Novaes and P. Vivo,Introduction to random matrices theory and practice, Monograph Award63(2018) 914

2018
[91]

Viswanath and G

V. Viswanath and G. M¨ uller,The recursion method: application to many-body dynamics. Springer, 1994

1994
[92]

Bhattacharjee, X

B. Bhattacharjee, X. Cao, P. Nandy and T. Pathak,Operator growth in open quantum systems: lessons from the dissipative syk,Journal of High Energy Physics2023(2023) 54

2023
[93]

A. P. Magnus,On freud’s equations for exponential weights,Journal of approximation theory46(1986) 65–99

1986
[94]

Lubinsky and E

D. Lubinsky and E. Saff,Uniform and mean approximation by certain weighted polynomials, with applications,Constructive Approximation4(1988) 21–64

1988
[95]

Lubinsky, H

D. Lubinsky, H. Mhaskar and E. Saff,A proof of freud’s conjecture for exponential weights, Constructive Approximation4(1988) 65–83

1988
[96]

Brezin, E

E. Brezin, E. Marinari and G. Parisi,A non-perturbative ambiguity free solution of a string model,Physics Letters B242(1990) 35–38

1990
[97]

Maldacena and D

J. Maldacena and D. Stanford,Remarks on the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model,Phys. Rev. D94 (2016) 106002, [1604.07818]

2016 arXiv
[98]

D. L. Jafferis, D. K. Kolchmeyer, B. Mukhametzhanov and J. Sonner,Jackiw-Teitelboim gravity with matter, generalized eigenstate thermalization hypothesis, and random matrices, Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 066015, [2209.02131]

2023 arXiv
[99]

Balasubramanian, J

V. Balasubramanian, J. M. Magan, P. Nandi and Q. Wu,Spread complexity and the saturation of wormhole size,2412.02038

arXiv
[100]

Nandy,Tridiagonal Hamiltonians modeling the density of states of the double-scaled SYK model,JHEP01(2025) 072, [2410.07847]

P. Nandy,Tridiagonal Hamiltonians modeling the density of states of the double-scaled SYK model,JHEP01(2025) 072, [2410.07847]

2025 arXiv
[101]

Banks, M

T. Banks, M. R. Douglas, N. Seiberg and S. H. Shenker,Microscopic and Macroscopic Loops in Nonperturbative Two-dimensional Gravity,Phys. Lett. B238(1990) 279

1990
[102]

Seiberg and D

N. Seiberg and D. Shih,Minimal string theory,Comptes Rendus Physique6(2005) 165–174, [hep-th/0409306]

2005 arXiv
[103]

P. Saad, S. H. Shenker and D. Stanford,JT gravity as a matrix integral,1903.11115

1903 arXiv
[104]

C. V. Johnson,Nonperturbative Jackiw-Teitelboim gravity,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 106023, [1912.03637]

2020 arXiv
[105]

C. V. Johnson,Jackiw-Teitelboim supergravity, minimal strings, and matrix models,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 046012, [2005.01893]

2021 arXiv
[106]

C. V. Johnson,Explorations of nonperturbative Jackiw-Teitelboim gravity and supergravity, Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 046013, [2006.10959]

2021 arXiv
[107]

C. V. Johnson,The Microstate Physics of JT Gravity and Supergravity,2201.11942. – 21 –

arXiv
[108]

Susskind,Computational Complexity and Black Hole Horizons,Fortsch

L. Susskind,Computational Complexity and Black Hole Horizons,Fortsch. Phys.64(2016) 24–43, [1403.5695]

2016 arXiv
[109]

Stanford and L

D. Stanford and L. Susskind,Complexity and Shock Wave Geometries,Phys. Rev.D90 (2014) 126007, [1406.2678]

2014 arXiv
[110]

A. R. Brown, D. A. Roberts, L. Susskind, B. Swingle and Y. Zhao,Holographic Complexity Equals Bulk Action?,Phys. Rev. Lett.116(2016) 191301, [1509.07876]

2016 arXiv
[111]

A. R. Brown, D. A. Roberts, L. Susskind, B. Swingle and Y. Zhao,Complexity, action, and black holes,Phys. Rev.D93(2016) 086006, [1512.04993]

2016 arXiv
[112]

Cai, S.-M

R.-G. Cai, S.-M. Ruan, S.-J. Wang, R.-Q. Yang and R.-H. Peng,Action growth for AdS black holes,JHEP09(2016) 161, [1606.08307]

2016 arXiv
[113]

J. F. Pedraza, A. Russo, A. Svesko and Z. Weller-Davies,Lorentzian Threads as Gatelines and Holographic Complexity,Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) 271602, [2105.12735]

2021 arXiv
[114]

J. F. Pedraza, A. Russo, A. Svesko and Z. Weller-Davies,Sewing spacetime with Lorentzian threads: complexity and the emergence of time in quantum gravity,JHEP02(2022) 093, [2106.12585]

2022 arXiv
[115]

Belin, R

A. Belin, R. C. Myers, S.-M. Ruan, G. S´ arosi and A. J. Speranza,Does Complexity Equal Anything?,Phys. Rev. Lett.128(2022) 081602, [2111.02429]

2022 arXiv
[116]

Belin, R

A. Belin, R. C. Myers, S.-M. Ruan, G. S´ arosi and A. J. Speranza,Complexity equals anything II,JHEP01(2023) 154, [2210.09647]

2023 arXiv
[117]

J. F. Pedraza, A. Russo, A. Svesko and Z. Weller-Davies,Computing spacetime,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D31(2022) 2242010, [2205.05705]

2022 arXiv
[118]

Carrasco, J

R. Carrasco, J. F. Pedraza, A. Svesko and Z. Weller-Davies,Gravitation from optimized computation: Einstein and beyond,JHEP09(2023) 167, [2306.08503]

2023 arXiv
[119]

Jørstad, R

E. Jørstad, R. C. Myers and S.-M. Ruan,Complexity=anything: singularity probes,JHEP 07(2023) 223, [2304.05453]

2023 arXiv
[120]

Jiang, M.-T

H.-Y. Jiang, M.-T. Wang and Y.-X. Liua,Holographic complexity and phase transition for AdS black holes,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 046013, [2307.09223]

2024 arXiv
[121]

Caceres, R

E. Caceres, R. Carrasco and V. Patil,Lorentzian threads and generalized complexity,JHEP 04(2024) 010, [2312.10606]

2024 arXiv
[122]

R. C. Myers and S.-M. Ruan,Complexity Equals (Almost) Anything, 3, 2024.2403.17475

2024
[123]

Are´ an, H.-S

D. Are´ an, H.-S. Jeong, J. F. Pedraza and L.-C. Qu,Kasner interiors from analytic hairy black holes,JHEP11(2024) 138, [2407.18430]

2024 arXiv
[124]

Jiang and Y.-X

H.-Y. Jiang and Y.-X. Liu,Complexity equals anything for multi-horizon black holes,JHEP 12(2025) 072, [2506.10398]

2025
[125]

Miyaji, S.-M

M. Miyaji, S.-M. Ruan, S. Shibuya and K. Yano,Universal Time Evolution of Holographic and Quantum Complexity,2507.23667

arXiv
[126]

C´ aceres, R

E. C´ aceres, R. Carrasco, V. Patil, J. F. Pedraza and A. Svesko,The landscape of complexity measures in 2D gravity,JHEP10(2025) 218, [2503.20943]

2025
[127]

C´ aceres, R

E. C´ aceres, R. Carrasco and J. F. Pedraza,Lorentzian threads and nonlocal computation in holography,2512.07963. – 22 –
[128]

Fatemiabhari, H

A. Fatemiabhari, H. Nastase and D. Roychowdhury,Holographic Krylov complexity in N= 4SYM,2511.19286
[129]

Fatemiabhari, H

A. Fatemiabhari, H. Nastase, C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury,Holographic Krylov complexity in confining gauge theories,2511.22717

arXiv
[130]

Fatemiabhari, H

A. Fatemiabhari, H. Nastase, C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury,Holographic Krylov Complexity for Conformal Quiver Gauge Theories,2512.14812. – 23 –

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Demeterfi,Two-dimensional quantum gravity, matrix models and string theory, International Journal of Modern Physics A8(1993) 1185–1244

K. Demeterfi,Two-dimensional quantum gravity, matrix models and string theory, International Journal of Modern Physics A8(1993) 1185–1244

1993

[2] [2]

E. Witten,Two-dimensional gravity and intersection theory on moduli space, inThe Large N Expansion In Quantum Field Theory And Statistical Physics: From Spin Systems to 2-Dimensional Gravity, pp. 871–938. World Scientific, 1993

1993

[3] [3]

Adler, T

M. Adler, T. Shiota and P. van Moerbeke,Random matrices, vertex operators and the virasoro algebra,Physics Letters A208(1995) 67–78

1995

[4] [4]

M¨ uck and Y

W. M¨ uck and Y. Yang,Krylov complexity and orthogonal polynomials,Nucl. Phys. B984 (2022) 115948, [2205.12815]

arXiv 2022

[5] [5]

A. Kar, L. Lamprou, M. Rozali and J. Sully,Random matrix theory for complexity growth and black hole interiors,JHEP01(2022) 016, [2106.02046]

arXiv 2022

[6] [6]

M¨ uck,Black holes and Marchenko-Pastur distribution,Phys

W. M¨ uck,Black holes and Marchenko-Pastur distribution,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 126001, [2403.05241]. – 16 –

arXiv 2024

[7] [7]

Adhikari,Krylov Polynomials and Quantum Query Complexity,2510.11786

K. Adhikari,Krylov Polynomials and Quantum Query Complexity,2510.11786

arXiv

[8] [8]

Alishahiha, S

M. Alishahiha, S. Banerjee and M. J. Vasli,Krylov complexity as a probe for chaos,Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 749, [2408.10194]

arXiv 2025