A sharp bound on spacetime distance from quantum entanglement

Arshid Shabir; Mir Faizal; Samuel L. Braunstein; Zhi-Wei Wang

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 76 references

A sharp bound on spacetime distance from quantum entanglement

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that boundary mutual information imposes a logarithmic lower bound on bulk geodesic distance, so vanishing correlations force spacetime separation to diverge.

desk verdict The MfI bound is a clean two-line inequality built on Pinsker plus the geodesic dictionary, but its load-bearing locality assumption on code-compressed probes is unproven; worth refereeing with pressure on that step. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.12245 v1 pith:V7O5P6K2 submitted 2026-08-12 hep-th gr-qcquant-ph

Zhi-Wei Wang , Arshid Shabir , Mir Faizal , Samuel L. Braunstein This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thgr-qcquant-ph

keywords AdS-CFTcorrespondencemutualinformationgeodesicdistancequantumPinskerinequalityheavyoperatorprobesentanglementwedgeholographiccodesubspacebulkconnectivity

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

Boundary entanglement already determines bulk area through the Ryu–Takayanagi formula. This paper claims the missing metric counterpart: in a semiclassical holographic code subspace, the mutual information $I(A:B)$ between two boundary regions forces the renormalized bulk geodesic length $L_{\mathrm{ren}}(x,y)$ between probes in those regions to obey $L_{\mathrm{ren}}(x,y) \ge (2\$\Delta$)^{-1}\ln(\kappa_\$\Delta$^2(1-\epsilon_\star)^2/(2\ln 2\,I(A:B)))$. As the mutual information vanishes, the allowed distance diverges logarithmically, so a finite bulk separation requires a strictly positive information budget. A multiscale chaining argument promotes this pairwise inequality into a lower bound on bulk diameter, and a parallel-strip check in AdS₅/CFT₄ shows that the bound forces quantum corrections to lift the classical mutual-information transition.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is a two-step inequality chain. Quantum Pinsker supplies a state-dependent correlation budget: each bounded observable pair across $A,B$ satisfies $|\langle O_AO_B\rangle-\langle O_A\rangle\langle O_B\rangle| \le \|O_A\|_\infty\|O_B\|_\infty\sqrt{2\ln 2\,I(A:B)}$. The heavy-probe geodesic dictionary converts the same correlator into an exponentiated renormalized length $N_\$\Delta$ e^{-\$\Delta$ L_{\mathrm{ren}}}$. Composing these two relations and taking logarithms produces the metric-from-information bound, with calibration constant $\kappa_\$\Delta$=|N_\$\Delta$|/B_\$\Delta$^2$ absorbing the probe normalization and the code-subspace operator bound $B_\$\Delta$$. A separate multiscale diameter bound (Theorem 2) chains these pairwise estimates along shortest paths, with a single alignment error $\delta$ per step, to control the entire bulk diameter.

What would settle it

Compute the exact mutual information and the code-compressed heavy-primary correlator in a boundary state with an independently known bulk geodesic length; if at any separated pair the correlator magnitude exceeds $B_\$\Delta$^2\sqrt{2\ln 2\,I(A:B)}$, the claimed bound is violated. A concrete place to look is the AdS₅/CFT₄ strip at the classical transition $s_c=(\sqrt{3}-1)\ell$, where the theorem requires the subleading mutual information to be strictly positive and strong enough to keep the right side of Eq. (3.2) finite.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is Theorem 1 (Section 3): for disjoint boundary regions $A,B$ with $I(A:B)>0$, the renormalized bulk geodesic length satisfies Eq. (3.2). The argument combines the quantum Pinsker inequality, which bounds every bounded connected bipartite correlator by $\sqrt{2\ln 2\,I(A:B)}$ times the product of operator norms, with the heavy-operator holographic dictionary $\langle \tilde O_\$\Delta$(x)\tilde O_\$\Delta$(y)\rangle_\rho = N_\$\Delta$ e^{-\$\Delta$ L_{\mathrm{ren}}(x,y)}(1+\epsilon_{\mathrm{tot}})$, whose multiplicative error is controlled below unity. Taking logarithms gives the advertised logarithmic bound. The same logic is iterated over boundary cells at many scales: if neighboring cells lack mutual information at any resolution, the allowed bulk diameter grows, and a connected semiclassical bulk becomes inconsistent with the boundary state.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise, flagged in Appendix A, is that compressing heavy operators by the nonlocal code projector still leaves bounded observables on the two boundary regions to which the quantum Pinsker inequality applies; if that compression destroys the tensor-product or commuting-algebra structure, the boundary mutual information can no longer be used to bound the geodesic correlator.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Ryu–Takayanagi is extended from entropy-area to information-distance: boundary mutual information constrains the metric itself, not just extremal areas.
Any proposed semiclassical geometry whose boundary regions carry too little mutual information to support the pairwise geodesic distances is ruled out without reconstructing the metric point by point.
A connected bulk of finite diameter requires positive mutual information between neighboring boundary cells at every resolution; the most information-poor scale controls the diameter.
In the parallel-strip vacuum the classical RT mutual information vanishes at $s_c=(\sqrt{3}-1)\ell$ while the actual geodesic distance is finite, so subleading bulk-entropic corrections must lift the mutual information to a strictly positive value.
At large separation the logarithmic growth of the bound matches the semiclassical geodesic scaling $L_{\mathrm{ren}}\sim 2\ln s$ for bounded regions, with exact saturation at $\Delta=\Delta_{\min}$ in the pure AdS vacuum.

Reading between the lines

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

If this bound is saturated in generic states for the lightest primary, then bulk metric power laws become a direct read-off of boundary mutual-information decay exponents, giving a purely boundary diagnostic of bulk curvature.
The multiscale requirement suggests an information-theoretic notion of spatial connectivity: a testable extension would define a threshold mutual information per link in tensor-network models of holography and ask whether link values below threshold reproduce the predicted diameter growth.
Read in reverse, the divergence as $I(A:B)\to 0$ suggests that exact zero mutual information between separated regions should coincide with the absence of a finite-distance bulk probe, sharpening the meaning of an emergent metric in finite-dimensional toy models.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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

The centerpiece is genuinely simple: quantum Pinsker plus the heavy-operator geodesic dictionary gives L_ren(x,y) ≥ (1/(2∆)) ln(κ_∆²(1−ε⋆)² / (2 ln 2 · I(A:B))). I checked the algebra — it's right — and the 1/(2∆) logarithmic rate is a clean statement. The soft spot is where the reader put it: the Pinsker step (Eq. 3.3) is applied to code-compressed operators ~O_A = Π_code (O_∆(x) − ⟨O_∆⟩) Π_code and ~O_B, and the paper assumes these are admissible A/B-side observables. A nonlocal projector Π_code generically mixes the two sides, so small I(A:B) need not constrain the compressed correlator. The assumption is stated in Appendix A ("admissible bounded representatives") but not proven, and it is load-bearing rather than cosmetic. The stress-test note is right on the math; I would only add that the assumption is not obviously false — a large-N or tensor-network argument might well establish it — but the paper doesn't supply one.

What the paper does well: the error budget is careful, and the authors are honest that the bound is a constraint, not a reconstruction. The parallel-strip argument is the best part: classical RT gives I = 0 where the bulk geodesic is finite, so the exact mutual information must be lifted by subleading quantum corrections. That is a clean, sound way of seeing why the classical RT transition needs QES smoothing. The AdS5/CFT4 calculation in Appendix I is a real check — the renormalized two-point function, geodesic length, and strip threshold all come out right, and the paper correctly distinguishes the saturating case (bounded regions, I ~ s^{−4∆_min}, giving exactly 2 ln s) from the non-saturated strip case.

Softer spots, in proportion: the multiscale Theorem 2 rests on a δ-alignment hypothesis that is assumed, not controlled; the bound can go trivial for realistic δ, and no model is given where δ is small. The BKM-metric appendix is decorative — standard relative-entropy Taylor expansion that never connects to bulk geometry. Novelty is modest, as the reader says: both ingredients are in the cited literature, and the appendices prove the main theorem in a few lines. That is fine; the paper's value is the packaging plus the applications, not a new mechanism.

The citation pattern looks clean. Who this is for: people working on entanglement and emergent geometry, holographic codes, and QES transitions. It deserves a serious referee. My recommendation: send it to peer review, with the referee instructed to push hard on the compressed-probe assumption — either a proof in a concrete code model, or the main theorem restated with the assumption explicit.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper claims a rigorous quantitative relation between boundary mutual information and bulk geodesic distance in holographic code subspaces. Its main result, Theorem 1 (Eq. 3.2), states that for boundary insertions x∈A and y∈B with positive mutual information I(A:B), the renormalized bulk geodesic length satisfies L_ren(x,y) ≥ (1/(2Δ)) ln( κ_Δ²(1−ε⋆)² / (2 ln 2 I(A:B)) ). The argument combines a quantum Pinsker inequality bounding all bounded connected correlators by mutual information with a heavy-operator holographic dictionary expressing the correlator as N_Δ e^{−Δ L_ren}. A multiscale iteration is used to promote the pairwise bound into a lower bound on bulk diameter, and the framework is applied to parallel strips in AdS5/CFT4, where the classical RT transition is argued to require quantum corrections to keep mutual information strictly positive. The paper is accompanied by extensive appendices proving the Pinsker bound, the geodesic error budget, the multiscale chaining, and a concrete AdS5 calculation.

Significance. If established, the claimed metric-from-information bound would be a notable quantitative step in the 'entanglement builds geometry' program, turning a qualitative slogan into a testable inequality with a logarithmic divergence as correlations vanish. The paper has genuine strengths: the Pinsker-to-correlator proof in Appendix B is careful and self-contained, the error budget in Appendix C is explicit, and the concrete strip calculation in Appendix I is a useful sanity check. However, the central theorem is only as strong as its key locality assumption, and that assumption is not proved. Since the Pinsker step requires the compressed heavy operators to be observables affiliated with the two sides of the bipartition, and since generic holographic code projectors destroy such factorizability, the main theorem is not established for the physical setting advertised in the abstract. The paper therefore does not yet justify its central claim.

major comments (3)

[Section 3, Eq. (3.3); Appendix A; Appendix B] The Pinsker inequality used at Eq. (3.3) is proved in Appendix B (Theorem B.1) only for observables OA∈B(H_A) and OB∈B(H_B) in a tensor-product realization, or for commuting elements of local algebras in the algebraic realization. The objects entering Eq. (3.3) are the code-compressed insertions ~O_A = Π_code(O_Δ(x)−⟨O_Δ(x)⟩)Π_code and ~O_B = Π_code(O_Δ(y)−⟨O_Δ(y)⟩)Π_code. The projection Π_code is a nonlocal projector onto the code subspace, and for a generic holographic code subspace H_code, which does not factorize as H_code,A⊗H_code,B aligned with the boundary regions A and B, the compressed operator ~O_A is not affiliated with the A-side algebra and need not commute with ~O_B. Appendix A simply asserts that these insertions are 'admissible bounded representatives' without proof; Lemma A.1 establishes only boundedness, not locality or commutativity. Consequently, Eq. (3.3) does not follow from the physical mutual information I(A:B), and Theorem 1 is not established as a theorem about boundary mutual information. This is a load-bearing gap: the QES and parallel-strip consequences in Sections 5 and 6 inherit it.
[Section 4, Eq. (4.2); Appendix E] The multiscale diameter bound is conditional on the standing chaining inequality (A.17) or, equivalently, on the δ-alignment condition in Definition E.3, where δ≥0 is a free parameter. Lemma E.4 derives δ-alignment from Gromov hyperbolicity and quasi-geodesic stability, but no argument is given that the operational bulk distance d_ρ in the state class is δ0-hyperbolic, nor that the selected cell points can be arranged on a quasi-geodesic. Without a quantitative control on δ, the right-hand side of Eq. (4.2) can be negative or arbitrarily small, so the claimed global obstruction to bulk connectivity is not established by the provided reasoning.
[Appendix C, Theorem C.1; Eq. (A.9)] The derivation of the heavy-probe dictionary requires a state-independent normalization N_code^Δ and a controlled total error ε⋆<1. In the proof of Theorem C.1, the state- and position-dependent prefactor variation C_{Δ,ρ}(x,y)/N_code^Δ − 1 is absorbed into the error term as a6, but no bound is supplied showing that this difference is small in the semiclassical parameters. Since |ε_tot| is bounded by exp(Σ a_j) − 1, an O(1) value of a6 could make ε⋆ comparable to or larger than 1, which would invalidate the logarithmic form of Eq. (3.2), where the factor (1−ε⋆)² is required to be positive. This missing estimate should be supplied or the theorem restated with an explicit bound on the prefactor ratio.

minor comments (3)

[Figure 2 and Section 5] The blue curve labeled 'MfI bound (QES)' is plotted as a smooth plateau in the disconnected phase, but the paper does not provide a concrete formula for the quantum-corrected QES mutual information in that phase; the curve appears illustrative rather than derived. Please clarify the status of this curve.
[Appendix I, Eq. (I.71)] The normalization N_Δ = ℓ_AdS^3 (2Δ−4)Γ(Δ)/(π² Γ(Δ−2)) vanishes at Δ=2, while the text assumes Δ>2. Please state explicitly that the formula is restricted to Δ>2 and clarify the limit Δ→2, if relevant.
[Throughout] The manuscript contains numerous equation-rendering artifacts (for example, in Eq. (2.1) and in the caption of Figure 1, where fractions and operator norms are garbled). These should be corrected before any revised submission.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: Theorem 1 is a logical consequence of the stated heavy-probe correlator dictionary and the standard quantum Pinsker inequality, with no fitted parameter, self-citation chain, or definitional identification doing the work.

full rationale

The central derivation (Eqs. (2.3), (2.4), (3.1)-(3.3), Appendix C.1) combines two independent inputs: the standard Pinsker bound on connected correlators in terms of mutual information, and the heavy-probe holographic dictionary expressing the code-compressed two-point function as N_Δ e^{-Δ L_ren}(1+ε_tot). Neither input is defined in terms of the target L_ren bound; L_ren is independently fixed by the bulk geodesic, and I(A:B) by the boundary state's relative entropy. Theorem 1 follows by taking logarithms after dividing by B_Δ^2, and no parameter is fitted to the data that the bound is then said to predict. The parallel-strip and large-separation applications are evaluations of the inequality using independently computed RT/OPE mutual informations, not fits renamed as predictions. The multiscale diameter bound (Theorem 2) is a chaining consequence with an explicitly assumed alignment error δ. Appendix A does flag a load-bearing scope condition—the code-compressed insertions are assumed to be 'admissible bounded representatives' of A- and B-side observables for Pinsker to apply—but that is an unproven hypothesis about locality of compressed probes, not a circular reduction; if it fails, Theorem 1 lacks a rigorous basis, yet no step of the derivation assumes its own conclusion. The paper contains no self-citations (the reference list contains no work by the present authors), so no self-citation chain is load-bearing. The saturation statement at large separation is presented as a consistency check of a lower bound against a known geodesic, not as an independent prediction from fitted inputs. Accordingly, no circular step meeting the quoted-evidence standard is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on (i) the quantum Pinsker inequality, (ii) the heavy-probe geodesic dictionary, (iii) the assumption that code-compressed operators remain valid bipartite observables for Pinsker, and (iv) a chaining/additivity hypothesis for the multiscale diameter bound. Calibration constants B_∆ (or κ_∆), the alignment error δ, and the bulk-entropy bound S⋆ enter as free parameters.

free parameters (3)

B_∆ (operator norm bound of code-compressed heavy probe) = not determined (assumed O(1) in ETH regime)
Enters the bound through κ_∆ = |N_∆|/B_∆²; sets the O(1) constant inside the logarithm and is not computed from first principles for general states.
δ (alignment error in multiscale chaining) = not determined, assumed ≥ 0
Appears in Theorem 2 and the coarse-additivity inequality (A.17); the diameter bound loses 2(D_k−1)δ and δ is not derived from the geometry.
S⋆ (bound on bulk entropy difference in QES comparison) = not determined
Controls the width of the RT/QES disagreement window in Appendix F; assumed finite but not computed.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Heavy-probe geodesic dictionary: the code-compressed connected correlator equals N_∆ e^{−∆ L_ren(x,y)}(1+ε_tot) with |ε_tot| < 1
Assumed in Appendix A (A.9)-(A.15) and stated in Section 2 as Eq. (2.4); it is the bridge converting correlator decay into geodesic length. It is not proven from first principles, only justified perturbatively in Appendix C with further assumptions.
domain assumption Code-compressed heavy operators are admissible bipartite observables for the quantum Pinsker inequality
Appendix A states the compressed insertions are 'admissible bounded representatives of the separated A- and B-side code observables'; without this, Pinsker, which requires commuting subalgebras or tensor-product factors, cannot be applied. This is the load-bearing operator-theoretic assumption.
domain assumption Uniform boundedness: ||Õ_∆,ρ(x)||_∞ ≤ B_∆ < ∞ on the state class
Appendix A (A.8); required to apply Pinsker with finite operator norms and to define κ_∆.
domain assumption QES prescription for boundary entropies with controlled remainder η⋆ < ∞
Appendix A (A.18)-(A.19); used in the parallel-strip and RT/QES compatibility sections.
domain assumption Coarse additivity / δ-alignment of geodesic lengths along adjacency paths
Appendix A (A.17) and Appendix E; assumed so that pairwise bounds chain into the diameter bound (4.2); δ is not derived.
domain assumption Split property / tensor product factorization for separated boundary regions
Appendix A (A.2)-(A.4); needed to define mutual information between A and B in the algebraic setting.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A sharp bound on spacetime distance from quantum entanglement." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/V7O5P6K2

@misc{pith2026260812245,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A sharp bound on spacetime distance from quantum entanglement},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/V7O5P6K2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.12245}
}

abstract

Ryu-Takayanagi established how boundary entanglement encodes bulk area. We provide the metric counterpart: boundary mutual information imposes a rigorous lower bound on bulk geodesic separation that diverges logarithmically as correlations vanish. A multiscale iteration promotes this local inequality to a global obstruction to bulk connectivity. For parallel strips in AdS$_5$/CFT$_4$, the bound necessitates a quantum resolution of the classical mutual-information transition and fixes the asymptotic growth of geodesic distance.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

[1]

Van Raamsdonk,Spacetime from bits,Science370(2020) 198

M. Van Raamsdonk,Spacetime from bits,Science370(2020) 198. – 90 –

work page 2020
[2]

Qi,Does gravity come from quantum information?,Nature Physics14(2018) 984

X.-L. Qi,Does gravity come from quantum information?,Nature Physics14(2018) 984

work page 2018
[3]

Jacobson,Entanglement equilibrium and the Einstein equation,Physical Review Letters 116(2016) 201101

T. Jacobson,Entanglement equilibrium and the Einstein equation,Physical Review Letters 116(2016) 201101

work page 2016
[4]

van Raamsdonk,Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement,General Relativity and Gravitation42(2010) 2323

M. van Raamsdonk,Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement,General Relativity and Gravitation42(2010) 2323

work page 2010
[5]

Maldacena,The largeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity, Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics2(1998) 231

J.M. Maldacena,The largeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity, Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics2(1998) 231

work page 1998
[6]

Ryu and T

S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi,Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from AdS/CFT, Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 181602

work page 2006
[7]

Engelhardt and A.C

N. Engelhardt and A.C. Wall,Quantum extremal surfaces: Holographic entanglement entropy beyond the classical regime,Journal of High Energy Physics01(2015) 073

work page 2015
[8]

Dong,The gravity dual of Rényi entropy,Nature Communications7(2016) 12472 [1601.06788]

X. Dong,The gravity dual of Rényi entropy,Nature Communications7(2016) 12472 [1601.06788]

arXiv 2016

Show all 76 references

[9]

Umemoto and T

K. Umemoto and T. Takayanagi,Entanglement of purification through holographic duality, Nature Physics14(2018) 573 [1708.09393]

2018 arXiv
[10]

Caputa, M

P. Caputa, M. Miyaji, T. Takayanagi and K. Umemoto,Holographic entanglement of purification from conformal field theories,Physical Review Letters122(2019) 111601 [1812.05268]

2019 arXiv
[11]

Tamaoka,Entanglement wedge cross section from the dual density matrix,Physical Review Letters122(2019) 141601 [1809.09109]

K. Tamaoka,Entanglement wedge cross section from the dual density matrix,Physical Review Letters122(2019) 141601 [1809.09109]

2019 arXiv
[12]

Suzuki, T

Y. Suzuki, T. Takayanagi and K. Umemoto,Entanglement wedges from the information metric in conformal field theories,Physical Review Letters123(2019) 221601 [1908.09939]

2019 arXiv
[13]

M.M. Wolf, F. Verstraete, M.B. Hastings and J.I. Cirac,Area laws in quantum systems: Mutual information and correlations,Physical Review Letters100(2008) 070502 [0704.3906]

2008 arXiv
[14]

Steinberg, S

M. Steinberg, S. Feld and A. Jahn,Holographic codes from hyperinvariant tensor networks, Nature Communications14(2023) 7314 [2304.02732]

2023 arXiv
[15]

Periwal, E.S

A. Periwal, E.S. Cooper, P. Kunkel, J.F. Wienand, E.J. Davis and M. Schleier-Smith, Programmable interactions and emergent geometry in an array of atom clouds,Nature600 (2021) 630

2021
[16]

X. Dong, D. Harlow and A.C. Wall,Reconstruction of bulk operators within the entanglement wedge in gauge-gravity duality,Physical Review Letters117(2016) 021601 [1601.05416]

2016 arXiv
[17]

Page,Average entropy of a subsystem,Physical Review Letters71(1993) 1291

D.N. Page,Average entropy of a subsystem,Physical Review Letters71(1993) 1291

1993
[18]

Fawzi and R

O. Fawzi and R. Renner,Quantum conditional mutual information and approximate markov chains,Communications in Mathematical Physics340(2015) 575

2015
[19]

Brandão, A.W

F.G.S.L. Brandão, A.W. Harrow, J. Oppenheim and S. Strelchuk,Quantum conditional mutual information, reconstructed states, and state redistribution,Physical Review Letters 115(2015) 050501 [1411.4921]

2015 arXiv
[20]

Haag,Local Quantum Physics, Springer, Berlin, 2 ed

R. Haag,Local Quantum Physics, Springer, Berlin, 2 ed. (1996), 10.1007/978-3-642-61458-3

1996 doi
[21]

Buchholz, C

D. Buchholz, C. D’Antoni and R. Longo,Nuclearity and thermal states in quantum field theory,Communications in Mathematical Physics111(1987) 123. – 91 –

1987
[22]

Araki,Relative entropy of states of von neumann algebras,Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences11(1976) 809

H. Araki,Relative entropy of states of von neumann algebras,Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences11(1976) 809

1976
[23]

Ohya and D

M. Ohya and D. Petz,Quantum Entropy and Its Use, Springer, Berlin, 2 ed. (2004), 10.1007/978-3-642-57997-4

2004 doi
[24]

Watrous,The Theory of Quantum Information, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2018), 10.1017/9781316848142

J. Watrous,The Theory of Quantum Information, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2018), 10.1017/9781316848142

2018 doi
[25]

Almheiri, X

A. Almheiri, X. Dong and D. Harlow,Bulk locality and quantum error correction in AdS/CFT,JHEP04(2015) 163

2015
[26]

Harlow,Jerusalem lectures on black holes and quantum information,Reviews of Modern Physics88(2016) 015002

D. Harlow,Jerusalem lectures on black holes and quantum information,Reviews of Modern Physics88(2016) 015002

2016
[27]

Pastawski, B

F. Pastawski, B. Yoshida, D. Harlow and J. Preskill,Holographic quantum error-correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspondence,Journal of High Energy Physics06 (2015) 149

2015
[28]

Gubser, I.R

S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov and A.M. Polyakov,Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory,Physics Letters B428(1998) 105

1998
[29]

Witten,Anti-de sitter space and holography,Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics2(1998) 253

E. Witten,Anti-de sitter space and holography,Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics2(1998) 253

1998
[30]

Aharony, S.S

O. Aharony, S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov and A.M. Polyakov,LargeNfield theories, string theory and gravity,Physics Reports323(2000) 183

2000
[31]

Balasubramanian, P

V. Balasubramanian, P. Kraus, A.E. Lawrence and S.P. Trivedi,Holographic probes of anti-de sitter spacetimes,Physical Review D59(1999) 104021

1999
[32]

Louko, D

J. Louko, D. Marolf and S.F. Ross,Geodesic propagators and black hole holography,Phys. Rev. D62(2000) 044041

2000
[33]

Skenderis,Lecture notes on holographic renormalization,Classical and Quantum Gravity 19(2002) 5849

K. Skenderis,Lecture notes on holographic renormalization,Classical and Quantum Gravity 19(2002) 5849

2002
[34]

Hubeny, M

V.E. Hubeny, M. Rangamani and T. Takayanagi,A covariant holographic entanglement entropy proposal,JHEP07(2007) 062

2007
[35]

Lewkowycz and J

A. Lewkowycz and J. Maldacena,Generalized gravitational entropy,JHEP08(2013) 090

2013
[36]

Faulkner, A

T. Faulkner, A. Lewkowycz and J. Maldacena,Quantum corrections to holographic entanglement entropy,JHEP11(2013) 074

2013
[37]

Wall,Maximin surfaces, and the strong subadditivity of the covariant holographic entanglement entropy,Class

A.C. Wall,Maximin surfaces, and the strong subadditivity of the covariant holographic entanglement entropy,Class. Quant. Grav.31(2014) 225007

2014
[38]

Umegaki,Conditional expectation in an operator algebra

H. Umegaki,Conditional expectation in an operator algebra. IV. Entropy and information, Kodai Mathematical Seminar Reports14(1962) 59

1962
[39]

Lindblad,Completely positive maps and entropy inequalities,Communications in Mathematical Physics40(1975) 147

G. Lindblad,Completely positive maps and entropy inequalities,Communications in Mathematical Physics40(1975) 147

1975
[40]

Uhlmann,Relative entropy and the Wigner–Yanase–Dyson–Lieb concavity in an interpolation theory,Communications in Mathematical Physics54(1977) 21

A. Uhlmann,Relative entropy and the Wigner–Yanase–Dyson–Lieb concavity in an interpolation theory,Communications in Mathematical Physics54(1977) 21

1977
[41]

Petz,Sufficient subalgebras and the relative entropy of states of a von neumann algebra, Communications in Mathematical Physics105(1986) 123

D. Petz,Sufficient subalgebras and the relative entropy of states of a von neumann algebra, Communications in Mathematical Physics105(1986) 123. – 92 –

1986
[42]

Hiai and D

F. Hiai and D. Petz,The proper formula for relative entropy and its asymptotics in quantum probability,Communications in Mathematical Physics143(1991) 99

1991
[43]

Takesaki,Theory of Operator Algebras I, Springer, Berlin, 2 ed

M. Takesaki,Theory of Operator Algebras I, Springer, Berlin, 2 ed. (2002), 10.1007/978-1-4612-6188-9

2002 doi
[44]

de Haro, S.N

S. de Haro, S.N. Solodukhin and K. Skenderis,Holographic reconstruction of spacetime and renormalization in the AdS/CFT correspondence,Communications in Mathematical Physics 217(2001) 595

2001
[45]

Davies and N

E.B. Davies and N. Mandouvalos,Heat kernel bounds on hyperbolic space and kleinian groups,Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society3(1988) 182

1988
[46]

Camporesi,Harmonic analysis and propagators on homogeneous spaces,Physics Reports 196(1990) 1

R. Camporesi,Harmonic analysis and propagators on homogeneous spaces,Physics Reports 196(1990) 1

1990
[47]

Graham and E

C.R. Graham and E. Witten,Conformal anomaly of submanifold observables in ads/cft correspondence,Nuclear Physics B546(1999) 52

1999
[48]

Bhatia,Matrix Analysis, Springer, New York (1997), 10.1007/978-1-4612-0653-8

R. Bhatia,Matrix Analysis, Springer, New York (1997), 10.1007/978-1-4612-0653-8

1997 doi
[49]

Diestel,Graph Theory, Springer, Berlin, 5 ed

R. Diestel,Graph Theory, Springer, Berlin, 5 ed. (2017), 10.1007/978-3-662-53622-3

2017 doi
[50]

Bridson and A

M.R. Bridson and A. Haefliger,Metric Spaces of Non-Positive Curvature, Springer, Berlin (1999), 10.1007/978-3-662-12494-9

1999 doi
[51]

Gromov,Hyperbolic groups, inEssays in Group Theory, S.M

M. Gromov,Hyperbolic groups, inEssays in Group Theory, S.M. Gersten, ed., (New York), pp. 75–263, Springer (1987), DOI

1987
[52]

Ghys and P

É. Ghys and P. de la Harpe, eds.,Sur les groupes hyperboliques d’après Mikhael Gromov, Birkhäuser, Boston (1990), 10.1007/978-1-4684-9167-8

1990 doi
[53]

Birrell and P.C.W

N.D. Birrell and P.C.W. Davies,Quantum Fields in Curved Space, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1982), 10.1017/CBO9780511622632

1982 doi
[54]

Polchinski,String Theory, vol

J. Polchinski,String Theory, vol. I–II, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1998), 10.1017/CBO9780511816079

1998 doi
[55]

Federer,Geometric Measure Theory, Springer, Berlin (1969), 10.1007/978-3-642-62010-2

H. Federer,Geometric Measure Theory, Springer, Berlin (1969), 10.1007/978-3-642-62010-2

1969 doi
[56]

Simon and A.N.U.C

L. Simon and A.N.U.C. for Mathematical Analysis,Lectures on Geometric Measure Theory, Proceedings of the Centre for Mathematical Analysis, Centre for Mathematical Analysis, Australian National University (1984)

1984
[57]

Morgan,Geometric Measure Theory: A Beginner’s Guide, Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, 5 ed

F. Morgan,Geometric Measure Theory: A Beginner’s Guide, Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, 5 ed. (2016), 10.1016/C2015-0-01918-9

2016 doi
[58]

Susskind and J

L. Susskind and J. Uglum,Black hole entropy in canonical quantum gravity and superstring theory,Phys. Rev. D50(1994) 2700

1994
[59]

Solodukhin,Entanglement entropy of black holes,Living Rev

S.N. Solodukhin,Entanglement entropy of black holes,Living Rev. Relativity14(2011) 8

2011
[60]

Simon,Representations of Finite and Compact Groups, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI (1996), 10.1090/gsm/010

B. Simon,Representations of Finite and Compact Groups, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI (1996), 10.1090/gsm/010

1996 doi
[61]

Mezzadri,How to generate random matrices from the classical compact groups, 2007

F. Mezzadri,How to generate random matrices from the classical compact groups, 2007

2007
[62]

Tao,Topics in Random Matrix Theory, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI (2012), 10.1090/gsm/132

T. Tao,Topics in Random Matrix Theory, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI (2012), 10.1090/gsm/132. – 93 –

2012 doi
[63]

Devroye,Non-Uniform Random Variate Generation, Springer, New York (1986), 10.1007/978-1-4613-8643-8

L. Devroye,Non-Uniform Random Variate Generation, Springer, New York (1986), 10.1007/978-1-4613-8643-8

1986 doi
[64]

Forrester,Log-Gases and Random Matrices, Princeton University Press, Princeton (2010), 10.1515/9781400835416

P.J. Forrester,Log-Gases and Random Matrices, Princeton University Press, Princeton (2010), 10.1515/9781400835416

2010 doi
[65]

Mehta,Random Matrices, Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, 3 ed

M.L. Mehta,Random Matrices, Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, 3 ed. (2004)

2004
[66]

Życzkowski and H.-J

K. Życzkowski and H.-J. Sommers,Induced measures in the space of mixed quantum states, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.34(2001) 7111

2001
[67]

Sen,Average entropy of a quantum subsystem,Physical Review Letters77(1996) 1

S. Sen,Average entropy of a quantum subsystem,Physical Review Letters77(1996) 1

1996
[68]

Lubkin,Entropy of ann-system from its correlation with ak-reservoir,Journal of Mathematical Physics19(1978) 1028

E. Lubkin,Entropy of ann-system from its correlation with ak-reservoir,Journal of Mathematical Physics19(1978) 1028

1978
[69]

Collins and P

B. Collins and P. Śniady,Integration with respect to the Haar measure on unitary, orthogonal and symplectic group,Commun. Math. Phys.264(2006) 773

2006
[70]

Marchenko and L.A

V.A. Marchenko and L.A. Pastur,Distribution of eigenvalues for some sets of random matrices,Mat. Sb. (N.S.)72(114)(1967) 507

1967
[71]

Fuchs and J

C.A. Fuchs and J. van de Graaf,Cryptographic distinguishability measures for quantum-mechanical states,IEEE Transactions on Information Theory45(1999) 1216

1999
[72]

Ruskai,Inequalities for quantum entropy: A review with conditions for equality, Journal of Mathematical Physics43(2002) 4358

M.B. Ruskai,Inequalities for quantum entropy: A review with conditions for equality, Journal of Mathematical Physics43(2002) 4358

2002
[73]

Hayden, R

P. Hayden, R. Jozsa, D. Petz and A. Winter,Structure of states which satisfy strong subadditivity of quantum entropy with equality,Commun. Math. Phys.246(2004) 359

2004
[74]

Sutter, M

D. Sutter, M. Berta and M. Tomamichel,Multivariate trace inequalities,Commun. Math. Phys.352(2017) 37

2017
[75]

Junge, R

M. Junge, R. Renner, D. Sutter, M.M. Wilde and A. Winter,Universal recovery maps and approximate sufficiency of quantum relative entropy,Annales Henri Poincaré19(2018) 2955

2018
[76]

Lieb and M.B

E.H. Lieb and M.B. Ruskai,Proof of the strong subadditivity of quantum-mechanical entropy, J. Math. Phys.14(1973) 1938. – 94 –

1973

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Van Raamsdonk,Spacetime from bits,Science370(2020) 198

M. Van Raamsdonk,Spacetime from bits,Science370(2020) 198. – 90 –

work page 2020

[2] [2]

Qi,Does gravity come from quantum information?,Nature Physics14(2018) 984

X.-L. Qi,Does gravity come from quantum information?,Nature Physics14(2018) 984

work page 2018

[3] [3]

Jacobson,Entanglement equilibrium and the Einstein equation,Physical Review Letters 116(2016) 201101

T. Jacobson,Entanglement equilibrium and the Einstein equation,Physical Review Letters 116(2016) 201101

work page 2016

[4] [4]

van Raamsdonk,Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement,General Relativity and Gravitation42(2010) 2323

M. van Raamsdonk,Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement,General Relativity and Gravitation42(2010) 2323

work page 2010

[5] [5]

Maldacena,The largeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity, Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics2(1998) 231

J.M. Maldacena,The largeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity, Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics2(1998) 231

work page 1998

[6] [6]

Ryu and T

S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi,Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from AdS/CFT, Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 181602

work page 2006

[7] [7]

Engelhardt and A.C

N. Engelhardt and A.C. Wall,Quantum extremal surfaces: Holographic entanglement entropy beyond the classical regime,Journal of High Energy Physics01(2015) 073

work page 2015

[8] [8]

Dong,The gravity dual of Rényi entropy,Nature Communications7(2016) 12472 [1601.06788]

X. Dong,The gravity dual of Rényi entropy,Nature Communications7(2016) 12472 [1601.06788]

arXiv 2016