Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 5 cited by

Can effective descriptions of bosonic systems be considered complete?

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that effective bosonic descriptions are complete: any physical unitary evolution can be approximated arbitrarily well by a finite-dimensional unitary generated by a polynomial Hamiltonian.

desk verdict A genuinely important paper with a real gap: the exponential identity in Theorem 2 needs a self-adjointness proof before the main theorems are fully established. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.13857 v1 pith:AFOQLPEG submitted 2025-01-23 quant-ph

Francesco Arzani , Robert I. Booth , Ulysse Chabaud This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph MSC 81P6881S0581Q10 PACS 03.67.Lx03.67.-a
keywords bosonicsystemscontinuous-variablequantumcomputingpolynomialHamiltonianseffectivedimensionenergy-constraineddiamondnormuniversalitySolovay–Kitaevtheoremsimulation
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 asks whether the standard shortcuts used to model bosonic systems—cutting off the infinite Hilbert space at a finite energy, and describing dynamics only by polynomial Hamiltonians—miss genuine physics. It answers no: any physical bosonic unitary evolution can be approximated arbitrarily well by a finite-dimensional unitary, and any finite-dimensional unitary can be generated exactly by a Hamiltonian that is a polynomial in position and momentum. Put together, this means polynomial Hamiltonians are universal for physical bosonic dynamics. The result gives concrete bounds on how large the truncation must be, closes a long-standing open problem about universal controllability, and yields an infinite-dimensional version of the Solovay–Kitaev theorem for approximating unitary gates efficiently.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the block-diagonal polynomial Hamiltonian $P(\hat q,\hat p) = \hat H \oplus \hat H'$, built by Lagrange interpolation polynomials in the number operator. For each entry $|i\rangle\langle j|$ of a finite-dimensional target Hamiltonian, the paper constructs a polynomial operator that vanishes on all Fock states up to $d$ except the targeted pair, and that also vanishes on the high-energy complement in a controlled way, so the full operator is block-diagonal and $e^{iP} = e^{i\hat H} \oplus e^{i\hat H'}$ on the low-energy subspace. On the approximation side, the machinery is the energy-constrained diamond norm together with two truncation steps controlled by the gentle measurement lemma and a rounding to a unitary via QR (Gram–Schmidt) factorization, which yields the effective dimension bound.

What would settle it

For a fixed $d$, take a target $\hat H$ and construct the polynomial $P(\hat q,\hat p)$ from the Lagrange-interpolation recipe in Appendix B; then compute the deficiency indices of the complement block $\hat H'$ on the Schwartz-space domain. If $\hat H'$ is not essentially self-adjoint, then $e^{iP}$ is not uniquely defined as a unitary operator and the identity $e^{iP} = e^{i\hat H} \oplus e^{i\hat H'}$ used in Theorems 2 and 3 fails; finding any single degree-3 example where this happens would break the proof, while proving essential self-adjointness in general would confirm it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the two standard effective descriptions of bosonic systems are complete for physical evolutions. First, any physical single-mode unitary channel can be approximated to arbitrary precision by a finite-dimensional unitary channel in the energy-constrained diamond norm, with an explicit bound on the effective dimension in terms of the energy bound, the approximation error, and the energy-growth of the physical unitary. Second, any finite-dimensional Hamiltonian can be reproduced exactly by a polynomial Hamiltonian that acts like the target Hamiltonian on the first d+1 Fock states and as some other Hermitian operator on the complement, so that its exponential is the direct sum of the target unitary and a unitary on the high-energy subspace. Combining these statements, the paper proves that polynomial Hamiltonians generate every physical bosonic unitary evolution approximately, that they provide universal state preparation, and that they satisfy an infinite-dimensional Solovay–Kitaev theorem.

Load-bearing premise

The whole chain rests on treating the block-diagonal polynomial $P = \hat H \oplus \hat H'$ as a genuine Hamiltonian on the infinite-dimensional space, so that $e^{iP}$ really exists as a unitary operator; for polynomials of degree above two this is not automatic and the paper does not prove it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Truncation is safe with quantitative guarantees: any physical single-mode evolution can be simulated to accuracy $\epsilon$ on a finite-dimensional space of dimension $O(E/\epsilon^4 \, E_{\hat U}(64E/\epsilon^2))$.
  • Polynomial Hamiltonians provide universal state engineering: from vacuum one can reach any target state to arbitrary precision, resolving the universal controllability question.
  • Polynomial Hamiltonians generate universal gate sets for continuous-variable quantum computing, putting the standard definition of universality on solid ground.
  • An infinite-dimensional Solovay–Kitaev theorem holds for these gate sets: any physical unitary with effective dimension $d+1$ can be approximated by a gate sequence of length $O(\log^c(1/\epsilon))$.
  • Bosonic circuits composed of vacuum input, gates generated by polynomial Hamiltonians, and number measurements can efficiently simulate universal qudit computations.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The proof route suggests that the energy-growth function $E_{\hat U}(n)$ is the true complexity parameter: for evolutions where this function grows faster than any computable function, the effective dimension may be hyper-large, so the polynomial-time guarantees are not efficient in physical parameters for all unitaries.
  • The single-mode truncation results likely extend to multiple modes, and the authors expect an extension to non-unitary dynamics via a dilation argument; if so, the same completeness story applies to open bosonic systems.
  • The construction leaves freedom in choosing the high-energy block $\hat H'$; choosing it to be an explicit self-adjoint operator (for instance a polynomial in the number operator) would make the exponential $e^{iP}$ fully rigorous and could be checked directly.
  • The space–energy trade-off identified in the truncation theorem gives a practical rule of thumb for classical simulation: the truncation dimension scales polynomially in $E/\epsilon^4$ times $E_{\hat U}(64E/\epsilon^2)$, so moderate-energy experiments need only moderately sized simulations.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper argues that two standard effective descriptions of bosonic systems—truncation to a finite-dimensional Hilbert space and restriction to polynomial Hamiltonians—are complete for physical bosonic unitary evolutions. Theorem 1 gives an explicit, computable bound on the approximate effective dimension of any single-mode physical unitary channel in the energy-constrained diamond norm. Theorem 2 constructs, for any finite-dimensional Hermitian operator, a block-diagonal polynomial Hamiltonian in the canonical operators that reproduces the finite-dimensional evolution on the low-energy subspace. Theorem 3 combines these results to state that polynomial Hamiltonians can approximate any physical single-mode unitary channel, Theorem 4 states an infinite-dimensional Solovay–Kitaev theorem for the constructed gate sets, and Corollary 1 claims universal controllability of polynomial Hamiltonians. The technical apparatus consists of the gentle measurement lemma, QR decomposition for the truncation step, and Lagrange interpolation polynomials for the Hamiltonian realization step.

Significance. If the central construction is made fully rigorous, the paper would resolve long-standing open questions in continuous-variable quantum computing: the soundness of the Lloyd–Braunstein notion of universality, universal controllability of polynomial Hamiltonians, and the existence of an infinite-dimensional Solovay–Kitaev theorem. The paper is genuinely constructive: Theorem 1 provides explicit error bounds and polynomial-time computability statements, and Theorem 2 gives an explicit Lagrange-interpolation construction with no free parameters. The multimode version of Theorem 2 is also provided. These strengths make the paper important for quantum simulation, quantum state engineering, and the foundations of bosonic quantum computing. The main caveat is that the proofs currently rely on an unproved operator-theoretic identity, so the stated results are conditional until that point is resolved.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix B, Eq. (B13)] The identity e^{iP_{\hat H}(\hat q,\hat p)} = e^{i\hat H}\oplus e^{i\hat H'} is asserted for an unbounded polynomial Hamiltonian of degree up to 3N. Block-diagonality of P_{\hat H} gives a symmetric operator on a dense domain, but Stone's theorem requires essential self-adjointness (or at least a distinguished self-adjoint extension preserving the block decomposition). The manuscript does not prove that the high-energy block (I-\Pi_N)P_{\hat H}(\hat q,\hat p)(I-\Pi_N) is essentially self-adjoint. The Fock-basis coefficients of this block grow polynomially, as seen in Eq. (B6) where P_n(m) behaves like m^N for large m, so standard sufficient conditions such as Carleman's criterion for Jacobi matrices are not verified. Since Theorem 3, Corollary 1, and Theorem 4 all use e^{iP} and rely on this identity, the gap is load-bearing rather than a presentation issue. The authors should either prove essential self-adjointness of the constructed operator on a natural domain, or reformulate the theorem in terms of a specific self-adjoint extension whose exponential is shown to reproduce the desired block-diagonal unitary.
  2. [Appendix A, around Eqs. (A17)-(A20)] The proof of Theorem 1 handwaves the completion of \Pi_N\hat U\Pi_N to a full-rank matrix. Lemma 3 establishes column full rank only for the first M columns (i.e., for \Pi_N\hat U\Pi_M), and the text says that the matrix 'can be completed to a full rank matrix on H_N which matches with \Pi_N\hat U\Pi_N on H_N.' This completion changes the QR factor R_N in columns M+1 through N, and the subsequent error bound via Lemma 4 concerns the restriction \Pi_M R_N\Pi_M. One must show that a completion exists whose upper-triangular factor has the same first M columns as the original \Pi_N\hat U\Pi_N, or else bound the difference introduced by the completion. Without this step, the explicit construction of the finite-dimensional unitary approximation \hat V_N and the claimed polynomial-time computability in Theorem 1 are not fully proved.
  3. [Abstract and Theorems 1, 3, 4] The abstract and introduction claim that 'any physical, bosonic unitary evolution' is covered, but Theorems 1, 3, and 4 are stated only for single-mode unitaries. The paper notes that the group U(S) can be extended to multiple modes, and Theorem 2 is proved multimode, but no multimode version of the effective-dimension theorem or of the combined universality theorem is proved. The outlook section explicitly says that generalization to multimode dynamics is expected rather than established. The claims in the abstract should be restricted to the single-mode results actually proved, or the multimode statements should be added.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Methods A(a)] The definition of the Schwartz space contains a typo: 'lim_{n\to 0} c_n n^k = 0' should read 'lim_{n\to\infty} c_n n^k = 0'.
  2. [Corollary 1 proof] The phrase 'the polynomial Hamiltonial P_\epsilon' contains a typo; it should be 'Hamiltonian'.
  3. [References] Reference [38] misspells the author as 'Gloub' and the edition as '3rd edtion'; it should be Golub and Van Loan, third edition.
  4. [Theorem 4 statement] The condition 'd \geq 64E/\epsilon^2 \in \mathbb{N}' is awkwardly typeset; it should state that d is a natural number satisfying d \geq 64E/\epsilon^2.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper's effective-dimension and polynomial-Hamiltonian constructions are explicit, parameter-free, and do not reduce to their inputs.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain, the central results are constructive and self-contained. Theorem 1 builds a finite-dimensional unitary approximation from the target unitary's energy function E_U through explicit bounds and a QR decomposition; the definition of approximate effective dimension quantifies over all high-energy extensions, so the bound is not a fitted parameter. Theorem 2 gives an explicit Lagrange-interpolation construction of a block-diagonal polynomial that reproduces the target Hamiltonian H on the low Fock subspace; Eq. (B13) is derived from the block decomposition, and while it relies on an unproven essential self-adjointness property of the high-energy block (a mathematical correctness gap, not a circular reduction), the theorem does not assume its conclusion. Theorem 3 and Corollary 1 combine Theorems 1 and 2 directly, and Theorem 4 imports only the standard qudit Solovay-Kitaev theorem. The only author-overlapping citation, [24], is used for contextual open questions and for a generalization remark ('generalizing a recent result for qubit computations [24, Theorem 4.1]'), not as a load-bearing premise; none of the proofs reduce to [24] or to any fitted quantity. No step was found in which a predicted quantity equals an input by construction, or in which a definition smuggles in the target result.

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

No parameters are fitted; all are derived or standard. The main non-standard assumption is the implicit existence of a global unitary evolution for the constructed polynomial Hamiltonian.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Physical unitary operators are those preserving the Schwartz space S, i.e. U(S), or the weaker condition that ⟨n|U† n̂ U|n⟩ < ∞ for all n.
    Defines the class of evolutions Theorem 1 applies to; excludes unitaries that map physical states to infinite-energy states. Introduced in Section II, Eq. (1) and Methods A.
  • ad hoc to paper The block-diagonal polynomial Hamiltonian P = H ⊕ H' generates a well-defined unitary evolution e^{iP} on the full Hilbert space.
    The paper asserts the exponential identity in Theorem 2 without proving essential self-adjointness of the high-energy block H'. Methods section C states they 'avoid these mathematical technicalities' by block-diagonal structure, but that only fixes the low-subspace action.
  • standard math Standard operator-theoretic facts: Stone's theorem, spectral theorem, QR decomposition, gentle measurement lemma, and the qudit Solovay-Kitaev theorem.
    Used throughout the proofs of Theorems 1, 2 and 4; cited to [19,37,38,22].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Can effective descriptions of bosonic systems be considered complete?." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AFOQLPEG

@misc{pith2026250113857,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Can effective descriptions of bosonic systems be considered complete?},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AFOQLPEG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.13857}
}
read the original abstract

Bosonic statistics give rise to remarkable phenomena, from the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect to Bose-Einstein condensation, with applications spanning fundamental science to quantum technologies. Modeling bosonic systems relies heavily on effective descriptions: typical examples include truncating their infinite-dimensional state space and restricting their dynamics to a simple class of Hamiltonians, such as polynomials of canonical operators, which are used to define quantum computing over bosonic modes. However, many natural bosonic Hamiltonians do not belong to this simple class, and some quantum effects harnessed by bosonic computers inherently require infinite-dimensional spaces, questioning the validity of such effective descriptions of bosonic systems. How can we trust results obtained with such simplifying assumptions to capture real effects? Driven by the increasing importance of bosonic systems for quantum technologies, we solve this outstanding problem by showing that these effective descriptions do in fact capture the relevant physics of bosonic systems. Our technical contribution is twofold: firstly, we prove that any physical, bosonic unitary evolution can be strongly approximated by a finite-dimensional unitary evolution; secondly, we show that any finite-dimensional unitary evolution can be generated exactly by a bosonic Hamiltonian that is a polynomial of canonical operators. Beyond their fundamental significance, our results have implications for classical and quantum simulations of bosonic systems, they provide universal methods for engineering bosonic quantum states and Hamiltonians, they show that polynomial Hamiltonians do generate universal gate sets for quantum computing over bosonic modes, and they lead to an infinite-dimensional Solovay--Kitaev theorem.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. PhD thesis: Modes, States, and Symmetries in quantum Optics for quantum Information and Metrology

    quant-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    Modal structure, photon statistics, and bosonic/phase symmetries jointly determine the usable resources for photonic quantum information and metrology, with explicit gains and limits for time-frequency, HOM, and SSR settings.

  2. Equivalence of continuous- and discrete-variable gate-based quantum computers with finite energy

    quant-ph 2025-10 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Finite-energy gate-based continuous-variable quantum circuits can be approximated on qudit or qubit computers with polynomial overhead, eliminating any superpolynomial advantage for this model.

  3. Interplay of resources for universal continuous-variable quantum computing

    quant-ph 2025-02 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The authors define symplectic coherence, show that circuits with little of it can be classically simulated, and map this resource to coherence in discrete-variable quantum computing via the GKP encoding.

  4. Quantum Computing in Discrete- and Continuous-Variable Architectures

    quant-ph 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The thesis introduces Gaussian-controlled rotations (GCR), a composite pulse that cancels oscillator-fluctuation errors in qubit rotations, enabling deterministic preparation of squeezed, cat, and GKP states and a pro...

  5. From simulatability to universality of continuous-variable quantum computers

    quant-ph 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A compilation thesis showing that large classes of GKP-based continuous-variable circuits are classically simulatable, while certain resources, including vacuum, can promote them to universality.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages · cited by 5 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Aaronson and A

    S. Aaronson and A. Arkhipov, Theory of Computing 9, 143 (2013)

    work page 2013

  2. [2]

    In particular, it im- plies the computational equivalence of bosonic quantum circuits based on these universal gate sets. VI. SIGNIFICANCE AND OUTLOOK We have considered effective descriptions of bosonic systems based on effective dimension and effective (poly- nomial) Hamiltonians, and rigorously proved that they faithfully reproduce the features of the ori...

    work page

  3. [3]

    judicious commutation

    and enable universal bosonic quan- tum state engineering (Corollary 1), which solves a long- standing open problem on the universal controllability of polynomial Hamiltonians [ 20]; (iii) polynomial Hamilto- nians generate universal gate sets in infinite dimensions (Theorem 3), which is of foundational importance for continuous-variable quantum computing, ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    C. S. Hamilton, R. Kruse, L. Sansoni, S. Barkhofen, C. Silberhorn, and I. Jex, Physical Review Letters 119, 170501 (2017)

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    Zhong, H

    H.-S. Zhong, H. Wang, Y.-H. Deng, M.-C. Chen, L.-C. Peng, Y.-H. Luo, J. Qin, D. Wu, X. Ding, Y. Hu, et al. , Science 370, 1460 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    L. S. Madsen, F. Laudenbach, M. F. Askarani, F. Rortais, T. Vincent, J. F. F. Bulmer, F. M. Miatto, L. Neuhaus, L. G. Helt, M. J. Collins, A. E. Lita, T. Gerrits, S. W. Nam, V. D. Vaidya, M. Menotti, I. Dhand, Z. Vernon, 9 N. Quesada, and J. Lavoie, Nature 606, 75 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    V. V. Albert, arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.05714 (2022), 10.48550/arXiv. 2211.05714

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2211.05714 2022

  8. [8]

    Gottesman, A

    D. Gottesman, A. Kitaev, and J. Preskill, Phys. Rev. A 64, 012310 (2001)

    2001

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    Sivak, A

    V. Sivak, A. Eickbusch, B. Royer, S. Singh, I. Tsioutsios, S. Ganjam, A. Miano, B. Brock, A. Ding, L. Frunzio, et al. , Nature 616, 50 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    It is well-known that such a relation cannot be satisfied by finite-dimensional linear operators, as can be seen by contradiction by taking the trace, giving zero for the left hand side and a non-zero value for the right hand side

  3. [11]

    S. P. Jordan, K. S. Lee, and J. Preskill, Science 336, 1130 (2012)

    2012

  4. [12]

    Y. Tong, V. V. Albert, J. R. McClean, J. Preskill, and Y. Su, Quantum 6, 816 (2022)

    2022

  5. [13]

    Lloyd and S

    S. Lloyd and S. L. Braunstein, Physical Review Letters 82, 1784 (1999)

    1999

  6. [14]

    H. A. Gersch and G. C. Knollman, Physical Review 129, 959 (1963)

    1963

  7. [15]

    Ramond, Field theory: a modern primer (Routledge, 2020)

    P. Ramond, Field theory: a modern primer (Routledge, 2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    Mandel and E

    L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, 1995)

    1995

  9. [17]

    Sefi and P

    S. Sefi and P. Van Loock, Physical Review Letters 107, 170501 (2011)

    2011

  10. [18]

    Tsirelson, Problem statement from website of open problems at TU Brauns chweig (2006)

    B. Tsirelson, Problem statement from website of open problems at TU Brauns chweig (2006)

    2006

  11. [19]

    Z. Ji, A. Natarajan, T. Vidick, J. Wright, and H. Yuen, Communications of the ACM 64, 131 (2021)

    2021

  12. [20]

    J. M. Martinis, in Les Houches , Vol. 79 (Elsevier, 2004) pp. 487–520

    2004

  13. [21]

    B. C. Hall, Quantum theory for mathematicians , Vol. 267 (Springer, 2013)

    2013

  14. [22]

    Wu, T.-J

    R.-B. Wu, T.-J. Tarn, and C.-W. Li, Physical Review A 73, 012719 (2006)

    2006

  15. [23]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniver sary Edition , 10th ed. (Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 2011)

    2011

  16. [24]

    C. M. Dawson and M. A. Nielsen, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0505030 (2005), 10.48550/arXiv. quant-ph/0505030

    2005 doi arXiv

  17. [25]

    Becker, N

    S. Becker, N. Datta, L. Lami, and C. Rouzé, Physical Review Letters 126, 190504 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    Chabaud, M

    U. Chabaud, M. Joseph, S. Mehra- ban, and A. Motamedi, arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.04274 (2024), 10.48550/arXiv. 2410.04274

    2024 doi arXiv

  19. [27]

    S. L. Braunstein and P. Van Loock, Reviews of modern physics 77, 513 (2005)

    2005

  20. [28]

    Weedbrook, S

    C. Weedbrook, S. Pirandola, R. García-Patrón, N. J. Cerf, T. C. Ralph, J. H. Shapiro, and S. Lloyd, Reviews of Modern Physics 84, 621 (2012)

    2012

  21. [29]

    Adesso, S

    G. Adesso, S. Ragy, and A. R. Lee, Open Systems & Information Dynamics 21, 1440001 (2014)

    2014

  22. [31]

    M. E. Shirokov, arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.00361 (2017), 10.48550/arXiv. 1706.003

    2017 doi arXiv

  23. [32]

    A. J. Daley, I. Bloch, C. Kokail, S. Flannigan, N. Pearson, M. Troyer, and P. Zoller, Nature 607, 667 (2022)

    2022

  24. [33]

    J. H. Busnaina, Z. Shi, A. McDonald, D. Dubyna, I. Nsanzineza, J. S. Hung, C. S. Chang, A. A. Clerk, and C. M. Wilson, Nature Communications 15, 3065 (2024)

    2024

  25. [34]

    Wang, F.-M

    C. Wang, F.-M. Liu, M.-C. Chen, H. Chen, X.-H. Zhao, C. Ying, Z.-X. Shang, J.-W. Wang, Y.-H. Huo, C.-Z. Peng, et al. , Science 384, 579 (2024)

    2024

  26. [35]

    C. S. Chiu, G. Ji, A. Bohrdt, M. Xu, M. Knap, E. Demler, F. Grusdt, M. Greiner, and D. Greif, Science 365, 251 (2019)

    2019

  27. [36]

    Burgarth, P

    D. Burgarth, P. Facchi, A. Hahn, M. Johnsson, and K. Yuasa, Physical Review Research 6, 043155 (2024)

    2024

  28. [37]

    Einstein, B

    A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, Physical Review 47, 777 (1935)

    1935

  29. [38]

    Schwartz, in Annales de l’Université de Grenoble , Vol

    L. Schwartz, in Annales de l’Université de Grenoble , Vol. 23 (1947) pp. 7–24

    1947

  30. [39]

    M. M. Wilde, Quantum information theory (Cambridge University Press, 2013)

    2013

  31. [40]

    G. H. Gloub and C. F. Van Loan, Johns Hopkins Univer- stiy Press, 3rd edtion (1996)

    1996

  32. [41]

    Dunford and J

    N. Dunford and J. T. Schwartz, Linear operators, part 1: general theory, Vol. 10 (John Wiley & Sons, 1988). 10 Supplementary Information Appendix A: Proof of Theorem 1: Effective dimension of physical unitary channels Hereafter, we denote by ΠN =∑ N n=0 |n⟩⟨n| the projector ont...

    1988

Pith tools

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