pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.23800 · v1 · pith:BS23PB5Znew · submitted 2026-06-22 · 🪐 quant-ph

Unitary Designs from Doped Matchgate Circuits

Fabian Ballar Trigueros , Zheng-Hang Sun , Xhek Turkeshi , Piotr Sierant , Poetri Sonya Tarabunga This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 07:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords unitary designsmatchgate circuitsnon-Gaussian gatesfree-fermion dynamicsMarkov chain2-designsfermionic interactions
0
0 comments X

The pith

Doping matchgate circuits with non-Gaussian gates produces approximate unitary 2-designs with rigorous bounds on gate count.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper shows that adding a controlled number of non-Gaussian gates to otherwise free-fermion matchgate circuits generates the randomness needed for approximate 2-designs. For globally scrambled dynamics the quantum design formation maps exactly to a classical birth-death Markov chain whose continuum limit is an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process. This mapping supplies explicit bounds on the required number of non-Gaussian gates that hold for any parity-preserving interaction and do not depend on microscopic details. The same mechanism appears to control higher-order designs according to numerical checks. The construction yields efficient parity-preserving designs when used as local blocks in glued circuits, with consequences for entanglement growth and fermionic shadow tomography.

Core claim

By doping matchgate circuits with non-Gaussian gates the design problem for globally scrambled dynamics maps exactly onto a classical birth-death Markov chain with an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck continuum limit. This recasts the emergence of quantum randomness in terms of spectral gaps and mixing times and yields rigorous bounds on the number of non-Gaussian gates needed for approximate 2-designs. The bounds apply to a broad class of parity-preserving non-Gaussian gates independently of microscopic details.

What carries the argument

The matchgate commutant framework, which maps the quantum unitary design formation exactly onto a classical Markov chain.

If this is right

  • Approximate parity-preserving 2-designs are obtained in polylogarithmic depth with sparse non-Gaussian gate count.
  • Page-like entanglement growth is expected in the doped circuits.
  • Fermionic classical-shadow protocols become feasible with these designs.
  • Numerics indicate the same mechanism governs higher-order designs.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Local brickwork dynamics being diffusion-limited suggests that global scrambling assumptions are crucial for fast design formation.
  • This approach could be extended to study design formation in other integrable systems doped with interactions.
  • The Markov chain mapping might allow exact calculation of design times for specific gate sets beyond the continuum limit.

Load-bearing premise

The matchgate commutant framework permits an exact mapping of the quantum design problem to a classical Markov chain that holds independently of microscopic details for globally scrambled dynamics.

What would settle it

A numerical simulation showing that the number of non-Gaussian gates required for a given design fidelity deviates significantly from the predicted bound for a parity-preserving gate would falsify the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.23800 by Fabian Ballar Trigueros, Piotr Sierant, Poetri Sonya Tarabunga, Xhek Turkeshi, Zheng-Hang Sun.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Doping protocols and emergence of randomness in matchgate circuits. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (A) Deviation of the unitary 2-frame potential from the Z2-symmetric Haar value, as a function of doping depth. The solid red line shows the thermodynamic-limit prediction from the perturbative approach, while markers denote values obtained from the exact doping-matrix method. (B) Relative deviation of the state 2-frame potential, as a function of dop￾ing depth. transfer matrix to an explicit finite combin… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Deviation of the unitary 2-frame potential from the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: System-size scaling of the spectral gap ∆ [Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (A) Schematic of the glued-circuit construction. The n qubits are partitioned into local patches of size ξ, and overlapping unitaries acting on neighboring pairs of patches (2ξ qubits) are arranged in a brickwork geometry. (B) Each local unitary in the glued circuit is implemented by a t-doped matchgate circuit acting on 2ξ qubits. Using this framework, we construct a circuit by replac￾ing each small rando… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Relative deviation of the state 4-frame potential [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Probabilistic doping protocol and resulting unitary [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Matchgate circuits realize free-fermion dynamics: they are efficiently classically simulable, yet cannot on their own generate the generic randomness required for universal computation or unitary design formation. We study a controlled route beyond this integrable limit by doping matchgate circuits with non-Gaussian gates-physically, the injection of fermionic interactions into an otherwise free system. Using the matchgate commutant framework, we obtain analytic control over unitary $2$-design formation. For globally scrambled dynamics, the design problem maps exactly onto a classical birth-death Markov chain with an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck continuum limit, recasting the emergence of quantum randomness in terms of spectral gaps and mixing times and yielding rigorous bounds on the number of non-Gaussian gates needed for approximate $2$-designs. These bounds hold for a broad class of parity-preserving non-Gaussian gates, independently of microscopic details, with numerics indicating that the same mechanism governs higher-order designs. Used as local building blocks in a glued-circuit architecture, they yield approximate parity-preserving $2$-designs in polylogarithmic depth with a sparse non-Gaussian gate count, with implications for Page-like entanglement growth and fermionic classical-shadow protocols. Finally, locality reshapes this picture: in local brickwork dynamics, design formation is diffusion-limited and far slower. Our results establish doped matchgate circuits as a controlled, analytically tractable route from free fermions to interaction-generated quantum designs.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies doped matchgate circuits, in which free-fermion matchgate dynamics are supplemented by a controlled number of parity-preserving non-Gaussian gates. Using the matchgate commutant framework, the authors claim that, for globally scrambled dynamics, the problem of forming an approximate unitary 2-design maps exactly onto a classical birth-death Markov chain whose continuum limit is an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process. This mapping is asserted to yield rigorous, detail-independent bounds on the number of non-Gaussian gates required. The work further examines glued-circuit constructions that achieve polylogarithmic depth and contrasts these with slower, diffusion-limited local brickwork dynamics, while noting numerical indications that the same mechanism extends to higher-order designs and implications for entanglement growth and fermionic classical shadows.

Significance. If the claimed exact reduction to a parameter-free Markov chain holds, the paper supplies an analytically tractable route from integrable free-fermion circuits to interaction-generated randomness, with explicit mixing-time bounds that apply uniformly across a broad gate class. The recasting of design formation in terms of spectral gaps and the OU limit constitutes a genuine technical contribution, and the glued-architecture results offer concrete depth and gate-count scalings with potential utility for shadow protocols.

major comments (2)
  1. [commutant-framework section] The central claim of an exact, microscopic-detail-independent mapping (abstract and the section introducing the commutant projection) rests on the assertion that the projected quantum channel reduces precisely to a birth-death process whose gap is uniform over the stated gate class. The manuscript must exhibit the explicit generator of this chain and demonstrate that its eigenvalues are independent of the particular non-Gaussian gate chosen; otherwise the independence statement is not load-bearing.
  2. [Markov-chain analysis] The rigorous bounds on the number of non-Gaussian gates (abstract and the Markov-chain analysis) are derived from the spectral gap of the OU process. The paper should state the precise dependence of the gap on system size and doping density, and confirm that the polylogarithmic depth claim for the glued architecture follows directly from this gap without additional assumptions on the scrambling time.
minor comments (3)
  1. The abstract is information-dense; separating the mapping claim, the bound statement, and the architectural results into distinct sentences would improve readability.
  2. [numerics paragraph] Numerical evidence that the mechanism extends to higher-order designs is mentioned only in passing; a brief table or plot summarizing the observed scaling for k>2 would strengthen the claim without altering the main 2-design focus.
  3. Notation for the birth-death rates and the OU drift and diffusion coefficients should be introduced with explicit definitions to avoid ambiguity in the continuum limit derivation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading, positive assessment of significance, and recommendation for minor revision. The comments help clarify the presentation of the commutant mapping and the scaling bounds. We respond to each major comment below and indicate the revisions that will be incorporated.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [commutant-framework section] The central claim of an exact, microscopic-detail-independent mapping (abstract and the section introducing the commutant projection) rests on the assertion that the projected quantum channel reduces precisely to a birth-death process whose gap is uniform over the stated gate class. The manuscript must exhibit the explicit generator of this chain and demonstrate that its eigenvalues are independent of the particular non-Gaussian gate chosen; otherwise the independence statement is not load-bearing.

    Authors: The mapping follows from the fact that the matchgate commutant is spanned by parity and excitation-number operators; any parity-preserving non-Gaussian gate projects onto the same tridiagonal birth-death generator on the doping coordinate, with off-diagonal rates set by the doping density alone. The eigenvalues of this generator are therefore identical for the entire gate class. To make the claim fully explicit we will add, in the revised commutant-framework section, the concrete (N+1)×(N+1) rate matrix together with the short algebraic argument that its spectrum depends only on system size and doping density. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Markov-chain analysis] The rigorous bounds on the number of non-Gaussian gates (abstract and the Markov-chain analysis) are derived from the spectral gap of the OU process. The paper should state the precise dependence of the gap on system size and doping density, and confirm that the polylogarithmic depth claim for the glued architecture follows directly from this gap without additional assumptions on the scrambling time.

    Authors: In the continuum limit the OU gap is 1; after rescaling by doping density ρ = k/N the discrete birth-death gap is Θ(ρ), so the ε-mixing time is O(ρ^{-1} log(1/ε)). The glued architecture interleaves fast global matchgate scrambling (O(log N) depth by existing results) with O(ρ^{-1} log N) doping layers, yielding overall polylog depth with no further assumptions. The revised Markov-chain analysis section will contain an explicit paragraph stating these scalings and deriving the depth bound directly from the gap. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained

full rationale

The paper invokes the matchgate commutant framework to derive an exact mapping of the 2-design problem onto a classical birth-death Markov chain (with OU limit) for globally scrambled dynamics. This reduction is presented as analytic and rigorous, yielding bounds independent of microscopic gate details for a broad class of parity-preserving gates. No step reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, self-defined quantity, or load-bearing self-citation; the central claim rests on the framework producing new spectral-gap and mixing-time control rather than renaming or refitting inputs. The derivation is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper relies on standard assumptions from quantum information theory regarding matchgates and unitary designs; no new free parameters or invented entities are apparent from the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Properties of matchgate circuits and their commutant
    Invoked to obtain analytic control over design formation.
  • standard math Existence of Ornstein-Uhlenbeck continuum limit for the Markov chain
    Used to recast emergence of quantum randomness in terms of spectral gaps.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5799 in / 1422 out tokens · 34348 ms · 2026-06-26T07:59:22.872795+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

207 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Rigol, V

    M. Rigol, V. Dunjko, and M. Olshanii, Thermalization and its mechanism for generic isolated quantum sys- tems, Nature452, 854 (2008)

    2008

  2. [2]

    D’Alessio, Y

    L. D’Alessio, Y. Kafri, A. Polkovnikov, and M. Rigol, From quantum chaos and eigenstate thermalization to statistical mechanics and thermodynamics, Adv. Phys. 65, 239–362 (2016)

    2016

  3. [3]

    Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys

    M. Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys. Rev. E50, 888 (1994)

    1994

  4. [4]

    Magesan, J

    E. Magesan, J. M. Gambetta, and J. Emerson, Scal- able and robust randomized benchmarking of quantum processes, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 180504 (2011)

    2011

  5. [5]

    Elben, S

    A. Elben, S. T. Flammia, H.-Y. Huang, R. Kueng, J. Preskill, B. Vermersch, and P. Zoller, The randomized measurement toolbox, Nat. Rev. Phys.5, 9 (2023)

    2023

  6. [6]

    Heinrich, M

    M. Heinrich, M. Kliesch, and I. Roth, Randomized benchmarking with random quantum circuits (2023), arXiv:2212.06181 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Knill, D

    E. Knill, D. Leibfried, R. Reichle, J. Britton, R. B. Blakestad, J. D. Jost, C. Langer, R. Ozeri, S. Sei- delin, and D. J. Wineland, Randomized benchmarking of quantum gates, Phys. Rev. A77, 012307 (2008)

    2008

  8. [8]

    Huang, R

    H.-Y. Huang, R. Kueng, and J. Preskill, Predicting many properties of a quantum system from very few measurements, Nat. Phys.16, 1050 (2020)

    2020

  9. [9]

    Huang, Learning quantum states from their clas- sical shadows, Nat

    H.-Y. Huang, Learning quantum states from their clas- sical shadows, Nat. Rev. Phys.4, 81 (2022)

    2022

  10. [10]

    A. Zhao, N. C. Rubin, and A. Miyake, Fermionic partial tomography via classical shadows, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 110504 (2021)

    2021

  11. [11]

    R. King, D. Gosset, R. Kothari, and R. Babbush, Triply efficient shadow tomography, PRX Quantum6, 010336 (2025)

    2025

  12. [12]

    Majsak, D

    J. Majsak, D. McNulty, and M. Oszmaniec, A simple and efficient joint measurement strategy for estimating fermionic observables and hamiltonians, npj Quantum Info.11, 61 (2025)

    2025

  13. [13]

    Dankert, R

    C. Dankert, R. Cleve, J. Emerson, and E. Livine, Exact and approximate unitary 2-designs and their application to fidelity estimation, Phys. Rev. A80, 012304 (2009)

    2009

  14. [14]

    Gross, K

    D. Gross, K. Audenaert, and J. Eisert, Evenly dis- tributed unitaries: On the structure of unitary designs, J. Math. Phys.48, 052104 (2007)

    2007

  15. [15]

    D. A. Roberts and B. Yoshida, Chaos and complex- ity by design, Journal of High Energy Physics2017, 10.1007/jhep04(2017)121 (2017)

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2017)121 2017

  16. [16]

    Surace and L

    J. Surace and L. Tagliacozzo, Fermionic Gaussian states: an introduction to numerical approaches, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes , 54 (2022)

    2022

  17. [17]

    G. B. Mbeng, A. Russomanno, and G. E. Santoro, The quantum Ising chain for beginners, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes , 82 (2024)

    2024

  18. [18]

    Echenique and J

    P. Echenique and J. L. Alonso, A mathematical and computational review of hartree–fock scf methods in quantum chemistry, Mol. Phys.105, 3057 (2007), https://doi.org/10.1080/00268970701757875

    work page doi:10.1080/00268970701757875 2007

  19. [19]

    V. Bach, E. H. Lieb, and J. P. Solovej, Generalized hartree-fock theory and the hubbard model, J. Stat. Phys.76, 3 (1994)

    1994

  20. [20]

    Bardeen, L

    J. Bardeen, L. N. Cooper, and J. R. Schrieffer, Theory of superconductivity, Phys. Rev.108, 1175 (1957)

    1957

  21. [21]

    D. J. Dean and M. Hjorth-Jensen, Pairing in nuclear systems: from neutron stars to finite nuclei, Rev. Mod. Phys.75, 607 (2003)

    2003

  22. [22]

    Funai, Gaussian states in quantum field theory: Ex- act representations of relative phase in superpositions of gaussian states, Phys

    N. Funai, Gaussian states in quantum field theory: Ex- act representations of relative phase in superpositions of gaussian states, Phys. Rev. D111, 105031 (2025)

    2025

  23. [23]

    P. Sala, T. Shi, S. K¨ uhn, M. C. Ba˜ nuls, E. Demler, and J. I. Cirac, Variational study of u(1) and su(2) lattice gauge theories with gaussian states in 1+1 dimensions, Phys. Rev. D98, 034505 (2018)

    2018

  24. [24]

    Zohar, M

    E. Zohar, M. Burrello, T. B. Wahl, and J. I. Cirac, Fermionic projected entangled pair states and local u(1) gauge theories, Ann. Phys.363, 385 (2015)

    2015

  25. [25]

    L. G. Valiant, Quantum computers that can be simu- lated classically in polynomial time, inProceedings of the Thirty-Third Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’01 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2001) p. 114–123

    2001

  26. [26]

    L. G. Valiant, Quantum Circuits That Can Be Simu- lated Classically in Polynomial Time, SIAM J. Comput. 31, 1229 (2012). 22

    2012

  27. [27]

    B. M. Terhal and D. P. DiVincenzo, Classical simulation of noninteracting-fermion quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. A65, 032325 (2002)

    2002

  28. [28]

    Jozsa and A

    R. Jozsa and A. Miyake, Matchgates and classical sim- ulation of quantum circuits, Proc. R. Soc. A464, 3089–3106 (2008)

    2008

  29. [29]

    Knill, Fermionic linear optics and matchgates (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0108033 [quant-ph]

    E. Knill, Fermionic linear optics and matchgates (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0108033 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  30. [30]

    D. J. Brod and E. F. Galv˜ ao, Extending matchgates into universal quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A84, 022310 (2011)

    2011

  31. [31]

    A. A. Mele and Y. Herasymenko, Efficient learning of quantum states prepared with few fermionic non- gaussian gates, PRX Quantum6, 010319 (2025)

    2025

  32. [32]

    Paviglianiti, L

    A. Paviglianiti, L. Lumia, E. Tirrito, A. Silva, M. Col- lura, X. Turkeshi, and G. Lami, Emergence of generic entanglement structure in doped matchgate circuits, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 020403 (2026)

    2026

  33. [33]

    Oszmaniec, N

    M. Oszmaniec, N. Dangniam, M. E. Morales, and Z. Zimbor´ as, Fermion sampling: A robust quantum computational advantage scheme using fermionic linear optics and magic input states, PRX Quantum3, 020328 (2022)

    2022

  34. [34]

    Dias and R

    B. Dias and R. Koenig, Classical simulation of non- Gaussian fermionic circuits, Quantum8, 1350 (2024)

    2024

  35. [35]

    Reardon-Smith, M

    O. Reardon-Smith, M. Oszmaniec, and K. Korzekwa, Improved simulation of quantum circuits dominated by free fermionic operations, Quantum8, 1549 (2024)

    2024

  36. [36]

    C. Oh, M. Oszmaniec, O. Reardon-Smith, and Z. Zim- bor´ as, Classical simulation of free-fermionic dynam- ics and quantum chemistry with magic input (2026), arXiv:2604.26813 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  37. [37]

    Hebenstreit, R

    M. Hebenstreit, R. Jozsa, B. Kraus, S. Strelchuk, and M. Yoganathan, All pure fermionic non-gaussian states are magic states for matchgate computations, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 080503 (2019)

    2019

  38. [38]

    Bravyi and A

    S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, Universal quantum computa- tion with ideal clifford gates and noisy ancillas, Phys. Rev. A71, 022316 (2005)

    2005

  39. [39]

    Bittel and L

    L. Bittel and L. Leone, Adaptively secure unitary de- signs with constant non-clifford cost, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 210802 (2026)

    2026

  40. [40]

    Veitch, S

    V. Veitch, S. A. H. Mousavian, D. Gottesman, and J. Emerson, The resource theory of stabilizer quantum computation, New J. Phys.16, 013009 (2014)

    2014

  41. [41]

    Leone, S

    L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, Y. Zhou, and A. Hamma, Quantum Chaos is Quantum, Quantum5, 453 (2021)

    2021

  42. [42]

    Haferkamp, F

    J. Haferkamp, F. Montealegre-Mora, M. Heinrich, J. Eisert, D. Gross, and I. Roth, Efficient unitary designs with a system-size independent number of non-clifford gates, Commun. Math. Phys.397, 995 (2022)

    2022

  43. [43]

    Liu and A

    Z.-W. Liu and A. Winter, Many-body quantum magic, PRX Quantum3, 020333 (2022)

    2022

  44. [44]

    A. Gu, S. F. Oliviero, and L. Leone, Magic-induced computational separation in entanglement theory, PRX Quantum6, 020324 (2025)

    2025

  45. [45]

    Magni, A

    B. Magni, A. Christopoulos, A. De Luca, and X. Turkeshi, Anticoncentration in clifford circuits and beyond: From random tensor networks to pseudomagic states, Phys. Rev. X15, 031071 (2025)

    2025

  46. [46]

    Magni and X

    B. Magni and X. Turkeshi, Quantum Complexity and Chaos in Many-Qudit Doped Clifford Circuits, Quan- tum9, 1956 (2025)

    1956

  47. [47]

    Magni, M

    B. Magni, M. Heinrich, L. Leone, and X. Turkeshi, An- ticoncentration and state design of doped real clifford circuits and tensor networks (2025), arXiv:2512.15880 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    Leone, S

    L. Leone, S. F. Oliviero, A. Hamma, J. Eisert, and L. Bittel, Non-clifford cost of random unitaries, PRX Quantum7, 020321 (2026)

    2026

  49. [49]

    Zhang, S

    Y. Zhang, S. Vijay, Y. Gu, and Y. Bao, Designs from magic-augmented clifford circuits, PRX Quantum7, 010344 (2026)

    2026

  50. [50]

    P. S. Tarabunga, Fermionic non-gaussianity via bell sampling: monotones and efficient quantum algorithms (2026), arXiv:2606.05066 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  51. [51]

    K. Wan, W. J. Huggins, J. Lee, and R. Babbush, Match- gate shadows for fermionic quantum simulation, Com- mun. Math. Phys.404, 629–700 (2023)

    2023

  52. [52]

    Sierant, X

    P. Sierant, X. Turkeshi, and P. S. Tarabunga, Theory of the matchgate commutant (2026), arXiv:2603.12392 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2026

  53. [53]

    Lastres and S

    M. Lastres and S. Moudgalya, Geometry of free fermion commutants (2026), arXiv:2604.05031 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  54. [54]

    Braccia, N

    P. Braccia, N. L. Diaz, M. Larocca, M. Cerezo, and D. Garc´ ıa-Mart´ ın, The commutant of fermionic gaussian unitaries (2026), arXiv:2603.19210 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2026

  55. [55]

    D. A. Levin, Y. Peres, and E. L. Wilmer,Markov chains and mixing times(American Mathematical So- ciety, 2006)

    2006

  56. [56]

    F. B. Anders and A. Schiller, Real-time dynamics in quantum-impurity systems: A time-dependent numer- ical renormalization-group approach, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 196801 (2005)

    2005

  57. [57]

    Thoenniss, A

    J. Thoenniss, A. Lerose, and D. A. Abanin, Nonequilib- rium quantum impurity problems via matrix-product states in the temporal domain, Phys. Rev. B107, 195101 (2023)

    2023

  58. [58]

    Y. Li, P. Sala, F. Pollmann, S. Moudgalya, and O. Motrunich, Dynamics in the presence of local symmetry-breaking impurities, Phys. Rev. B112, 155108 (2025)

    2025

  59. [59]

    Bravyi and D

    S. Bravyi and D. Gosset, Complexity of quantum impu- rity problems, Commun. Math. Phys.356, 451 (2017)

    2017

  60. [60]

    Roy and A

    A. Roy and A. J. Scott, Unitary designs and codes, Des. Codes Cryptogr.53, 13 (2009)

    2009

  61. [61]

    A. A. Mele, Introduction to Haar Measure Tools in Quantum Information: A Beginner’s Tutorial, Quan- tum8, 1340 (2024)

    2024

  62. [62]

    Aharonov, A

    D. Aharonov, A. Kitaev, and N. Nisan, Quantum cir- cuits with mixed states, inProc. Annu. ACM Symp. Theory Comput., STOC ’98 (Association for Comput- ing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1998) p. 20–30

    1998

  63. [63]

    Schuster, J

    T. Schuster, J. Haferkamp, and H.-Y. Huang, Ran- dom unitaries in extremely low depth, Science389, 92 (2025)

    2025

  64. [64]

    LaRacuente and F

    N. LaRacuente and F. Leditzky, Approximate unitary k- designs from shallow, low-communication circuits, Com- mun. Math. Phys.407, 51 (2026)

    2026

  65. [65]

    Heinrich, J

    M. Heinrich, J. Haferkamp, I. Roth, and J. Helsen, Anti-concentration is (almost) all you need (2025), arXiv:2510.23719 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    Grevink, J

    L. Grevink, J. Haferkamp, M. Heinrich, J. Helsen, M. Hinsche, T. Schuster, and Z. Zimbor´ as, Will it glue? on short-depth designs beyond the unitary group (2025), arXiv:2506.23925 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  67. [67]

    Dowling, J

    N. Dowling, J. D. Nardis, M. Heinrich, X. Turkeshi, and S. Pappalardi, Free independence and unitary de- 23 sign from random matrix product unitaries (2025), arXiv:2508.00051 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  68. [68]

    Christopoulos, A

    A. Christopoulos, A. Chan, and A. De Luca, Universal distributions of overlaps from generic dynamics in quan- tum many-body systems, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 043035 (2025)

    2025

  69. [69]

    Sauliere, B

    A. Sauliere, B. Magni, G. Lami, X. Turkeshi, and J. De Nardis, Universality in the anticoncentration of chaotic quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. B112, 134312 (2025)

    2025

  70. [70]

    G. Lami, A. D. Luca, X. Turkeshi, and J. D. Nardis, Quantum state design and emergent confinement mech- anism in measured tensor network states (2025), arXiv:2504.16995 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  71. [71]

    G. Lami, J. De Nardis, and X. Turkeshi, Anticoncentra- tion and state design of random tensor networks, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 010401 (2025)

    2025

  72. [72]

    F. G. S. L. Brand˜ ao, A. W. Harrow, and M. Horodecki, Local random quantum circuits are approximate polynomial-designs, Commun. Math. Phys.346, 397–434 (2016)

    2016

  73. [73]

    B. C. Dias, M. Haque, P. Ribeiro, and P. McClarty, Diffusive operator spreading for random unitary free fermion circuits (2021), arXiv:2102.09846 [cond-mat.str- el]

    arXiv 2021

  74. [74]

    Nahum, J

    A. Nahum, J. Ruhman, S. Vijay, and J. Haah, Quantum entanglement growth under random unitary dynamics, Phys. Rev. X7, 031016 (2017)

    2017

  75. [75]

    Swann, D

    T. Swann, D. Bernard, and A. Nahum, Spacetime picture for entanglement generation in noisy fermion chains, Phys. Rev. B112, 064301 (2025)

    2025

  76. [76]

    Sinclair and M

    A. Sinclair and M. Jerrum, Approximate counting, uni- form generation and rapidly mixing markov chains, Inf. Comput.82, 93–133 (1989)

    1989

  77. [77]

    G. F. Lawler and A. D. Sokal, Bounds on the l 2 spec- trum for markov chains and markov processes: A gen- eralization of cheeger’s inequality, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.309, 557 (1988)

    1988

  78. [78]

    Trevisan, Max cut and the smallest eigenvalue, in Proc

    L. Trevisan, Max cut and the smallest eigenvalue, in Proc. Annu. ACM Symp. Theory Comput., STOC ’09 (ACM, 2009) p. 263–272

    2009

  79. [79]

    Bauer and J

    F. Bauer and J. Jost, Bipartite and neighborhood graphs and the spectrum of the normalized graph laplace operator, Commun. Anal. Geom.21, 787–845 (2013)

    2013

  80. [80]

    Belkin, J

    D. Belkin, J. Allen, and B. K. Clark, Apparent uni- versal behavior in second moments of random quantum circuits (2025), arXiv:2510.23726 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

Showing first 80 references.