Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 45 references

Phase space contraction rate for classical mixed states

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a classical mixed density matrix built from normalized tangent vectors has a phase space contraction rate equal to the local Gibbs entropy rate for dissipative systems.

desk verdict The mixed-state Jacobi algebra is a legitimate extension of the author's own formalism, but the central claim identifying Λm with a Gibbs entropy rate fails because the density matrix is built from normalized tangent vectors and the covariance identification is unjustified. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.09361 v3 pith:FEQCXXOW submitted 2025-02-13 cond-mat.stat-mech cond-mat.softnlin.CD

Mohamed Sahbani , Swetamber Das , Jason R. Green This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mechcond-mat.softnlin.CD MSC 82C0537D45
keywords phasespacecontractionrateclassicaldensitymatrixmixedstatesnon-HamiltoniandynamicsJacobiformulaGibbsentropycovariancedissipativesystems
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 extends classical density matrix theory from pure states to mixed states that combine statistical weights with the geometry of tangent vectors. It derives Jacobi's formula for these mixed states, defining a contraction rate $\Lambda_m = \frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{dt} \ln|\varrho| = \frac{1}{2} \operatorname{Tr} L$. By recognizing the density matrix as a covariance matrix of a Gaussian phase-space distribution, the paper shows this contraction rate equals the local Gibbs entropy rate, $\dot S_G/k_B = \Lambda_m$. If correct, this gives an ensemble-level measure of entropy flow in non-Hamiltonian and dissipative systems, computable directly from the density matrix dynamics without separately solving the full Liouville equation.

What carries the argument

The key object is the classical mixed density matrix $\varrho = \frac{1}{k}\sum_j |\delta u_j\rangle\langle\delta u_j|$ of normalized tangent vectors, together with its logarithmic derivative $L$ defined implicitly by the Lyapunov equation $d\varrho/dt = (L\varrho + \varrho L^\top)/2$. Jacobi's formula applied to $\varrho$ yields the contraction rate $\Lambda_m = \frac{1}{2}\operatorname{Tr} L = \frac{1}{2}d\ln|\varrho|/dt$. The second load-bearing step is the identification $\chi = c\varrho$ of the density matrix with the covariance matrix of a Gaussian distribution; this turns $|\varrho|$ into the normalization factor of the local Gibbs entropy, so its logarithmic time derivative is the entropy rate.

What would settle it

For a dissipative system such as a damped harmonic oscillator, numerically integrate a small ensemble of nearby trajectories, form the actual covariance matrix $\chi(t)$ of the deviations, and compute its Gibbs entropy rate; then compare it with $\Lambda_m = \frac{1}{2}\operatorname{Tr}L$ obtained from the density matrix of normalized tangent vectors. If the two rates differ, or if the ratio $\chi/\varrho$ is not constant in time, the central equality fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that for non-Hamiltonian dynamics, a mixed classical density matrix $\varrho(t) = \frac{1}{k}\sum_j |\delta u_j\rangle\langle\delta u_j|$, formed from normalized tangent vectors, satisfies Jacobi's formula $d|\varrho|/dt = |\varrho|\operatorname{Tr}(\varrho^{-1}d\varrho/dt)$ and thus defines a contraction rate $\Lambda_m = \frac{1}{2}\operatorname{Tr} L = \frac{1}{2}d\ln|\varrho|/dt$. Because $\varrho$ is proportional to the covariance matrix $\chi$ of a Gaussian ensemble in a small phase-space volume, the differential Shannon entropy of that ensemble has rate $\dot S_G/k_B = \Lambda_m$. The paper further shows that maximally mixed states (a complete, equally weighted basis of tangent vectors) give $\Lambda_{\max}=0$, recovering Liouville's volume preservation, while pure states give $\Lambda_p = \operatorname{Tr}\bar A = \Lambda - d\langle A\rangle$, relating the usual phase space contraction rate to instantaneous Lyapunov exponents. Together these results unify the mechanical deformation of local phase-space regions with the statistical spreading of an ensemble in a single density-matrix object.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that the mixed-state density matrix built from normalized tangent vectors is proportional, with a time-independent constant, to the covariance matrix of the phase-space distribution whose Gibbs entropy is being computed; if the perturbation scales grow or shrink over time, that proportionality breaks and the entropy rate is no longer $\Lambda_m$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any deterministic dissipative flow, the mixed-state contraction rate $\Lambda_m$ can be computed from the density matrix alone, encoding both local volume deformation and ensemble spreading.
  • In maximally mixed states the contraction rate vanishes, so the tangent-space volume is conserved even when the phase space itself is compressible.
  • The local Gibbs entropy rate of a Gaussian ensemble equals $\Lambda_m$, giving a direct relation between density-matrix contraction and entropy exchange with the surroundings.
  • The pure-state rate $\Lambda_p = \operatorname{Tr}\bar A = \Lambda - d\langle A\rangle$ connects the standard phase space contraction rate to instantaneous Lyapunov exponents.
  • Because $\varrho$ obeys a Lyapunov equation, its evolution is amenable to standard linear algebra, offering a route to entropy rates without solving for the full probability density.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If $\varrho$ can be identified with the actual finite-time covariance of an ensemble, $\Lambda_m$ may serve as a local, trajectory-dependent analog of the global entropy production rate in nonequilibrium steady states, testable in molecular dynamics simulations.
  • The proportionality constant $c$ between covariance and $\varrho$ may carry physical information about the radial scale of perturbations; if $c$ varies in time, a correction term $\frac{d}{dt}\ln c$ would appear in the entropy rate, a possibility the paper assumes away.
  • The covariance interpretation suggests a natural extension to stochastic systems: replacing deterministic tangent vectors with sample covariances of noisy trajectories would give a contraction rate that includes diffusive spreading, potentially connecting to entropy production in Langevin dynamics.
  • For systems where the number of tangent vectors $k$ is less than the phase-space dimension $d$, the determinant $|\varrho|$ vanishes and $\Lambda_m$ is undefined; a regularized or pseudo-determinant version would be needed to extend the result to under-complete ensembles.
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.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper extends a recently developed classical density matrix formalism to mixed states. It defines pure, maximally mixed, and fully mixed density matrices built from normalized tangent vectors, derives Jacobi-type formulas for the associated propagators and density matrices, and introduces contraction rates Λp, Λmax, and Λm. The central advertised result is that the mixed-state contraction rate Λm = (1/2)d/dt ln|ϱ| equals a local Gibbs entropy rate, ẋS_G/k_B = Λm (Eqs. 41, 44–46). The paper also claims that maximally mixed states have a vanishing contraction rate, Λmax = 0, for arbitrary deterministic dynamics.

Significance. The pure-state part of the paper is largely sound: the Jacobi formula for the norm-preserving propagator in Eq. (15), the trace identity Tr Ā = Λ - d⟨A⟩, and the logarithmic-derivative formalism in Sec. VI are useful algebraic results. Equation (41) is a valid identity for any invertible symmetric ϱ. If the entropy claim were correct, the paper would provide a new local measure of entropy flow linked to the classical density matrix formalism. However, the central claim is not supported: the covariance identification in Sec. VII is invalid for the normalized state defined in Eq. (9), and Eq. (45)–(46) are definitional once S_G is defined through ln|ϱ|. The maximally mixed derivation in Sec. IV also relies on an unjustified completeness assumption. These issues are load-bearing for the abstract and conclusions.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. VII, Eqs. (44)–(46)] The equality ẋS_G/k_B = Λm rests on identifying the mixed state with a covariance matrix, but the identification is not valid for the state defined in the paper. In Eq. (9) and App. G, ϱ = k^{-1}Σ_i |δu_i⟩⟨δu_i| is built from normalized tangent vectors |δu_i⟩ = |δx_i⟩/||δx_i||, whereas the Gaussian covariance in Eq. (43) is χ = k^{-1}Σ_i |δx_i⟩⟨δx_i|. The raw covariance is χ = k^{-1}Σ_i r_i^2 |δu_i⟩⟨δu_i| with r_i = ||δx_i||, which is not a constant multiple of ϱ when the radial scales r_i evolve. Thus c in App. O is not generally time independent. For the two-dimensional isotropic contraction ẋ = -λx, ẏ = -λy, all unit vectors are fixed, so ϱ is constant and Λm = 0, while χ(t) = e^{-2λt}χ(0), giving (1/2)d ln|χ|/dt = -2λ. The true local Gibbs entropy rate is therefore not Λm; Eq. (46) is an unproven identification, not a theorem.
  2. [Sec. VII, Eqs. (44)–(46)] Even if one accepted χ = cϱ, the equality ẋS_G/k_B = Λm is definitional: Eq. (44) defines S_G as (k_B/2)ln((2πe)^d |ϱ|) plus a time-independent constant, so its time derivative is (1/2)d ln|ϱ|/dt, which is exactly Λm by Eq. (41). The paper presents this as a physical relationship between entropy flow and contraction, but the nontrivial step is the covariance identification in Eq. (43), not the derivative in Eq. (45). Without an independent argument that the Gaussian distribution with covariance cϱ actually describes the ensemble of phase points, Eq. (46) is a restatement of the definition rather than a new measure of entropy flow.
  3. [Sec. IV, Eqs. (12), (24)–(26)] The derivation of Λmax = 0 assumes the propagated basis remains complete, Σ_i |δϕ_i⟩⟨δϕ_i| = 1 at all times. The propagator fM defined by Eq. (7) is generated by Ā = A - ⟨δu|A|δu⟩1, which is not antisymmetric; an orthonormal basis at t0 need not remain orthonormal under fM. In the special case of a common propagator, ϱmax(t) = d^{-1}fM fM^T, which is not d^{-1}1 unless fM is orthogonal. In the general case the Ā_i differ from vector to vector, so there is even less reason for the completeness relation to persist. Consequently, the identity TrA = d Tr(Aϱmax) in Eq. (24), and the claim that |fM'| is time invariant 'for arbitrary deterministic dynamics', are not established. The statement that symmetry of ϱ implies the completeness relation is also incorrect: symmetry guarantees an orthonormal eigenbasis at a fixed time, not propagation of a chosen initial basis.
  4. [Eq. (41); App. O] The quantities ln|ϱ| and Λm are only defined when ϱ is full rank, but the construction in Eq. (9) permits k < d, in which case ϱ is rank deficient. The text switches to k = d in App. O without explaining why an ensemble of phase points must have exactly d members. This matters because the differential entropy in Eq. (44) is undefined for a singular covariance, and the paper's central claim requires a full-rank ϱ.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (9) and Sec. V] The relationship between k (the number of pure states in the mixture) and d (the phase space dimension) is never stated explicitly; Eq. (9) uses k, while Eq. (27) sums over d and App. G assumes k = d.
  2. [Eqs. (24) and (36)] The notation |fM'| is inconsistent: in Eq. (24) it is defined as (Π_i |fM_i|)^{1/d}, but in Eq. (36) it is written as Π_i |fM_i| without the power.
  3. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption does not define the dimension d or the number of vectors k; this is confusing because the figure shows three vectors in what appears to be a three-dimensional phase space.
  4. [Eq. (17)] The parameter a is said to have dimensions [TM^{-1}], but the text immediately states that the stability matrix elements must have dimension [T^{-1}]; the intended dimensions of a are unclear.
  5. [Introduction, first paragraph] The notation 'dt ln ρ = 0' is nonstandard and should be written as d(ln ρ)/dt = 0 or (d/dt) ln ρ = 0.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 8.0 of 10

The equality ḍS_G/k_B = Λm is a tautology: the local Gibbs entropy is defined as (k_B/2) ln|ϑ| plus constants, so its time derivative equals Λm by construction.

  1. self definitional [Section VII, Eqs. (44)–(46); Appendix O]
    "S_G = k_B/2 ln((2πec)^d |ϑ|) (44) … ḍS_G/k_B = 1/2 d/dt ln|ϑ| = 1/2 Σ_i d/dt ln p_i (45) … ḍS_G/k_B = 1/2 Tr L = Λm (46) … Since the proportionality constant c is time independent, the entropy rate is directly proportional the contraction rate in Jacobi's formula for the mixed state (App. O)."

    Λm is defined in Eq. 41 as Λm := (1/2) d/dt ln|ϑ| = (1/2) Tr(ϑ^{-1} dϑ/dt). Equation 44 then defines the local Gibbs entropy as (k_B/2) ln((2πec)^d |ϑ|), i.e. a constant plus (k_B/2) ln|ϑ|. Differentiating Eq. 44 gives ḍS_G/k_B = (1/2) d/dt ln|ϑ|, which is exactly the definition of Λm. Thus Eq. 46 restates the definition of S_G in terms of Λm; it is not an independent derivation of an entropy rate from phase-space contraction. The additional identification χ = cϑ needed to call S_G a Gibbs entropy is asserted in Appendix O rather than derived, and it conflicts with the normalized-tangent-vector construction of ϑ in Eq. 9/Appendix G, where the radial scale discarded in normalization would make c time-dependent for contracting flows.

full rationale

The paper derives several genuine identities, including Jacobi's formula for the norm-preserving propagator, Λp = Tr Ä, the vanishing contraction rate for maximally mixed states, and the ensemble equation involving the surprisal covariance. These parts are not circular. The circular step occurs at the paper's central advertised result, Eq. (46). Λm is introduced in Eq. (41) as Λm := (1/2) d/dt ln|ϑ| = (1/2) Tr(ϑ^{-1} dϑ/dt). The local Gibbs entropy is then defined in Eq. (44) as S_G = (k_B/2) ln((2πec)^d |ϑ|), which differs from (k_B/2) ln|ϑ| only by a time-independent constant. Differentiating that definition gives ḍS_G/k_B = (1/2) d/dt ln|ϑ| = Λm, so Eq. (46) is true by construction. No dynamical content is added between Eqs. (44) and (46); the paper effectively renames the log-determinant rate as a local Gibbs entropy rate. The only physically load-bearing premise outside this tautology is the covariance identification χ = cϑ used to justify calling S_G a Gaussian Gibbs entropy. That identification is asserted in Appendix O, not derived, and it is inconsistent with the normalized tangent vectors used to construct ϑ in Eq. (9) and Appendix G: for a flow with contracting radial scales, χ = k^{-1} Σ r_i^2 |δu_i⟩⟨δu_i| is not a constant multiple of ϑ = k^{-1} Σ |δu_i⟩⟨δu_i|. Thus the central claim that the mixed-state contraction rate is a local entropy-flow measure is definitional, with its nontrivial physical input unsupported, rather than an independent result.

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

No free parameters are fitted to data. The derivation relies on the classical density matrix framework from prior work, the postulated Lyapunov equation for mixed states, and two ad hoc assumptions: the completeness of the propagated basis for maximally mixed states and the proportionality of the covariance matrix to ϱ. The invented-entities list is empty because the paper introduces no new physical degrees of freedom.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The state is built from normalized tangent vectors evolving under d|δu>/dt = \bar A |δu> with \bar A = A - ⟨δu|A|δu⟩1
    Inherited from the authors' classical density matrix theory [22]; the paper does not re-derive it and the completeness needed later is not a consequence of this dynamics.
  • domain assumption The mixed state evolves according to the Lyapunov equation dtϱ = (Lϱ + ϱL^T)/2, with logarithmic derivative L given implicitly by Eq. 10
    Postulated as the equation of motion for mixed states; not derived from the ensemble of pure states, and L is not uniquely defined without extra conditions.
  • ad hoc to paper A complete set of orthonormal basis states remains complete at all times, Σ_i |δφ_i><δφ_i| = 1
    Used in Eq. 24 to get Λmax=0; generally false for non-normal stability matrices, so the maximally mixed conservation claim is unsupported.
  • ad hoc to paper The local phase-space distribution is Gaussian with covariance χ = cϱ, where c is time independent
    Introduced in Section VII to identify ϱ with a covariance matrix and define the Gibbs entropy; not justified and inconsistent with the use of normalized tangent vectors unless a constant global scale is assumed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Phase space contraction rate for classical mixed states." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FEQCXXOW

@misc{pith2026250209361,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Phase space contraction rate for classical mixed states},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FEQCXXOW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.09361}
}
read the original abstract

Physical systems with non-reciprocal or dissipative forces evolve according to a generalization of Liouville's equation that accounts for the expansion and contraction of phase space volume. Here, we connect geometric descriptions of these non-Hamiltonian dynamics to a recently established classical density matrix theory. In this theory, the evolution of a ``maximally mixed'' classical density matrix is related to the well-known phase space contraction rate that, when ensemble averaged, is the rate of entropy exchange with the surroundings. Here, we extend the definition of mixed states to include statistical and mechanical components, describing both the deformations of local phase space regions and the evolution of ensembles within them. As a result, the equation of motion for this mixed state represents the rate of contraction for an ensemble of dissipative trajectories. Recognizing this density matrix as a covariance matrix, its contraction rate is another measure of entropy flow characterizing nonequilibrium steady states.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.09361 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Since the density matrix is symmetric, we have the completeness relation Pd i=1 |δϕi⟩ ⟨δϕi| =

    Another special case are maximally mixed states ϱmax = d−1 dX i=1 |δϕi⟩ ⟨δϕi| (maximally mixed) (12) with a complete a set of equally weighted basis states, pi = 1 /d. Since the density matrix is symmetric, we have the completeness relation Pd i=1 |δϕi⟩ ⟨δϕi| =

    work page

  2. [2]

    contraction rates

    Completely mixed states are also purely mechani- cal with each pure state contributing equally and min- imum purity, Tr ϱ2 max = 1 /d. Hence, ϱmax = d−11 and L = 0. Given the equation of motion dtϱmax = Lϱmax + ϱmaxL⊤ /2 = 0, we see that these states are conserved over time. The density matrix and its equation of motion are the ingredients we need to esta...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Zwanzig, Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics (Ox- ford University Press, New York, 2001)

    R. Zwanzig, Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics (Ox- ford University Press, New York, 2001)

    work page 2001

  4. [4]

    Aubin, Nonlinear analysis on manifolds

    T. Aubin, Nonlinear analysis on manifolds. Monge- Ampere equations, Vol. 252 (Springer Science & Business Media, 2012)

    work page 2012

  5. [5]

    Abraham, J

    R. Abraham, J. E. Marsden, and T. Ratiu,Manifolds, tensor analysis, and applications, Vol. 75 (Springer Sci- ence & Business Media, 2012)

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    D. J. Evans and G. P. Morriss,Statistical Mechanics of Nonequilibrium Liquids(ANU Press, 2007)

    work page 2007

  7. [7]

    Gerlich, Die verallgemeinerte Liouville-Gleichung, Physica 69, 458 (1973)

    G. Gerlich, Die verallgemeinerte Liouville-Gleichung, Physica 69, 458 (1973)

    work page 1973

  8. [8]

    Prugovečki, Liouville dynamics for optimal stochastic phase-space representations of quantum mechanics, An- nals of Physics110, 102 (1978)

    E. Prugovečki, Liouville dynamics for optimal stochastic phase-space representations of quantum mechanics, An- nals of Physics110, 102 (1978)

    work page 1978

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    J. R. Dorfman,An Introduction to Chaos in Nonequilib- rium Statistical Mechanics, Cambridge Lecture Notes in Physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999)

    1999

  2. [10]

    Gaspard,Chaos, Scattering and Statistical Mechanics, Cambridge Nonlinear Science Series (Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge, 1998)

    P. Gaspard,Chaos, Scattering and Statistical Mechanics, Cambridge Nonlinear Science Series (Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge, 1998)

    1998

  3. [11]

    M. E. Tuckerman, Y. Liu, G. Ciccotti, and G. J. Martyna, Non-Hamiltonian molecular dynamics: Gen- eralizing Hamiltonian phase space principles to non- Hamiltonian systems, J. Chem. Phys.115, 1678 (2001)

    2001

  4. [12]

    G. S. Ezra, On the statistical mechanics of non- Hamiltonian systems: the generalized Liouville equation, entropy, and time-dependent metrics, J. Math. Chem. 35, 29 (2004)

    2004

  5. [13]

    J. R. Dorfman, Chaotic dynamics in nonequilibrium sta- tistical mechanics, in Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science, edited by R. A. Meyers (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2020) pp. 1–31

    2020

  6. [14]

    Gaspard and G

    P. Gaspard and G. Nicolis, Transport properties, Lya- punov exponents, and entropy per unit time, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 1693 (1990). 9

    1990

  7. [15]

    J. R. Dorfman and P. Gaspard, Chaotic scattering theory of transport and reaction-rate coefficients, Phys. Rev. E 51, 28 (1995)

    1995

  8. [16]

    J. R. Dorfman and H. van Beijeren, Dynamical systems theory and transport coefficients: A survey with applica- tions to Lorentz gases, Physica A240, 12 (1997)

    1997

  9. [17]

    Muir, A Treatise on the Theory of Determinants, editedbyW.H.Metzler(Longmans, GreenandCo.,Lon- don, 1933)

    T. Muir, A Treatise on the Theory of Determinants, editedbyW.H.Metzler(Longmans, GreenandCo.,Lon- don, 1933)

    1933

  10. [18]

    Andrey, The rate of entropy change in non- Hamiltonian systems, Phys

    L. Andrey, The rate of entropy change in non- Hamiltonian systems, Phys. Lett. A111, 45 (1985)

    1985

  11. [19]

    therateofentropy change in non-Hamiltonian systems

    L.Andrey,Noteconcerningthepaper“therateofentropy change in non-Hamiltonian systems”, Phys. Lett. A114, 183 (1986)

    1986

  12. [20]

    J.D.Ramshaw,Remarksonentropyandirreversibilityin non-Hamiltonian systems, Phys. Lett. A116, 110 (1986)

    1986

  13. [21]

    Betancourt, A general metric for Riemannian man- ifold Hamiltonian Monte Carlo, in International Con- ference on Geometric Science of Information(Springer,

    M. Betancourt, A general metric for Riemannian man- ifold Hamiltonian Monte Carlo, in International Con- ference on Geometric Science of Information(Springer,

  14. [22]

    Tuckerman, C

    M. Tuckerman, C. Mundy, and G. Martyna, On the clas- sical statistical mechanics of non-Hamiltonian systems, Europhys. Lett. 45, 149 (1999)

    1999

  15. [23]

    J. D. Ramshaw, Remarks on non-Hamiltonian statistical mechanics, EPL 59, 319 (2002)

    2002

  16. [24]

    Das and J

    S. Das and J. R. Green, Density matrix formulation of dynamical systems, Phys. Rev. E106, 054135 (2022)

    2022

  17. [25]

    Das and J

    S. Das and J. R. Green, Speed limits on deterministic chaos and dissipation, Phys. Rev. Res.5, L012016(2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    Das and J

    S. Das and J. R. Green, Maximum speed of dissipation, Phys. Rev. E.109, L052104 (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    Sahbani, S

    M. Sahbani, S. Das, and J. R. Green, Classical Fisher information for differentiable dynamical systems, Chaos 33 (2023)

    2023

  20. [28]

    Sergi, Non-Hamiltonian equilibrium statistical me- chanics, Phys

    A. Sergi, Non-Hamiltonian equilibrium statistical me- chanics, Phys. Rev. E67, 021101 (2003)

    2003

  21. [29]

    Sergi and P

    A. Sergi and P. V. Giaquinta, On the geometry and en- tropy of non-Hamiltonian phase space, Journal of Statis- tical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2007, P02013 (2007)

    2007

  22. [30]

    Bravetti and D

    A. Bravetti and D. Tapias, Liouville’s theorem and the canonical measure for nonconservative systems from con- tact geometry, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 48, 245001 (2015)

    2015

  23. [31]

    Pikovsky and A

    A. Pikovsky and A. Politi,Lyapunov Exponents: A Tool to Explore Complex Dynamics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016)

    2016

  24. [32]

    Hörnedal, O

    N. Hörnedal, O. A. Prośniak, A. del Campo, and A. Chenu, A geometrical description of non-Hermitian dynamics: speed limits in finite rank density operators (2024), arXiv:2405.13913 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Shankar,Principles of quantum mechanics(Springer Science & Business Media, 2012)

    R. Shankar,Principles of quantum mechanics(Springer Science & Business Media, 2012)

    2012

  26. [34]

    J. S. Sidhu and P. Kok, Geometric perspective on quan- tum parameter estimation, AVS Quantum Sci.2, 014701 (2020)

    2020

  27. [35]

    Das and J

    S. Das and J. R. Green, Spectral bounds on the entropy flow rate and lyapunov exponents in differentiable dy- namical systems, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    C. W. Helstrom, Minimum mean-squared error of es- timates in quantum statistics, Phys. Lett. A 25, 101 (1967)

    1967

  29. [37]

    P. J. Olver, C. Shakiban, and C. Shakiban,Applied linear algebra, Vol. 1 (Springer, 2006)

    2006

  30. [38]

    J.R.MagnusandH.Neudecker, Matrix differential calcu- lus with applications in statistics and econometrics(John Wiley & Sons, 2019)

    2019

  31. [39]

    Goldstein, Classical Mechanics (Addison-Wesley, 1980)

    H. Goldstein, Classical Mechanics (Addison-Wesley, 1980)

    1980

  32. [40]

    Benettin, L

    G. Benettin, L. Galgani, A. Giorgilli, and J.-M. Strelcyn, Lyapunov characteristic exponents for smooth dynami- cal systems and for Hamiltonian systems; a method for computing all of them. part 1: Theory, Meccanica15, 9 (1980)

    1980

  33. [41]

    V.Kargin,Lyapunovexponentsoffreeoperators,Journal of Functional Analysis255, 1874 (2008)

    2008

  34. [42]

    M. G. A. Paris, Quantum estimation for quantum tech- nology, Int. J. Quantum Inform.07, 125 (2009)

    2009

  35. [43]

    Ruelle, Positivity of entropy production in nonequilib- rium statistical mechanics, J

    D. Ruelle, Positivity of entropy production in nonequilib- rium statistical mechanics, J. Stat. Phys.85, 1 (1996)

    1996

  36. [44]

    Ruelle, Entropy production in nonequilibrium statis- tical mechanics, Commun

    D. Ruelle, Entropy production in nonequilibrium statis- tical mechanics, Commun. Math. Phys.189, 365 (1997)

    1997

  37. [45]

    Klages,Microscopic Chaos, Fractals and Transport in Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics (World Scientific, 2007)

    R. Klages,Microscopic Chaos, Fractals and Transport in Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics (World Scientific, 2007). 10 Appendix A: Equation of motion for the propagator A tangent vector|δu(t)⟩ evolves according to |δu(t)⟩ = fM (t, t0) |δu(t0)⟩ . (A1) The time derivative of t...

    2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.