Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 113 references

Generalized Entropic Quantum Speed Limits

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 ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper derives a two-parameter family of entropic quantum speed limits from the α-z-Rényi relative entropy, claimed to hold for arbitrary finite-dimensional unitary and nonunitary dynamics.

desk verdict The central inequality (4) is invalid as stated—Eq. (B3) inverts a lower bound that can be negative, and the paper's own depolarizing example violates the bound—so the QSL family is unsupported, despite a sensible construction and useful examples. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.11049 v3 pith:HRGB53LC submitted 2025-01-19 quant-ph

Jucelino Ferreira de Sousa , Diego Paiva Pires This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph MSC 81P4581P6894A17 PACS 03.65.-w03.67.-a
keywords quantumspeedlimitsalpha-z-RenyirelativeentropyMandelstam-TammboundsopensystemsnonunitarydynamicsSchattennormsUhlmannfidelityPetz-Renyi
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 tries to establish that the α-z-Rényi relative entropy, a two-parameter family of distinguishability measures that includes Petz-Rényi entropy, sandwiched Rényi entropy, fidelity, and affinity as special cases, can be turned into quantum speed limits: lower bounds on the time a quantum system needs to evolve from one state to another. It claims these bounds apply to finite-dimensional systems undergoing both unitary and nonunitary processes, for mixed and pure, separable and entangled states. The speed-limit time depends only on the smallest and largest eigenvalues of the probe and instantaneous states plus the Schatten speed of the dynamics, so it is cheap to evaluate. If correct, this supplies a unified entropic version of Mandelstam-Tamm bounds and extends earlier Petz-Rényi speed limits to open quantum systems.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the α-z-relative purity $g_{\alpha,z}(\rho,\varrho)=\mathrm{Tr}\big[(\varrho^{(1-\alpha)/2z}\rho^{\alpha/z}\varrho^{(1-\alpha)/2z})^z\big]$, whose logarithm defines the α-z-Rényi relative entropy. The proof bounds the time derivative of this purity using the Araki-Lieb-Thirring inequality, a trace lower bound $\mathrm{Tr}(\rho_t^\alpha\rho_0^{1-\alpha})\ge 1+(1-\alpha)\ln[k_{\min}(\rho_0)]$, and Hölder and operator-norm estimates, producing the prefactor $h_{\alpha,z}(\rho_0)$ and a weighted time integral of the Schatten speed $\|d\rho_t/dt\|_1$. The speed-limit time is then obtained by inverting that weighted average.

What would settle it

Evaluate the right-hand side of Eq. (4) for a single-qubit initial state with $r=3/4$ and $\alpha=1/2$, where $k_{\min}(\rho_0)=1/8$ and $1+(1-\alpha)\ln[k_{\min}(\rho_0)]\approx -0.0397$: the prefactor $h_{\alpha,z}$ becomes negative while the left-hand side is nonnegative, so the claimed bound cannot hold as written unless the inversion step is repaired.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Eq. (4): for $0<\alpha<1$ and $1\ge z\ge \max\{\alpha,1-\alpha\}$, the α-z-Rényi relative entropy is bounded by $D_{\alpha,z}(\rho_\tau\|\rho_0) \le \frac{\alpha\,h_{\alpha,z}(\rho_0)}{|1-\alpha|}\int_0^\tau [k_{\min}(\rho_t)]^{\alpha-1}\|d\rho_t/dt\|_1\,dt$, with $h_{\alpha,z}(\rho_0)$ given by a closed expression in the extreme eigenvalues of the initial state. From this bound, its swapped version, and the symmetrized version, the paper derives a generalized speed-limit time $\tau^{\mathrm{QSL}}_{\alpha,z}$ in Eq. (11) that is claimed to lower-bound the actual evolution time. The family is two-parameter, is symmetric under $\alpha\to 1-\alpha$, and specializes to Petz-Rényi speed limits at $z=1$ and to fidelity- and affinity-based bounds at $\alpha=1/2$. The authors claim validity for pure or mixed, separable or entangled states, and for unitary and nonunitary dynamics.

Load-bearing premise

The whole chain assumes that the factor $1+(1-\alpha)\ln[k_{\min}(\rho_0)]$ is positive so its reciprocal can be used to invert the lower bound on the relative purity, but this positivity is never stated and fails for sufficiently mixed states, including the paper's own $r=3/4$, $\alpha=1/2$ example.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For closed-system dynamics, the entropic speed limit scales with the inverse of the energy variance, placing it in the Mandelstam-Tamm class of bounds.
  • For open-system dynamics, the speed limit is expressed through the Schatten $1$-norm of the rate of change of the Kraus operators, so it can be evaluated from a quantum-channel description without diagonalizing the full Liouvillian.
  • At $z=1$ the family reduces to Petz-Rényi speed limits, and at $\alpha=1/2$ it produces fidelity- and affinity-based speed limits, recovering several known results as particular choices of parameters.
  • The symmetry $\tau^{\mathrm{QSL}}_{\alpha,z}=\tau^{\mathrm{QSL}}_{1-\alpha,z}$ means every bound below $\alpha=1/2$ has a matching bound above it.
  • If valid for higher-dimensional systems, the bounds provide a low-cost estimate of how fast distinguishability changes, requiring only extreme eigenvalues and the generator of the dynamics.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The claimed coverage of pure states is not directly supported by the proof as written, because $k_{\min}(\rho_0)=0$ makes the logarithmic factor in $h_{\alpha,z}$ singular; a separate limiting argument or full-rank regularization would be needed.
  • The positivity of $1+(1-\alpha)\ln[k_{\min}(\rho_0)]$ is required for the inversion step in Eq. (B3), and it fails for sufficiently mixed states, including the paper's own example $r=3/4$, $\alpha=1/2$; a repaired version would need either a restriction on $k_{\min}(\rho_0)$ or a different inversion bound.
  • In the depolarizing-channel example the speed limit nearly vanishes near $\alpha=1/2$, suggesting that the practically useful regime of this family may lie away from the symmetric relative-entropy branch.
  • A natural testable extension is to check whether the same bounding strategy can be pushed beyond the data-processing-inequality region in the $(\alpha,z)$ plane, which the paper leaves open.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a two-parameter family of quantum speed limits based on α-z-Rényi relative entropies. The central result is Eq. (4), an upper bound on D_{α,z}(ρ_τ∥ρ_0) in terms of the time-averaged Schatten speed weighted by extremal-eigenvalue factors; from it the authors derive QSL times in Eqs. (11)–(13), specialize them to unitary and nonunitary dynamics in Eqs. (16)–(23), and illustrate them for single- and two-qubit systems. The paper claims validity for arbitrary finite-dimensional dynamics, including pure, mixed, separable, and entangled states.

Significance. If correct, the result would unify several entropic speed limits and extend the Petz-Rényi bounds of Ref. [56] to open systems using only minimal spectral information. The exposition is clear, and the analytical examples are explicit enough that the derivations can be checked directly. Unfortunately, the central inequality is false, and the proposed family of QSLs is therefore unsupported.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix B.1, Eq. (B3)] The derivation of the key bound inverts the lower bound (B5), Tr(ρ_t^α ρ_0^{1−α}) ≥ 1+(1−α) ln k_min(ρ_0). This inversion is valid only when the right-hand side is strictly positive. For any state with k_min(ρ_0) < exp(−1/(1−α)), the right-hand side is negative, so [g_{α,z}(ρ_t,ρ_0)]^{−1}, which is positive, cannot be bounded above by a negative number; for exact equality the bound is singular. This unstated positivity condition is not included in the theorem statements, and it is precisely the regime that the absolute value in Eq. (5) is meant to handle.
  2. [Eq. (4) and Sec. V.A.2] Equation (4) fails numerically for the paper's own depolarizing example. Take α=1/2, z=1, and r=3/4, for which k_min(ρ_0)=1/8 < e^{−2}. Using Eq. (31), D_{1/2,1}(ρ_∞∥ρ_0) = −2 ln[(√(1−r)+√(1+r))/2] ≈ 0.1855, while the right-hand side of Eq. (4) evaluates to h_{1/2,1}(ρ_0) ∫_0^∞ [k_min(ρ_t)]^{−1/2} ∥dρ_t/dt∥_1 dt ≈ 0.0525. Thus Eq. (4) asserts that a positive divergence is bounded above by a smaller positive number. Since Eqs. (6), (7), and the QSL times (11)–(13), (16)–(23) are all derived from Eq. (4) or from the same inversion step, the main results of the paper collapse.
  3. [Appendix B and Sec. IV] Appendix B begins by assuming that ρ_0 and ρ_t are full-rank, invertible density matrices, but the abstract and Sec. IV claim the speed limits hold for pure states and for arbitrary finite-dimensional dynamics. For pure states k_min=0, the factor [k_min(ρ_t)]^{α−1} diverges and the bound (B5) is not defined; no limiting argument is supplied. The domain of validity of the results is therefore narrower than claimed, independently of the algebraic error above.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. V.A.2, discussion of Fig. 2] The text states that D_{1/2,z}(ρ_τ∥ρ_0) ≈ 0 for all τ ≥ 0, but Eq. (31) gives a finite asymptotic value, e.g., ≈ 0.185 for r=3/4; the numerical statement should be corrected.
  2. [Eq. (8)] Equation (8) restricts the result to 1/2 < z ≤ 1, while the stated data-processing-inequality region for α=1/2 includes z=1/2; please clarify whether the bound holds at the endpoint.
  3. [Eq. (B4)] The use of the Araki-Lieb-Thirring inequality would be easier to verify if the text explicitly listed the operators and parameters; as written, it is not immediately obvious that the choice A=ρ_0^{(1−α)/2}, B=ρ_t^α, q=z, r=1/z satisfies the hypotheses of the inequality for all z in the stated range.
  4. [References] Reference [107] contains a typo: 'Bathia' should be 'Bhatia'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the QSL bound is derived analytically from contractivity and standard inequalities; the cited lemma [56] is a parameter-free prior result, not a redefinition of the target.

full rationale

The derivation chain is analytic and self-contained given standard inequalities and one parameter-free lemma from the authors' prior work. Eq. (4) follows from bounding |dD/dt| by the Schatten speed using Hölder and Araki–Lieb–Thirring inequalities; Eq. (11) is obtained by rearranging Eq. (4), so the QSL time is a mathematical consequence, not an independently fitted quantity. The cited lemma (B5) from Ref. [56] is a general lower bound on Tr(ρ_t^α ρ_0^{1−α}) that does not assume or encode Eq. (4), so invoking it is legitimate support even though an author overlaps. No parameter is fitted and no definition is chosen to force the bound. Separately, the inversion in Eq. (B3) requires positivity of 1+(1−α) ln kmin(ρ0), which is not stated; that is a correctness gap, not circularity, and therefore does not raise the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted; the result is an analytic inequality. However, it depends on an unstated positivity assumption and on a lemma from the authors' earlier work. The central bound is invalid without the positivity restriction, which is not part of the stated domain.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Integral representation of matrix powers ρ^s = sin(πs)/π ∫0∞ dx x^{s-1} ρ(ρ+xI)^{-1} for 0<s<1.
    Used to differentiate ρ_t^{α/z} in Appendix B.1 (Eqs. B8-B10). Standard matrix calculus.
  • standard math Araki-Lieb-Thirring inequality Tr[(A^r B^r A^r)^q] ≥ Tr[(A B A)^{r q}] for q≥0, r≥1.
    Used to lower bound g_{α,z} in Eq. (B4).
  • domain assumption Trace inequality Tr(ρ^α σ^{1-α}) ≥ 1 + (1-α) ln[kmin(σ)] for α∈(0,1), taken from Ref. [56].
    This is the lemma whose inversion requires positivity; it is cited from the authors' own prior work and is not reproved.
  • ad hoc to paper Positivity of 1+(1-α)ln[kmin(ρ0)].
    Needed to derive Eq. (B3). The paper does not state or justify it, and it is false for their r=3/4 example at α=1/2.
  • domain assumption α-z-RRE satisfies the data processing inequality for 0<α<1, 1≥z≥max{α,1-α}.
    The paper restricts to this parameter region based on Refs. [60,61,65].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Generalized Entropic Quantum Speed Limits." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HRGB53LC

@misc{pith2026250111049,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Generalized Entropic Quantum Speed Limits},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HRGB53LC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.11049}
}
abstract

We present a class of generalized entropic quantum speed limits based on $\alpha$-$z$-R\'{e}nyi relative entropy, a real-valued, contractive, two-parameter family of distinguishability measures. The quantum speed limit (QSL) falls into the class of Mandelstam-Tamm bounds, and applies to finite-dimensional quantum systems that undergo a general physical process, i.e., their effective dynamics can be modeled by unitary or nonunitary evolutions. The results cover pure or mixed, separable, and entangled probe quantum states. The QSL time depends on the smallest and largest eigenvalues of the probe and instantaneous states of the system, and its evaluation requires low computational cost. In addition, it is inversely proportional to the time-average of the Schatten speed of the instantaneous state, which in turn is fully characterized by the considered dynamics. We specialize our results to the case of unitary and nonunitary evolutions. In the former case, the QSL scales with the inverse of the energy fluctuations, while the latter depends on the Schatten $1$-norm of the rate of change of the quantum channel Kraus operators. We illustrate our findings for single-qubit and two-qubit states, and unitary and nonunitary evolutions. Our results may find applications in the study of entropic uncertainty relations, quantum metrology, and also entanglement entropies signaled by generalized entropies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.11049 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (Color online) Phase diagram for the generalized [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (Color online) Density plot of the entropic QSL [see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (Color online) Density plot of the normalized relative errors [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (Color online) Density plot of the entropic QSL time in Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (Color online) Density plot of the normalized relative error [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (Color online) Density plot of the normalized relative error [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

113 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages

  1. [56]

    Speed limits on correlations in bipartite quantum systems,

    V. Pandey, D. Shrimali, B. Mohan, S. Das, and A. K. Pati, “Speed limits on correlations in bipartite quantum systems,” Phys. Rev. A 107, 052419 (2023)

    work page 2023

  2. [1]

    Unitary evolution Let H = ⃗ n· ⃗ σbe the time-independent Hamiltonian of the two-level system, where ⃗ n= ( nx, ny, nz) is a three- dimensional vector. The unitary evolution is governed by the operator Ut = e−itH = cos(∥⃗ n∥t)I − i sin(∥⃗ n∥t)(ˆn · ⃗ σ), where ∥⃗ n∥2 = P l=x,y,z n2 l is the Euclidean norm, with ˆn = ⃗ n/∥⃗ n∥ and ∥ˆn∥ = 1. The instantaneo...

  3. [2]

    Here, I is the 2 × 2 identity matrix, σj is the jth Pauli matrix, and Γ defines the characteristic damping rate of the Markovian nonunitary process

    Nonunitary evolution We consider the single-qubit state evolving under a depolarizing channel described by the time-dependent Kraus operators K0 = (1/2) √ 1 + 3e−Γt I, and K1,2,3 = (1/2) √ 1 − e−Γt σx,y,z , with P jK † j Kj = P jKjK † j = I [99]. Here, I is the 2 × 2 identity matrix, σj is the jth Pauli matrix, and Γ defines the characteristic damping rat...

  4. [3]

    Here {|0⟩, |1⟩} define the computational basis states in the complex two-dimensional vector space C2

    (|0, 0⟩ + |1, 1⟩) is the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state. Here {|0⟩, |1⟩} define the computational basis states in the complex two-dimensional vector space C2. The noisy processes of energy dissipation and decoherence are mod- eled by the amplitude-damping channel [102]. The in- stantaneous state of the two-qubits system is given by ρt = Et(ρ0) = ...

  5. [4]

    Quantum speed limits–primer, perspectives, and potential future directions,

    M. R. Frey, “Quantum speed limits–primer, perspectives, and potential future directions,” Quantum Inf. Process. 15, 3919 (2016)

    2016

  6. [5]

    Quantum speed limits: from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to optimal quan- tum control,

    S. Deffner and S. Campbell, “Quantum speed limits: from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to optimal quan- tum control,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 50, 453001 (2017)

    2017

  7. [6]

    Bounds in nonequilibrium quantum dynamics,

    Z. Gong and R. Hamazaki, “Bounds in nonequilibrium quantum dynamics,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 36, 2230007 (2022)

    2022

  8. [7]

    Generalized Clausius Inequal- ity for Nonequilibrium Quantum Processes,

    S. Deffner and E. Lutz, “Generalized Clausius Inequal- ity for Nonequilibrium Quantum Processes,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 170402 (2010)

    2010

Show all 113 references
  1. [8]

    Unifying speed limit, thermodynamic un- certainty relation and Heisenberg principle via bulk- boundary correspondence,

    Y. Hasegawa, “Unifying speed limit, thermodynamic un- certainty relation and Heisenberg principle via bulk- boundary correspondence,” Nat. Commun. 14, 2828 (2023)

    2023

  2. [9]

    Thermodynamic speed lim- its for mechanical work,

    E. Aghion and J. R. Green, “Thermodynamic speed lim- its for mechanical work,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 56, 05LT01 (2023)

    2023

  3. [10]

    Geometric Speed Limit of Accessible Many-Body State Prepara- tion,

    M. Bukov, D. Sels, and A. Polkovnikov, “Geometric Speed Limit of Accessible Many-Body State Prepara- tion,” Phys. Rev. X 9, 011034 (2019)

    2019

  4. [11]

    Or- thogonality Catastrophe as a Consequence of the Quan- tum Speed Limit,

    T. Fogarty, S. Deffner, T. Busch, and S. Campbell, “Or- thogonality Catastrophe as a Consequence of the Quan- tum Speed Limit,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 110601 (2020)

    2020

  5. [12]

    Oper- ational definition of a quantum speed limit,

    Y. Shao, B. Liu, M. Zhang, H. Yuan, and J. Liu, “Oper- ational definition of a quantum speed limit,” Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023299 (2020)

    2020

  6. [13]

    Probing Quantum Speed Limits with Ultracold Gases,

    A. del Campo, “Probing Quantum Speed Limits with Ultracold Gases,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 180603 (2021)

    2021

  7. [14]

    Demonstration of Quantum Brachis- tochrones between Distant States of an Atom,

    M. R. Lam, N. Peter, T. Groh, W. Alt, C. Robens, D. Meschede, A. Negretti, S. Montangero, T. Calarco, and A. Alberti, “Demonstration of Quantum Brachis- tochrones between Distant States of an Atom,” Phys. Rev. X 11, 011035 (2021)

    2021

  8. [15]

    Kibble-Zurek scaling in quantum speed limits for shortcuts to adia- baticity,

    R. Puebla, S. Deffner, and S. Campbell, “Kibble-Zurek scaling in quantum speed limits for shortcuts to adia- baticity,” Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 032020 (2020)

    2020

  9. [16]

    Advances in quantum metrology,

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, “Advances in quantum metrology,” Nat. Photonics 5, 222 (2011)

    2011

  10. [17]

    Reverse quantum speed limit: How slowly a quantum battery can discharge,

    B. Mohan and A. K. Pati, “Reverse quantum speed limit: How slowly a quantum battery can discharge,” Phys. Rev. A 104, 042209 (2021)

    2021

  11. [18]

    Minimal time required to charge a quantum system,

    J.-Y. Gyhm, D. Rosa, and D. ˇSafr´ anek, “Minimal time required to charge a quantum system,” Phys. Rev. A 109, 022607 (2024)

    2024

  12. [19]

    Connection between entanglement and the speed of quantum evolution,

    J. Batle, M. Casas, A. Plastino, and A. R. Plastino, “Connection between entanglement and the speed of quantum evolution,” Phys. Rev. A 72, 032337 (2005)

    2005

  13. [20]

    Breaking local quantum speed limits with steering,

    Federico Centrone and Manuel Gessner, “Breaking local quantum speed limits with steering,” Phys. Rev. Res. 6, L042067 (2024)

    2024

  14. [21]

    Quantum Speed Limits across the Quantum- to-Classical Transition,

    B. Shanahan, A. Chenu, N. Margolus, and A. del Campo, “Quantum Speed Limits across the Quantum- to-Classical Transition,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 070401 (2018)

    2018

  15. [22]

    Quantum Speed Limit is Not Quantum,

    M. Okuyama and M. Ohzeki, “Quantum Speed Limit is Not Quantum,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 070402 (2018)

    2018

  16. [23]

    Speed Limits for Macroscopic Transi- tions,

    R. Hamazaki, “Speed Limits for Macroscopic Transi- tions,” PRX Quantum 3, 020319 (2022)

    2022

  17. [24]

    Optimal Control at the Quantum Speed Limit,

    T. Caneva, M. Murphy, T. Calarco, R. Fazio, S. Mon- tangero, V. Giovannetti, and G. E. Santoro, “Optimal Control at the Quantum Speed Limit,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 240501 (2009)

    2009

  18. [25]

    Quantum speed limit for robust state characterization and engineering,

    K. Kobayashi and N. Yamamoto, “Quantum speed limit for robust state characterization and engineering,” Phys. Rev. A 102, 042606 (2020)

    2020

  19. [26]

    Quantum speed limits in open systems: Non-Markovian dynamics with- out rotating-wave approximation,

    Z. Sun, J. Liu, J. Ma, and X. Wang, “Quantum speed limits in open systems: Non-Markovian dynamics with- out rotating-wave approximation,” Sci. Rep. 5, 8444 (2015)

    2015

  20. [27]

    Minimal evolution time and quantum speed limit of non-Markovian open sys- tems,

    X. Meng, C. Wu, and H. Guo, “Minimal evolution time and quantum speed limit of non-Markovian open sys- tems,” Sci. Rep. 5, 16357 (2015)

    2015

  21. [28]

    Quantum- speed-limit bounds in an open quantum evolution,

    N. Mirkin, F. Toscano, and D. A. Wisniacki, “Quantum- speed-limit bounds in an open quantum evolution,” Phys. Rev. A 94, 052125 (2016)

    2016

  22. [29]

    Role of non-Markovianity and backflow of information in the speed of quantum evolution,

    M. Cianciaruso, S. Maniscalco, and G. Adesso, “Role of non-Markovianity and backflow of information in the speed of quantum evolution,” Phys. Rev. A 96, 012105 (2017)

    2017

  23. [30]

    There is no general connection between the quantum speed limit and non-Markovianity,

    J. Teittinen, H. Lyyra, and S. Maniscalco, “There is no general connection between the quantum speed limit and non-Markovianity,” New J. Phys. 21, 123041 (2019)

    2019

  24. [31]

    Quantum Speed Limit and Divisibility of the Dynamical Map,

    J. Teittinen and S. Maniscalco, “Quantum Speed Limit and Divisibility of the Dynamical Map,” Entropy23, 331 (2021)

    2021

  25. [32]

    Quantum speed limit time of a non-hermitian two-level system,

    Y.-Y. Wang and M.-F. Fang, “Quantum speed limit time of a non-hermitian two-level system,” Chin. Phys. B 29, 030304 (2020)

    2020

  26. [33]

    Time scaling and quantum speed limit in non-Hermitian Hamiltonians,

    F. Impens, F. M. D’Angelis, F. A. Pinheiro, and D. Gu´ ery-Odelin, “Time scaling and quantum speed limit in non-Hermitian Hamiltonians,” Phys. Rev. A 104, 052620 (2021)

    2021

  27. [34]

    Generalised quantum speed limit for ar- bitrary time-continuous evolution,

    D. Thakuria, A. Srivastav, B. Mohan, A. Kumari, and A. K. Pati, “Generalised quantum speed limit for ar- bitrary time-continuous evolution,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 57, 025302 (2023)

    2023

  28. [35]

    Speed limits and thermodynamic uncertainty relations for quantum systems governed by non-Hermitian Hamiltonian,

    T. Nishiyama and Y. Hasegawa, “Speed limits and thermodynamic uncertainty relations for quantum systems governed by non-Hermitian Hamiltonian,” arXiv:2404.16392 (2024)

    2024

  29. [36]

    Estimating the time evolution of NMR sys- tems via a quantum-speed-limit-like expression,

    D. V. Villamizar, E. I. Duzzioni, A. C. S. Leal, and R. Auccaise, “Estimating the time evolution of NMR sys- tems via a quantum-speed-limit-like expression,” Phys. Rev. A 97, 052125 (2018)

    2018

  30. [37]

    Experimental inves- tigation of geometric quantum speed limits in an open quantum system,

    D. P. Pires, E. R. deAzevedo, D. O. Soares-Pinto, F. Brito, and J. G. Filgueiras, “Experimental inves- tigation of geometric quantum speed limits in an open quantum system,” Commun. Phys. 7, 142 (2024)

    2024

  31. [38]

    Observing crossover between quantum speed limits,

    G. Ness, M. R. Lam, W. Alt, D. Meschede, Y. Sagi, and A. Alberti, “Observing crossover between quantum speed limits,” Sci. Adv. 7, eabj9119 (2021). 17

    2021

  32. [39]

    The uncertainty relation between energy and time in nonrelativistic quantum me- chanics,

    L. Mandelstam and I. Tamm, “The uncertainty relation between energy and time in nonrelativistic quantum me- chanics,” in Selected papers (Springer, Berlin, Heidel- berg, 1991) pp. 115–123

    1991

  33. [40]

    The maximum speed of dynamical evolution,

    N. Margolus and L. B. Levitin, “The maximum speed of dynamical evolution,” Phys. D: Nonlinear Phenom. 120, 188 (1998)

    1998

  34. [41]

    The role of entanglement in dynamical evolution,

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, “The role of entanglement in dynamical evolution,” EPL 62, 615 (2003)

    2003

  35. [42]

    Quantum limits to dynamical evolution,

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, “Quantum limits to dynamical evolution,” Phys. Rev. A 67, 052109 (2003)

    2003

  36. [43]

    Fundamental Limit on the Rate of Quantum Dynamics: The Unified Bound Is Tight,

    L. B. Levitin and T. Toffoli, “Fundamental Limit on the Rate of Quantum Dynamics: The Unified Bound Is Tight,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 160502 (2009)

    2009

  37. [44]

    Geometry of quantum evolution,

    J. Anandan and Y. Aharonov, “Geometry of quantum evolution,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 1697 (1990)

    1990

  38. [45]

    Quantum Speed Limit for States with a Bounded Energy Spectrum,

    G. Ness, A. Alberti, and Y. Sagi, “Quantum Speed Limit for States with a Bounded Energy Spectrum,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 140403 (2022)

    2022

  39. [46]

    Quantum Speed Limit for Physical Pro- cesses,

    M. M. Taddei, B. M. Escher, L. Davidovich, and R. L. de Matos Filho, “Quantum Speed Limit for Physical Pro- cesses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 050402 (2013)

    2013

  40. [47]

    Quantum Speed Limits in Open System Dy- namics,

    A. del Campo, I. L. Egusquiza, M. B. Plenio, and S. F. Huelga, “Quantum Speed Limits in Open System Dy- namics,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 050403 (2013)

    2013

  41. [48]

    Quantum Speed Limit for Non- Markovian Dynamics,

    S. Deffner and E. Lutz, “Quantum Speed Limit for Non- Markovian Dynamics,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 010402 (2013)

    2013

  42. [49]

    Generalized Geometric Quantum Speed Limits,

    D. P. Pires, M. Cianciaruso, L. C. C´ eleri, G. Adesso, and D. O. Soares-Pinto, “Generalized Geometric Quantum Speed Limits,” Phys. Rev. X 6, 021031 (2016)

    2016

  43. [50]

    Ac- tion quantum speed limits,

    E. O’Connor, G. Guarnieri, and S. Campbell, “Ac- tion quantum speed limits,” Phys. Rev. A 103, 022210 (2021)

    2021

  44. [51]

    Geometric quantum speed limits for Markovian dynamics in open quantum sys- tems,

    K. Lan, S. Xie, and X. Cai, “Geometric quantum speed limits for Markovian dynamics in open quantum sys- tems,” New J. Phys. 24, 055003 (2022)

    2022

  45. [52]

    Tight and attainable quantum speed limit for open systems,

    Z.-Y. Mai and C.-S. Yu, “Tight and attainable quantum speed limit for open systems,” Phys. Rev. A 108, 052207 (2023)

    2023

  46. [53]

    Quantum speed limits for information and coherence,

    B. Mohan, S. Das, and A. K. Pati, “Quantum speed limits for information and coherence,” New J. Phys. 24, 065003 (2022)

    2022

  47. [54]

    Resource speed limits: maximal rate of resource varia- tion,

    F. Campaioli, C.-S. Yu, F. A. Pollock, and K. Modi, “Resource speed limits: maximal rate of resource varia- tion,” New J. Phys. 24, 065001 (2022)

    2022

  48. [55]

    Fundamental speed limits on entanglement dynamics of bipartite quantum systems,

    V. Pandey, S. Bhowmick, B. Mohan, Sohail, and U. Sen, “Fundamental speed limits on entanglement dynamics of bipartite quantum systems,” arXiv:2303.07415 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    Relative purity, speed of fluctuations, and bounds on equilibration times,

    D. P. Pires and T. R. de Oliveira, “Relative purity, speed of fluctuations, and bounds on equilibration times,” Phys. Rev. A 104, 052223 (2021)

    2021

  50. [58]

    Unified entropies and quantum speed lim- its for nonunitary dynamics,

    D. P. Pires, “Unified entropies and quantum speed lim- its for nonunitary dynamics,” Phys. Rev. A 106, 012403 (2022)

    2022

  51. [59]

    Bounding gener- alized relative entropies: Nonasymptotic quantum speed limits,

    D. P. Pires, K. Modi, and L. C. C´ eleri, “Bounding gener- alized relative entropies: Nonasymptotic quantum speed limits,” Phys. Rev. E 103, 032105 (2021)

    2021

  52. [60]

    Symmetric Petz-R´ enyi relative entropy uncertainty relation,

    D. S. P. Salazar, “Symmetric Petz-R´ enyi relative entropy uncertainty relation,” arXiv:2402.01390 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Entropic Energy-Time Uncertainty Re- lation,

    P. J. Coles, V. Katariya, S. Lloyd, I. Marvian, and M. M. Wilde, “Entropic Energy-Time Uncertainty Re- lation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 100401 (2019)

    2019

  54. [62]

    α-z-R´ enyi relative entropies,

    K. M. R. Audenaert and N. Datta, “ α-z-R´ enyi relative entropies,” J. Math. Phys. 56, 022202 (2015)

    2015

  55. [63]

    Equality conditions of data processing in- equality for α-z R´ enyi relative entropies,

    H. Zhang, “Equality conditions of data processing in- equality for α-z R´ enyi relative entropies,” J. Math. Phys. 61, 102201 (2020)

    2020

  56. [64]

    Inequal- ities for quantum divergences and the Audenaert-Datta conjecture,

    E. A. Carlen, R. L. Frank, and E. H. Lieb, “Inequal- ities for quantum divergences and the Audenaert-Datta conjecture,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 51, 483001 (2018)

    2018

  57. [65]

    Family of coherence measures and duality between quantum coherence and path distinguishability,

    C. Xiong, A. Kumar, and J. Wu, “Family of coherence measures and duality between quantum coherence and path distinguishability,” Phys. Rev. A98, 032324 (2018)

    2018

  58. [66]

    Comparison of Quantum Channels by Super- channels,

    G. Gour, “Comparison of Quantum Channels by Super- channels,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 65, 5880 (2019)

    2019

  59. [67]

    Dis- tinguishing Random and Black Hole Microstates,

    J. Kudler-Flam, V. Narovlansky, and S. Ryu, “Dis- tinguishing Random and Black Hole Microstates,” PRX Quantum 2, 040340 (2021)

    2021

  60. [68]

    From Wigner-Yanase-Dyson conjecture to Carlen-Frank-Lieb conjecture,

    H. Zhang, “From Wigner-Yanase-Dyson conjecture to Carlen-Frank-Lieb conjecture,” Adv. Math. 365, 107053 (2020)

    2020

  61. [69]

    Strong con- verse theorems using R´ enyi entropies,

    F. Leditzky, M. M. Wilde, and N. Datta, “Strong con- verse theorems using R´ enyi entropies,” J. Math. Phys. 57, 082202 (2016)

    2016

  62. [70]

    The second laws of quantum thermodynam- ics,

    F. Brand˜ ao, M. Horodecki, N. Ng, J. Oppenheim, and S. Wehner, “The second laws of quantum thermodynam- ics,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112, 3275 (2015)

    2015

  63. [71]

    Quantum work statistics and resource theories: Bridging the gap through R´ enyi diver- gences,

    G. Guarnieri, N. H. Y. Ng, K. Modi, J. Eisert, M. Pa- ternostro, and J. Goold, “Quantum work statistics and resource theories: Bridging the gap through R´ enyi diver- gences,” Phys. Rev. E 99, 050101 (2019)

    2019

  64. [72]

    Critical Examination of Incoherent Operations and a Physically Consistent Re- source Theory of Quantum Coherence,

    E. Chitambar and G. Gour, “Critical Examination of Incoherent Operations and a Physically Consistent Re- source Theory of Quantum Coherence,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 030401 (2016)

    2016

  65. [73]

    Maximal coherence and the resource theory of purity,

    A. Streltsov, H. Kampermann, S. W¨ olk, M. Gessner, and D. Bruß, “Maximal coherence and the resource theory of purity,” New J. Phys. 20, 053058 (2018)

    2018

  66. [74]

    Relating rela- tive R´ enyi entropies and Wigner-Yanase-Dyson skew in- formation to generalized multiple quantum coherences,

    D. P. Pires, A. Smerzi, and T. Macr ` ı, “Relating rela- tive R´ enyi entropies and Wigner-Yanase-Dyson skew in- formation to generalized multiple quantum coherences,” Phys. Rev. A 102, 012429 (2020)

    2020

  67. [75]

    Quasi-entropies for finite quantum systems,

    D. Petz, “Quasi-entropies for finite quantum systems,” Rep. Math. Phys. 23, 57 (1986)

    1986

  68. [76]

    On the Quantum R´ enyi Rel- ative Entropies and Related Capacity Formulas,

    M. Mosonyi and F. Hiai, “On the Quantum R´ enyi Rel- ative Entropies and Related Capacity Formulas,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 57, 2474 (2011)

    2011

  69. [77]

    On quantum R´ enyi entropies: A new generalization and some properties,

    M. M¨ uller-Lennert, F. Dupuis, O. Szehr, S. Fehr, and M. Tomamichel, “On quantum R´ enyi entropies: A new generalization and some properties,” J. Math. Phys. 54, 122203 (2013)

    2013

  70. [78]

    Strong con- verse for the classical capacity of entanglement-breaking and Hadamard channels via a sandwiched R´ enyi relative entropy,

    M. M. Wilde, A. Winter, and D. Yang, “Strong con- verse for the classical capacity of entanglement-breaking and Hadamard channels via a sandwiched R´ enyi relative entropy,” Commun. Math. Phys. 331, 593 (2014)

    2014

  71. [79]

    Monotonicity of a relative R´ enyi entropy,

    R. L. Frank and E. H. Lieb, “Monotonicity of a relative R´ enyi entropy,” J. Math. Phys.54, 122201 (2013)

    2013

  72. [80]

    A limit of the quantum R´ enyi divergence,

    N. Datta and F. Leditzky, “A limit of the quantum R´ enyi divergence,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.47, 045304 (2014)

    2014

  73. [81]

    Min- and Max-Relative Entropies and a New Entanglement Monotone,

    N. Datta, “Min- and Max-Relative Entropies and a New Entanglement Monotone,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 55, 18 2816 (2009)

    2009

  74. [82]

    R´ enyi Divergence and Kullback-Leibler Divergence,

    T. van Erven and P. Harremos, “R´ enyi Divergence and Kullback-Leibler Divergence,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 60, 3797 (2014)

    2014

  75. [83]

    Maximum Relative Entropy of Coherence: An Opera- tional Coherence Measure,

    K. Bu, U. Singh, S.-M. Fei, A. K. Pati, and J. Wu, “Maximum Relative Entropy of Coherence: An Opera- tional Coherence Measure,” Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 150405 (2017)

    2017

  76. [84]

    Quan- tum Coherence Quantifiers Based on R´ enyi α-Relative Entropy,

    L.-H. Shao, Y.-M. Li, Y. Luo, and Z.-J. Xi, “Quan- tum Coherence Quantifiers Based on R´ enyi α-Relative Entropy,” Commun. Theor. Phys. 67, 631 (2017)

    2017

  77. [85]

    Quantifying Entanglement,

    V. Vedral, M. B. Plenio, M. A. Rippin, and P. L. Knight, “Quantifying Entanglement,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 2275 (1997)

    1997

  78. [86]

    Information-Theoretical Bound of the Irreversibility in Thermal Relaxation Pro- cesses,

    N. Shiraishi and K. Saito, “Information-Theoretical Bound of the Irreversibility in Thermal Relaxation Pro- cesses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 110603 (2019)

    2019

  79. [87]

    Quantum work statistics close to equilibrium,

    M. Scandi, H. J. D. Miller, J. Anders, and M. Perarnau- Llobet, “Quantum work statistics close to equilibrium,” Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023377 (2020)

    2020

  80. [88]

    Work, Entropy Pro- duction, and Thermodynamics of Information under Pro- tocol Constraints,

    A. Kolchinsky and D. H. Wolpert, “Work, Entropy Pro- duction, and Thermodynamics of Information under Pro- tocol Constraints,” Phys. Rev. X 11, 041024 (2021)

    2021

  81. [89]

    Extending Noether’s theorem by quantifying the asymmetry of quantum states,

    I. Marvian and R. W. Spekkens, “Extending Noether’s theorem by quantifying the asymmetry of quantum states,” Nat. Commun. 5, 3821 (2014)

    2014

  82. [90]

    Bengtsson and K

    I. Bengtsson and K. ˙Zyczkowski, Geometry of Quan- tum States: An Introduction to Quantum Entanglement (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006)

    2006

  83. [91]

    Statistical speed of quan- tum states: Generalized quantum Fisher information and Schatten speed,

    M. Gessner and A. Smerzi, “Statistical speed of quan- tum states: Generalized quantum Fisher information and Schatten speed,” Phys. Rev. A 97, 022109 (2018)

    2018

  84. [92]

    Geometric quantum speed limits: a case for Wigner phase space,

    S. Deffner, “Geometric quantum speed limits: a case for Wigner phase space,” New. J. Phys. 19, 103018 (2017)

    2017

  85. [93]

    Speed limit for open quantum systems,

    K. Funo, N. Shiraishi, and K. Saito, “Speed limit for open quantum systems,” New J. Phys.21, 013006 (2019)

    2019

  86. [94]

    Geometrical Bounds of the Irreversibility in Markovian Systems,

    T. Van Vu and Y. Hasegawa, “Geometrical Bounds of the Irreversibility in Markovian Systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 010601 (2021)

    2021

  87. [95]

    Speed limits of the trace distance for open quantum system,

    S. Nakajima and Y. Utsumi, “Speed limits of the trace distance for open quantum system,” New J. Phys. 24, 095004 (2022)

    2022

  88. [96]

    Quantum speed limits based on Schatten norms: Uni- versality and tightness,

    A. J. B. Rosal, D. O. Soares-Pinto, and D. P. Pires, “Quantum speed limits based on Schatten norms: Uni- versality and tightness,” Phys. Lett. A 534, 130250 (2025)

    2025

  89. [97]

    Generalized Coherent Quantum Speed Limits,

    H. Wang and X. Qiu, “Generalized Coherent Quantum Speed Limits,” arXiv:2401.01746 (2024)

    2024

  90. [98]

    Random Bosonic States for Robust Quantum Metrology,

    M. Oszmaniec, R. Augusiak, C. Gogolin, J. Ko lody´ nski, A. Ac ´ ın, and M. Lewenstein, “Random Bosonic States for Robust Quantum Metrology,” Phys. Rev. X6, 041044 (2016)

    2016

  91. [99]

    Quantum Fisher Information as the Convex Roof of Variance,

    S. Yu, “Quantum Fisher Information as the Convex Roof of Variance,” arXiv:1302.5311

    arXiv

  92. [100]

    Extremal properties of the vari- ance and the quantum Fisher information,

    G. T´ oth and D. Petz, “Extremal properties of the vari- ance and the quantum Fisher information,” Phys. Rev. A 87, 032324 (2013)

    2013

  93. [101]

    Lower bounds on the quantum Fisher infor- mation based on the variance and various types of en- tropies,

    G. T´ oth, “Lower bounds on the quantum Fisher infor- mation based on the variance and various types of en- tropies,” arXiv:1701.07461

    arXiv

  94. [102]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition (Cambridge University Press, 2010)

    2010

  95. [103]

    Observable Measure of Quantum Coher- ence in Finite Dimensional Systems,

    D. Girolami, “Observable Measure of Quantum Coher- ence in Finite Dimensional Systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 170401 (2014)

    2014

  96. [104]

    Quan- tum computers and dissipation,

    G. M. Palma, K.-A. Suominen, and A. Ekert, “Quan- tum computers and dissipation,” Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A: Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 452, 567 (1996)

    1996

  97. [105]

    Deco- herence of quantum registers,

    J. H. Reina, L. Quiroga, and N. F. Johnson, “Deco- herence of quantum registers,” Phys. Rev. A 65, 032326 (2002)

    2002

  98. [106]

    Breuer and F

    H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, 2007)

    2007

  99. [107]

    Quantifying, characterizing, and controlling information flow in ultracold atomic gases,

    P. Haikka, S. McEndoo, G. De Chiara, G. M. Palma, and S. Maniscalco, “Quantifying, characterizing, and controlling information flow in ultracold atomic gases,” Phys. Rev. A 84, 031602 (2011)

    2011

  100. [108]

    Unified ( r, s)- Relative Entropy,

    J. Wang, J. Wu, and C Minhyung, “Unified ( r, s)- Relative Entropy,” Int. J. Theor. Phys. 50, 1282 (2010)

    2010

  101. [109]

    Thermodynamic uncertainty rela- tion for quantum entropy production,

    D. S. P. Salazar, “Thermodynamic uncertainty rela- tion for quantum entropy production,” arXiv:2404.18163 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  102. [110]

    Bathia, Matrix Analysis (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997)

    R. Bathia, Matrix Analysis (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997)

    1997

  103. [111]

    On an inequality of Lieb and Thirring,

    H. Araki, “On an inequality of Lieb and Thirring,” Lett. in Math. Phys. 19, 167–170 (1990)

    1990

  104. [112]

    Inequalities for the Mo- ments of the Eigenvalues of the Schr¨ odinger Hamiltonian and their Relation to Sobolev Inequalities,

    E. H. Lieb and W. E. Thirring, “Inequalities for the Mo- ments of the Eigenvalues of the Schr¨ odinger Hamiltonian and their Relation to Sobolev Inequalities,” in Inequal- ities: Selecta of Elliott H. Lieb , edited by M. Loss and M. B. Ruskai (Springer, Berlin, 2002) pp. 203–237

    2002

  105. [113]

    Watrous, The theory of quantum information (Cam- bridge University Press, Oxford, 2018)

    J. Watrous, The theory of quantum information (Cam- bridge University Press, Oxford, 2018)

    2018

Pith tools

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