Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

Symmetry and Topology of Monitored Quantum Dynamics

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper establishes a tenfold symmetry and topology classification for monitored free fermions, and shows that nontrivial spacetime topology produces topologically nontrivial steady states and gapless boundary states in Lyapunov…

desk verdict A genuinely useful tenfold classification for monitored free fermions, but the L_t–\bar H_t topological equivalence is asserted rather than proved, so revision is needed before the bulk-boundary claims fully land. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.06133 v4 pith:MC2XEOVS submitted 2024-12-09 cond-mat.stat-mech cond-mat.dis-nnquant-ph

Zhenyu Xiao , Kohei Kawabata This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mechcond-mat.dis-nnquant-ph
keywords monitoredquantumdynamicsfreefermionstenfoldclassificationnon-HermitiantopologyLyapunovspectrumdynamicalpurificationbulk-boundarycorrespondencemeasurement-inducedphasetransitions
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

When free-fermion systems are continuously measured, their evolution becomes nonunitary and can be encoded in single-particle Kraus operators. The paper argues that these operators and their effective non-Hermitian generators fall into exactly ten symmetry classes, and that a further topological classification in spacetime dimensions parallels the periodic table of topological insulators and superconductors. The nontrivial cases are not merely formal: they predict topologically protected boundary features in Lyapunov spectra, such as zero modes and chiral edge modes, which make the system purify more slowly and survive spatial and temporal randomness. If correct, this gives a symmetry principle for measurement-induced phase transitions and identifies which topological terms can appear in the effective nonlinear sigma models of monitored dynamics.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the single-particle Kraus operator $K_t$ and its associated non-Hermitian dynamical generator $L_t = \partial_t - H_t$, together with the cumulative operator $K_{[0,t]}$ and the time-averaged generator $\bar H_t$ defined by $K_{[0,t]} =: e^{\bar H_t t}$. The symmetry analysis uses spacetime-internal time-reversal, particle-hole, and chiral conditions on $K_t$, which induce the non-Hermitian symmetries on $L_t$ and $\bar H_t$; the topology is then captured by deforming gapped operators to unitary or flat Hermitian representatives and reading off the homotopy class in the appropriate classifying space. The Lyapunov exponents are the real parts of the eigenvalues of $\bar H_t$, the steady state is built from the eigenvectors with positive real part, and the topological invariant is evaluated through local markers such as the chiral index and local Chern number.

What would settle it

Simulate a monitored class-BDI Majorana chain with weak measurements and random unitaries, tuning the disorder so that the mobility gap at zero closes only through exponentially localized states; then compute the winding number of $\bar H_t$ and the smallest Lyapunov exponent under both periodic and open boundary conditions. If changing the boundary conditions changes the quantized invariant, or if the open-boundary Lyapunov zero mode disappears while the bulk marker remains quantized, the assumption that localized in-gap states do not affect topology would be violated.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that monitored free fermions admit a tenfold classification of symmetry and topology in which the time direction acts like an extra spatial dimension. A monitored trajectory is described by the cumulative single-particle Kraus operator $K_{[0,t]}$, whose infinitesimal generator is the non-Hermitian operator $L_t = \partial_t - H_t$; the paper classifies the symmetries of these operators and shows that their topology is captured by the homotopy groups of the classifying spaces $C_s$ or $R_s$ in $d+1$ spacetime dimensions. With a mobility gap at zero, $L_t$ deforms into a unitary operator, while the time-averaged generator $\bar H_t$ (defined by $K_{[0,t]} =: e^{\bar H_t t}$) deforms into a flat Hermitian Hamiltonian, and the paper proves that $L_t$ and $\bar H_t$ share the same topological classification. Non-trivial spacetime topology then manifests as topologically nontrivial steady states and anomalous gapless boundary states in the Lyapunov spectrum, including Lyapunov zero modes in one spatial dimension and chiral edge modes in two spatial dimensions, so that the purification time diverges or is algebraically slowed in a topologically protected way.

Load-bearing premise

The classification depends on the effective non-Hermitian generator having a mobility gap at zero and on localized in-gap states, together with any nonlocality of the time-averaged generator, being irrelevant to its topology; if those assumptions fail, the spacetime periodic table need not hold.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Monitored free fermions in each symmetry class and spacetime dimension carry a topological invariant from the tenfold table, so two dynamics with different invariants cannot be connected without closing the Lyapunov gap.
  • Nontrivial topology forces boundary-localized states in the Lyapunov spectrum under open boundary conditions, such as Lyapunov zero modes and chiral edge modes, leading to topologically protected slow purification.
  • The classification predicts which topological terms can enter the nonlinear sigma models for measurement-induced phase transitions, potentially explaining transitions that the standard perturbative sigma model cannot describe.
  • Steady-state correlation functions inherit quantized topological markers, such as the local Chern number and $\mathbb{Z}_2$ index, and these markers remain quantized even when translation invariance is broken by random measurement strengths.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension, not pursued in the paper, is to test whether the same topological invariants control the universality class of the purification transition in zero spatial dimension, where the winding number can be computed directly from the non-Hermitian generator.
  • The proved equivalence between the topology of $L_t$ and $\bar H_t$ suggests that numerical tools developed for disordered topological insulators, such as transfer-matrix scaling and local topological markers, transfer directly to monitored circuit dynamics; the paper uses such tools but does not state this as a general recipe.
  • The paper notes that non-Hermitian skin effects may be relevant to measurement-induced transitions; an untested consequence is that open-boundary Lyapunov spectra could deviate from periodic boundary conditions more strongly than the examples shown, potentially changing the purification slowdown exponent.
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 paper establishes a tenfold symmetry and topology classification for monitored free-fermion dynamics. The authors introduce single-particle Kraus operators K_t and effective non-Hermitian generators L_t, identify the symmetry constraints preserved along quantum trajectories (Eqs. 3–5), and derive classifying spaces for both L_t and the time-averaged generator \bar H_t defined by K[0,t]=e^{\bar H_t t}. They then argue that the point-gap topology of L_t in (d+1)-dimensional spacetime is equivalent to the real-line-gap topology of \bar H_t in d spatial dimensions, yielding Table II. They further claim a bulk-boundary correspondence: nontrivial spacetime topology produces topologically nontrivial steady states and gapless Lyapunov boundary modes, which they illustrate in 1+1-dimensional Majorana chains (classes BDI and D) and 2+1-dimensional complex fermions (class A).

Significance. If the central equivalence between the topology of L_t and \bar H_t holds in full generality, this paper provides a useful unifying framework that connects non-Hermitian classification, monitored dynamics, measurement-induced transitions, and nonlinear sigma models. The algebraic derivations in Appendices B and C are clean and internally consistent, and the numerical demonstrations with local topological markers (Z and Z2 indices, Chern markers) are concrete and reproducible in structure. The identification of potential topological terms in nonlinear sigma models is an insightful contribution. However, the paper's main result rests on assumptions about spectral gaps and locality of \bar H_t that are not established analytically; the numerical models are either translation-invariant or weakly disordered and therefore do not probe the most general regime the classification claims to cover.

major comments (3)
  1. [Topology (main text, after Eq. "K[0,t] =: e^{\bar H_t t}")] The sentence 'The possible nonlocality of \bar H_t is irrelevant to the topological classification [ ? ]' is a load-bearing assertion but is stated without proof or citation. If \bar H_t is nonlocal, the d-dimensional homotopy classification via \pi_0(C_{s-1-d}) or \pi_0(R_{s-1-d}) need not apply, and the bulk-boundary correspondence in Lyapunov spectra and the steady-state correlation function C=(1/2)QEQ^† may fail to encode the spacetime topology. Appendix C demonstrates only pointwise deformability of \bar H_t via Schur decomposition; it does not control spatial locality or temporal fluctuations. Please either supply a proof that nonlocality does not affect the relevant topologically protected properties, or state and justify the restricted class of dynamics (e.g., quasi-local \bar H_t) for which the classification holds.
  2. [Appendix B (classifying space of L_t)] The reduction from a mobility gap to a spectral gap is assumed: 'we assume a spectral gap since localized in-gap states do not affect topology generally.' This statement is not proven and is not obviously valid for non-Hermitian point-gap topology, where localized states can still contribute to point-gap invariants (e.g., through non-Hermitian skin-effect mechanisms). Since the purification time argument (τ_P = 2/min|η_n|) only establishes the absence of extended zero modes, not the irrelevance of all in-gap localized states, the derivation of Table II is conditional on this unproven assumption. Please justify this reduction or impose the spectral-gap condition as an explicit hypothesis in the statement of the classification.
  3. [Supplemental Material, Sec. III (Topological invariants of L_t and \bar H_t)] The topological invariants are derived under the assumptions of time-translation invariance and spatial translation invariance of \bar H_t ('for convenience'). These assumptions are not satisfied by generic monitored dynamics, which the main text emphasizes contains spacetime randomness. The numerical examples either preserve translation invariance (the uniform 2+1D case) or have weak disorder (W=0.4) and do not test the regime where these symmetries are strongly broken. Consequently, the paper does not establish that the proposed invariants remain well-defined and topological for generic monitored free fermions. A stability argument under broken translation/time-translation invariance, or a clear restriction of the classification's domain, is needed.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Main text, Topology section] The citation placeholder '[ ? ]' in the sentence about nonlocality of \bar H_t appears to be an unintended remnant of the manuscript preparation; it should be replaced with a proper citation or the statement removed.
  2. [Supplemental Material, Sec. II.B] The word 'receptively' should be 'respectively' in the sentence 'the classifying spaces are C1, R1, and R5, receptively.'
  3. [Appendix C (main text)] The notation N and M for the numbers of eigenvalues with positive and negative real parts collides with the symbol N used elsewhere for the number of fermion modes; this can confuse the reader and should be changed (e.g., to N_+ and N_-).
  4. [Table I] The caption states that \bar H_t and L_t share the same symmetry but form different classifying spaces; it would be helpful to state explicitly that the gap structures are point gap (for L_t) versus real line gap (for \bar H_t), since this is the reason for the different classifying spaces.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the tenfold classification and bulk-boundary correspondence are derived from definitions and standard non-Hermitian classification, not from fitted inputs or self-citation chains.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The symmetry classes are fixed by the spacetime symmetries in Eqs. (3)-(5), and Table I follows from the standard non-Hermitian tenfold classification (Refs. [100,101]) applied to L_t and the unitarized deformation U in Appendix B, with no fitted parameters. Table II is the homotopy-group periodic table for these classifying spaces, a direct K-theory application. The bulk-boundary step is a chain of explicit deformations: L_t to U via polar decomposition (Appendix B), Hbar_t to QEQ^{-1} via Schur decomposition (Appendix C), and the identification C = (1/2)QEQ† for the steady-state correlation function. The dimension shift (C_s for L_t in d+1 dimensions versus C_{s-1} for Hbar_t in d dimensions) makes the two classifications coincide by Bott periodicity; the invariant-coincidence proofs in Supplemental Material Sec. III for classes A and AIII are internal to the paper. Numerical markers such as nu_Z, nu_Z2, and the local Chern marker are computed from the steady-state correlation function, not imposed as inputs. Self-citations such as Ref. [79] for tau_P = 2/min|eta_n| and Ref. [99] for the Supplemental Material are external or internal lemmas whose assumptions do not include the target classification, so they do not make the argument circular. I explicitly flag two correctness risks that are not circularity: (i) the assertion 'The possible nonlocality of Hbar_t is irrelevant to the topological classification [ ? ]' is load-bearing and uncited; if false, the L_t-Hbar_t bridge and the steady-state bulk-boundary correspondence could fail for strongly disordered dynamics. (ii) Supplemental Material Sec. III assumes time-translation and translation invariance for the invariant proofs, which generic monitored dynamics does not possess, and the numerical models are translation-invariant or weakly disordered and do not resolve this gap. These are omitted proofs or unsupported assumptions, not reductions of the predictions to the inputs, so the circularity score remains 0.

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

The classification uses no fitted constants; the numerical parameters (Γ, Δ, W, W') are model choices to realize specific phases, not free parameters fitted to the central claim. No new particles, forces, or entities are introduced; Lyapunov zero modes are spectral features, not new objects.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The monitored dynamics is free-fermion (Gaussian preserving), so it is fully encoded in single-particle Kraus operators.
    Used throughout; the classification applies only to noninteracting fermions. The paper notes 'Owing to the free-fermion nature, the dynamics preserves Gaussianity and is fully encoded in single-particle Kraus operators' (page 2).
  • domain assumption In purifying phases, L_t has a mobility gap at zero; for the derivation, a spectral gap is assumed because 'localized in-gap states do not affect topology generally'.
    This justifies deforming L_t to a unitary operator. It is a standard but unproven assumption in disordered topological phases.
  • ad hoc to paper The possible nonlocality of \bar H_t is irrelevant to the topological classification (stated with a broken citation '[ ? ]').
    No justification or reference is given; if false, the equality of topological classification of L_t and \bar H_t could fail.
  • domain assumption For the explicit topological invariants, \bar H is assumed translation invariant (Supplemental Sec. III).
    Allows Bloch Hamiltonian; the numerical models break translation invariance but are handled via local markers.
  • domain assumption The relation tau_P = 2/min |eta_n| is taken from prior work by the same authors (Ref [79]).
    Used to connect purifying phases to the gap of L_t. It is self-cited but independently published.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Symmetry and Topology of Monitored Quantum Dynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MC2XEOVS

@misc{pith2026241206133,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Symmetry and Topology of Monitored Quantum Dynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MC2XEOVS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.06133}
}
read the original abstract

The interplay between unitary dynamics and quantum measurements induces diverse phenomena in open quantum systems with no counterparts in closed quantum systems at equilibrium. Here, we generally classify Kraus operators and their effective non-Hermitian dynamical generators, thereby establishing the tenfold classification for symmetry and topology of monitored free fermions. Our classification elucidates the role of topology in measurement-induced phase transitions and identifies potential topological terms in the corresponding nonlinear sigma models. Furthermore, we establish the bulk-boundary correspondence in monitored quantum dynamics: nontrivial topology in spacetime manifests itself as topologically nontrivial steady states and gapless boundary states in Lyapunov spectra, such as Lyapunov zero modes and chiral edge modes, leading to the topologically protected slowdown of dynamical purification.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.06133 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Monitored dynamics of a Majorana chain generated by rep [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) (2 + 1)-dimensional quantum circuit on a lattice [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Replica Keldysh field theory of quantum-jump processes: General formalism and application to imbalanced and inefficient fermion counting

    quant-ph 2025-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A replica Keldysh field theory for general quantum-jump processes is derived; for imbalanced and inefficient 1D fermion counting it predicts no measurement-induced transition and an inefficiency scale ξ∼(1−η)^{−1/2}, ...

  2. Topology and Spectrum in Measurement-Induced Phase Transitions

    quant-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The paper establishes a monitored analogue of bulk-edge correspondence: gapped area-law phases of Majorana circuits are separated by Lyapunov edge zero modes and a parity-based topological invariant, while the critica...

  3. Noisy Monitored Quantum Circuits

    quant-ph 2025-12 accept novelty 2.0 of 10

    A review showing that in noisy monitored quantum circuits, any noise enforces area-law entanglement with characteristic q^{-1/3} scaling and noise-correlation-dependent information-protection timescales.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

136 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    M. P. Fisher, V. Khemani, A. Nahum, and S. Vijay, Random Quantum Circuits, Annu. Rev. Condens. Mat- ter Phys. 14, 335 (2023)

    2023

  2. [2]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computa- tion and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2000)

    2000

  3. [3]

    Breuer and F

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

    2007

  4. [4]

    Rivas and S

    A. Rivas and S. F. Huelga, Open Quantum Systems (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012)

    2012

  5. [5]

    Carmichael, An Open Systems Approach to Quantum Optics (Springer, Berlin, 1993)

    H. Carmichael, An Open Systems Approach to Quantum Optics (Springer, Berlin, 1993)

    1993

  6. [6]

    M. B. Plenio and P. L. Knight, The quantum-jump ap- proach to dissipative dynamics in quantum optics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 101 (1998)

    1998

  7. [7]

    A. J. Daley, Quantum trajectories and open many-body quantum systems, Adv. Phys. 63, 77 (2014)

    2014

  8. [8]

    Eisert, M

    J. Eisert, M. Friesdorf, and C. Gogolin, Quantum many- body systems out of equilibrium, Nat. Phys. 11, 124 (2015)

    2015

Show all 136 references
  1. [9]

    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 (2016)

    2016

  2. [10]

    Vasseur, A

    R. Vasseur, A. C. Potter, Y.-Z. You, and A. W. W. Lud- wig, Entanglement transitions from holographic random tensor networks, Phys. Rev. B 100, 134203 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    A. Chan, R. M. Nandkishore, M. Pretko, and G. Smith, Unitary-projective entanglement dynamics, Phys. Rev. B 99, 224307 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    Skinner, J

    B. Skinner, J. Ruhman, and A. Nahum, Measurement- Induced Phase Transitions in the Dynamics of Entan- glement, Phys. Rev. X 9, 031009 (2019)

    2019

  5. [13]

    Y. Li, X. Chen, and M. P. A. Fisher, Quantum Zeno ef- fect and the many-body entanglement transition, Phys. Rev. B 98, 205136 (2018)

    2018

  6. [14]

    Y. Li, X. Chen, and M. P. A. Fisher, Measurement- driven entanglement transition in hybrid quantum cir- cuits, Phys. Rev. B 100, 134306 (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    S. Choi, Y. Bao, X.-L. Qi, and E. Altman, Quan- tum Error Correction in Scrambling Dynamics and Measurement-Induced Phase Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 030505 (2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    M. J. Gullans and D. A. Huse, Dynamical Purification Phase Transition Induced by Quantum Measurements, Phys. Rev. X 10, 041020 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    Jian, Y.-Z

    C.-M. Jian, Y.-Z. You, R. Vasseur, and A. W. W. Lud- wig, Measurement-induced criticality in random quan- tum circuits, Phys. Rev. B 101, 104302 (2020)

    2020

  10. [18]

    Szyniszewski, A

    M. Szyniszewski, A. Romito, and H. Schomerus, En- tanglement transition from variable-strength weak mea- 6 surements, Phys. Rev. B 100, 064204 (2019)

    2019

  11. [19]

    Y. Bao, S. Choi, and E. Altman, Theory of the phase transition in random unitary circuits with measure- ments, Phys. Rev. B 101, 104301 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    Tang and W

    Q. Tang and W. Zhu, Measurement-induced phase transition: A case study in the nonintegrable model by density-matrix renormalization group calculations, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 013022 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    M. J. Gullans and D. A. Huse, Scalable Probes of Measurement-Induced Criticality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 070606 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    Zabalo, M

    A. Zabalo, M. J. Gullans, J. H. Wilson, S. Gopalakrish- nan, D. A. Huse, and J. H. Pixley, Critical properties of the measurement-induced transition in random quan- tum circuits, Phys. Rev. B 101, 060301 (2020)

    2020

  15. [23]

    Goto and I

    S. Goto and I. Danshita, Measurement-induced transi- tions of the entanglement scaling law in ultracold gases with controllable dissipation, Phys. Rev. A 102, 033316 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    Lavasani, Y

    A. Lavasani, Y. Alavirad, and M. Barkeshli, Measurement-induced topological entanglement transitions in symmetric random quantum circuits, Nat. Phys. 17, 342 (2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    Sang and T

    S. Sang and T. H. Hsieh, Measurement-protected quan- tum phases, Phys. Rev. Research 3, 023200 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    Ippoliti, M

    M. Ippoliti, M. J. Gullans, S. Gopalakrishnan, D. A. Huse, and V. Khemani, Entanglement Phase Transi- tions in Measurement-Only Dynamics, Phys. Rev. X 11, 011030 (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    Szyniszewski, A

    M. Szyniszewski, A. Romito, and H. Schomerus, Univer- sality of Entanglement Transitions from Stroboscopic to Continuous Measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 210602 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    Lunt and A

    O. Lunt and A. Pal, Measurement-induced entangle- ment transitions in many-body localized systems, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 043072 (2020)

    2020

  21. [29]

    Li and M

    Y. Li and M. P. A. Fisher, Statistical mechanics of quan- tum error correcting codes, Phys. Rev. B 103, 104306 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    Fidkowski, J

    L. Fidkowski, J. Haah, and M. B. Hastings, How Dy- namical Quantum Memories Forget, Quantum 5, 382 (2021)

    2021

  23. [31]

    Nahum, S

    A. Nahum, S. Roy, B. Skinner, and J. Ruhman, Mea- surement and Entanglement Phase Transitions in All- To-All Quantum Circuits, on Quantum Trees, and in Landau-Ginsburg Theory, PRX Quantum 2, 010352 (2021)

    2021

  24. [32]

    Ippoliti and V

    M. Ippoliti and V. Khemani, Postselection-Free Entan- glement Dynamics via Spacetime Duality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 060501 (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    Biella and M

    A. Biella and M. Schir` o, Many-Body Quantum Zeno Ef- fect and Measurement-Induced Subradiance Transition, Quantum 5, 528 (2021)

    2021

  26. [34]

    Y. Bao, S. Choi, and E. Altman, Symmetry enriched phases of quantum circuits, Ann. Phys. 435, 168618 (2021)

    2021

  27. [35]

    Lu and T

    T.-C. Lu and T. Grover, Spacetime duality between lo- calization transitions and measurement-induced transi- tions, PRX Quantum 2, 040319 (2021)

    2021

  28. [36]

    Ippoliti, T

    M. Ippoliti, T. Rakovszky, and V. Khemani, Fractal, Logarithmic, and Volume-Law Entangled Nonthermal Steady States via Spacetime Duality, Phys. Rev. X 12, 011045 (2022)

    2022

  29. [37]

    Turkeshi, A

    X. Turkeshi, A. Biella, R. Fazio, M. Dalmonte, and M. Schir´ o, Measurement-induced entanglement transi- tions in the quantum Ising chain: From infinite to zero clicks, Phys. Rev. B 103, 224210 (2021)

    2021

  30. [38]

    S.-K. Jian, C. Liu, X. Chen, B. Swingle, and P. Zhang, Measurement-Induced Phase Transition in the Moni- tored Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 140601 (2021)

    2021

  31. [39]

    Minato, K

    T. Minato, K. Sugimoto, T. Kuwahara, and K. Saito, Fate of Measurement-Induced Phase Transition in Long- Range Interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 010603 (2022)

    2022

  32. [40]

    Block, Y

    M. Block, Y. Bao, S. Choi, E. Altman, and N. Y. Yao, Measurement-Induced Transition in Long-Range Inter- acting Quantum Circuits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 010604 (2022)

    2022

  33. [41]

    Zabalo, M

    A. Zabalo, M. J. Gullans, J. H. Wilson, R. Vasseur, A. W. W. Ludwig, S. Gopalakrishnan, D. A. Huse, and J. H. Pixley, Operator Scaling Dimensions and Multi- fractality at Measurement-Induced Transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 050602 (2022)

    2022

  34. [42]

    Turkeshi, M

    X. Turkeshi, M. Dalmonte, R. Fazio, and M. Schir` o, En- tanglement transitions from stochastic resetting of non- Hermitian quasiparticles, Phys. Rev. B 105, L241114 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    Yamamoto and R

    K. Yamamoto and R. Hamazaki, Localization proper- ties in disordered quantum many-body dynamics under continuous measurement, Phys. Rev. B 107, L220201 (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    T.-C. Lu, Z. Zhang, S. Vijay, and T. H. Hsieh, Mixed- State Long-Range Order and Criticality from Measure- ment and Feedback, PRX Quantum 4, 030318 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    V. B. Bulchandani, S. L. Sondhi, and J. T. Chalker, Random-Matrix Models of Monitored Quantum Cir- cuits, J. Stat. Phys. 191, 55 (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    De Luca, C

    A. De Luca, C. Liu, A. Nahum, and T. Zhou, Universal- ity classes for purification in nonunitary quantum pro- cesses (2023), arXiv:2312.17744

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Mochizuki and R

    K. Mochizuki and R. Hamazaki, Measurement-Induced Spectral Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 010410 (2025)

    2025

  40. [48]

    Q. Yang, Y. Zuo, and D. E. Liu, Keldysh nonlinear sigma model for a free-fermion gas under continuous measurements, Phys. Rev. Research 5, 033174 (2023)

    2023

  41. [49]

    C. Noel, P. Niroula, D. Zhu, A. Risinger, L. Egan, D. Biswas, M. Cetina, A. V. Gorshkov, M. J. Gul- lans, D. A. Huse, and C. Monroe, Measurement-induced quantum phases realized in a trapped-ion quantum com- puter, Nat. Phys. 18, 760 (2022)

    2022

  42. [50]

    J. M. Koh, S.-N. Sun, M. Motta, and A. J. Minnich, Measurement-induced entanglement phase transition on a superconducting quantum processor with mid-circuit readout, Nat. Phys. 19, 1314 (2023)

    2023

  43. [51]

    Google Quantum AI and Collaborators, Measurement- induced entanglement and teleportation on a noisy quantum processor, Nature 622, 481 (2023)

    2023

  44. [52]

    X. Cao, A. Tilloy, and A. De Luca, Entanglement in a fermion chain under continuous monitoring, SciPost Phys. 7, 024 (2019)

    2019

  45. [53]

    Nahum and B

    A. Nahum and B. Skinner, Entanglement and dynam- ics of diffusion-annihilation processes with Majorana de- fects, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 023288 (2020)

    2020

  46. [54]

    X. Chen, Y. Li, M. P. A. Fisher, and A. Lucas, Emergent conformal symmetry in nonunitary random dynamics of free fermions, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 033017 (2020). 7

    2020

  47. [55]

    Alberton, M

    O. Alberton, M. Buchhold, and S. Diehl, Entanglement Transition in a Monitored Free-Fermion Chain: From Extended Criticality to Area Law, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 170602 (2021)

    2021

  48. [56]

    C.-M. Jian, B. Bauer, A. Keselman, and A. W. W. Ludwig, Criticality and entanglement in nonunitary quantum circuits and tensor networks of noninteracting fermions, Phys. Rev. B 106, 134206 (2022)

    2022

  49. [57]

    Q. Tang, X. Chen, and W. Zhu, Quantum criticality in the nonunitary dynamics of (2 + 1)-dimensional free fermions, Phys. Rev. B 103, 174303 (2021)

    2021

  50. [58]

    Buchhold, Y

    M. Buchhold, Y. Minoguchi, A. Altland, and S. Diehl, Effective Theory for the Measurement-Induced Phase Transition of Dirac Fermions, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041004 (2021)

    2021

  51. [59]

    M¨ uller, S

    T. M¨ uller, S. Diehl, and M. Buchhold, Measurement- Induced Dark State Phase Transitions in Long-Ranged Fermion Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 010605 (2022)

    2022

  52. [60]

    Coppola, E

    M. Coppola, E. Tirrito, D. Karevski, and M. Collura, Growth of entanglement entropy under local projective measurements, Phys. Rev. B 105, 094303 (2022)

    2022

  53. [61]

    Kells, D

    G. Kells, D. Meidan, and A. Romito, Topological tran- sitions in weakly monitored free fermions, SciPost Phys. 14, 031 (2023)

    2023

  54. [62]

    Fleckenstein, A

    C. Fleckenstein, A. Zorzato, D. Varjas, E. J. Bergholtz, J. H. Bardarson, and A. Tiwari, Non-Hermitian topol- ogy in monitored quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. Research 4, L032026 (2022)

    2022

  55. [63]

    Kawabata, T

    K. Kawabata, T. Numasawa, and S. Ryu, Entanglement Phase Transition Induced by the Non-Hermitian Skin Effect, Phys. Rev. X 13, 021007 (2023)

    2023

  56. [64]

    Y.-P. Wang, C. Fang, and J. Ren, Absence of measurement-induced entanglement transition due to feedback-induced skin effect, Phys. Rev. B 110, 035113 (2024)

    2024

  57. [65]

    Merritt and L

    J. Merritt and L. Fidkowski, Entanglement transitions with free fermions, Phys. Rev. B 107, 064303 (2023)

    2023

  58. [66]

    Le Gal, X

    Y. Le Gal, X. Turkeshi, and M. Schir` o, Volume-to-area law entanglement transition in a non-Hermitian free fermionic chain, SciPost Phys. 14, 138 (2023)

    2023

  59. [67]

    F. Venn, J. Behrends, and B. B´ eri, Coherent-Error Threshold for Surface Codes from Majorana Delocal- ization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 060603 (2023)

    2023

  60. [68]

    Szyniszewski, O

    M. Szyniszewski, O. Lunt, and A. Pal, Disordered mon- itored free fermions, Phys. Rev. B 108, 165126 (2023)

    2023

  61. [69]

    Behrends, F

    J. Behrends, F. Venn, and B. B´ eri, Surface codes, quan- tum circuits, and entanglement phases, Phys. Rev. Re- search 6, 013137 (2024)

    2024

  62. [70]

    C.-M. Jian, H. Shapourian, B. Bauer, and A. W. W. Ludwig, Measurement-induced entanglement tran- sitions in quantum circuits of non-interacting fermions: Born-rule versus forced measurements (2023), arXiv:2302.09094

    2023 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Swann, D

    T. Swann, D. Bernard, and A. Nahum, Spacetime pic- ture for entanglement generation in noisy fermion chains (2023), arXiv:2302.12212

    2023

  64. [72]

    M. Fava, L. Piroli, T. Swann, D. Bernard, and A. Nahum, Nonlinear Sigma Models for Monitored Dy- namics of Free Fermions, Phys. Rev. X 13, 041045 (2023)

    2023

  65. [73]

    L´ oio, A

    H. L´ oio, A. De Luca, J. De Nardis, and X. Turkeshi, Pu- rification timescales in monitored fermions, Phys. Rev. B 108, L020306 (2023)

    2023

  66. [74]

    Poboiko, P

    I. Poboiko, P. P¨ opperl, I. V. Gornyi, and A. D. Mir- lin, Theory of Free Fermions under Random Projective Measurements, Phys. Rev. X 13, 041046 (2023)

    2023

  67. [75]

    Chahine and M

    K. Chahine and M. Buchhold, Entanglement phases, localization, and multifractality of monitored free fermions in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. B 110, 054313 (2024)

    2024

  68. [76]

    Poboiko, I

    I. Poboiko, I. V. Gornyi, and A. D. Mirlin, Measurement-Induced Phase Transition for Free Fermions above One Dimension, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 110403 (2024)

    2024

  69. [77]

    Z.-C. Liu, K. Li, and Y. Xu, Dynamical Transition Due to Feedback-Induced Skin Effect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 090401 (2024)

    2024

  70. [78]

    M. Fava, L. Piroli, D. Bernard, and A. Nahum, Moni- tored fermions with conserved U (1) charge, Phys. Rev. Research 6, 043246 (2024)

    2024

  71. [79]

    Z. Xiao, T. Ohtsuki, and K. Kawabata, Universal Stochastic Equations of Monitored Quantum Dynam- ics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 140401 (2025)

    2025

  72. [80]

    P. W. Anderson, Absence of Diffusion in Certain Ran- dom Lattices, Phys. Rev. 109, 1492 (1958)

    1958

  73. [81]

    Abrahams, P

    E. Abrahams, P. W. Anderson, D. C. Licciardello, and T. V. Ramakrishnan, Scaling Theory of Localization: Absence of Quantum Diffusion in Two Dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 673 (1979)

    1979

  74. [82]

    P. A. Lee and T. V. Ramakrishnan, Disordered elec- tronic systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 57, 287 (1985)

    1985

  75. [83]

    C. W. J. Beenakker, Random-matrix theory of quantum transport, Rev. Mod. Phys. 69, 731 (1997)

    1997

  76. [84]

    Evers and A

    F. Evers and A. D. Mirlin, Anderson transitions, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1355 (2008)

    2008

  77. [85]

    R. E. Prange and S. M. Girvin, eds., The Quantum Hall Effect (Springer, New York, 1987)

    1987

  78. [86]

    Huckestein, Scaling theory of the integer quantum Hall effect, Rev

    B. Huckestein, Scaling theory of the integer quantum Hall effect, Rev. Mod. Phys. 67, 357 (1995)

    1995

  79. [87]

    Kramer, T

    B. Kramer, T. Ohtsuki, and S. Kettemann, Random network models and quantum phase transitions in two dimensions, Phys. Rep. 417, 211 (2005)

    2005

  80. [88]

    A. P. Schnyder, S. Ryu, A. Furusaki, and A. W. W. Ludwig, Classification of topological insulators and su- perconductors in three spatial dimensions, Phys. Rev. B 78, 195125 (2008)

    2008

  81. [89]

    Kitaev, Periodic table for topological insulators and superconductors, AIP Conf

    A. Kitaev, Periodic table for topological insulators and superconductors, AIP Conf. Proc. 1134, 22 (2009)

    2009

  82. [90]

    S. Ryu, A. P. Schnyder, A. Furusaki, and A. W. W. Lud- wig, Topological insulators and superconductors: ten- fold way and dimensional hierarchy, New J. Phys. 12, 065010 (2010)

    2010

  83. [91]

    M. Z. Hasan and C. L. Kane, Colloquium: Topological insulators, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 3045 (2010)

    2010

  84. [92]

    Qi and S.-C

    X.-L. Qi and S.-C. Zhang, Topological insulators and superconductors, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 1057 (2011)

    2011

  85. [93]

    C.-K. Chiu, J. C. Y. Teo, A. P. Schnyder, and S. Ryu, Classification of topological quantum matter with sym- metries, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 035005 (2016)

    2016

  86. [94]

    Bravyi, Lagrangian representation for fermionic lin- ear optics, Quantum Inf

    S. Bravyi, Lagrangian representation for fermionic lin- ear optics, Quantum Inf. Comput. 5, 216 (2005)

    2005

  87. [95]

    Jacobs and D

    K. Jacobs and D. A. Steck, A straightforward introduc- tion to continuous quantum measurement, Contemp. Phys. 47, 279 (2006)

    2006

  88. [96]

    H. M. Wiseman and G. J. Milburn, Quantum Measure- ment and Control (Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, England, 2009)

    2009

  89. [97]

    M. R. Zirnbauer, Riemannian symmetric superspaces 8 and their origin in random-matrix theory, J. Math. Phys. 37, 4986 (1996)

    1996

  90. [98]

    Altland and M

    A. Altland and M. R. Zirnbauer, Nonstandard symme- try classes in mesoscopic normal-superconducting hy- brid structures, Phys. Rev. B 55, 1142 (1997)

    1997

  91. [99]

    See the Supplemental Material for symmetry classifica- tion of monitored free fermions and numerical details on monitored free fermions in 0 + 1, 1 + 1, and 2 + 1 dimensions

  92. [100]

    Bernard and A

    D. Bernard and A. LeClair, A Classification of Non- Hermitian Random Matrices, in Statistical Field Theo- ries, edited by A. Cappelli and G. Mussardo (Springer, Dordrecht, 2002) pp. 207–214

    2002

  93. [101]

    Kawabata, K

    K. Kawabata, K. Shiozaki, M. Ueda, and M. Sato, Sym- metry and Topology in Non-Hermitian Physics, Phys. Rev. X 9, 041015 (2019)

    2019

  94. [102]

    Prodan, T

    E. Prodan, T. L. Hughes, and B. A. Bernevig, Entan- glement Spectrum of a Disordered Topological Chern Insulator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 115501 (2010)

    2010

  95. [103]

    T. Wang, Z. Pan, T. Ohtsuki, I. A. Gruzberg, and R. Shindou, Multicriticality of two-dimensional class- D disordered topological superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 104, 184201

  96. [104]

    Slevin and T

    K. Slevin and T. Ohtsuki, Critical exponent for the An- derson transition in the three-dimensional orthogonal universality class, New J. Phys. 16, 015012 (2014)

    2014

  97. [105]

    Karoubi, K-Theory: An Introduction (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1978)

    M. Karoubi, K-Theory: An Introduction (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1978)

    1978

  98. [106]

    S. Lieu, M. McGinley, and N. R. Cooper, Tenfold Way for Quadratic Lindbladians, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 040401 (2020)

    2020

  99. [107]

    Altland, M

    A. Altland, M. Fleischhauer, and S. Diehl, Symmetry Classes of Open Fermionic Quantum Matter, Phys. Rev. X 11, 021037 (2021)

    2021

  100. [108]

    L. S´ a, P. Ribeiro, and T. Prosen, Symmetry Classifi- cation of Many-Body Lindbladians: Tenfold Way and Beyond, Phys. Rev. X 13, 031019 (2023)

    2023

  101. [109]

    Kawabata, A

    K. Kawabata, A. Kulkarni, J. Li, T. Numasawa, and S. Ryu, Symmetry of Open Quantum Systems: Classi- fication of Dissipative Quantum Chaos, PRX Quantum 4, 030328 (2023)

    2023

  102. [110]

    Nakagawa and M

    M. Nakagawa and M. Ueda, Topology of Discrete Quan- tum Feedback Control, Phys. Rev. X 15, 021016 (2025)

    2025

  103. [111]

    F. J. Dyson, The Dynamics of a Disordered Linear Chain, Phys. Rev. 92, 1331 (1953)

    1953

  104. [112]

    P. W. Brouwer, C. Mudry, B. D. Simons, and A. Altland, Delocalization in Coupled One-Dimensional Chains, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 862 (1998)

    1998

  105. [113]

    Mondragon-Shem, T

    I. Mondragon-Shem, T. L. Hughes, J. Song, and E. Pro- dan, Topological Criticality in the Chiral-Symmetric AIII Class at Strong Disorder, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 046802 (2014)

    2014

  106. [114]

    Altland, D

    A. Altland, D. Bagrets, L. Fritz, A. Kamenev, and H. Schmiedt, Quantum Criticality of Quasi-One- Dimensional Topological Anderson Insulators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 206602 (2014)

    2014

  107. [115]

    Hatano and D

    N. Hatano and D. R. Nelson, Localization Transitions in Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 570 (1996)

    1996

  108. [116]

    Hatano and D

    N. Hatano and D. R. Nelson, Vortex pinning and non- Hermitian quantum mechanics, Phys. Rev. B 56, 8651 (1997)

    1997

  109. [117]

    Furstenberg and H

    H. Furstenberg and H. Kesten, Products of Random Ma- trices, Ann. Math. Statist. 31, 457 (1960)

    1960

  110. [118]

    J. D. Hannukainen, M. F. Mart ´ ınez, J. H. Bardarson, and T. K. Kvorning, Local Topological Markers in Odd Spatial Dimensions and Their Application to Amor- phous Topological Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 277601 (2022)

    2022

  111. [119]

    A. Y. Kitaev, Unpaired Majorana fermions in quantum wires, Phys.-Usp. 44, 131 (2001)

    2001

  112. [120]

    Hikami, Three-loop β-functions of non-linear σ mod- els on symmetric spaces, Phys

    S. Hikami, Three-loop β-functions of non-linear σ mod- els on symmetric spaces, Phys. Lett. B 98, 208 (1981)

    1981

  113. [121]

    Wegner, Four-loop-order β-function of nonlinear σ- models in symmetric spaces, Nucl

    F. Wegner, Four-loop-order β-function of nonlinear σ- models in symmetric spaces, Nucl. Phys. B 316, 663 (1989)

    1989

  114. [122]

    T. Wang, Z. Pan, K. Slevin, and T. Ohtsuki, Critical be- havior of the Anderson transition in higher-dimensional Bogoliubov–de Gennes symmetry classes, Phys. Rev. B 108, 144208 (2023)

    2023

  115. [123]

    Xiao et al

    Z. Xiao et al. (in preparation)

  116. [124]

    P. G. Harper, Single Band Motion of Conduction Elec- trons in a Uniform Magnetic Field, Proc. Phys. Soc. A 68, 874 (1955)

    1955

  117. [125]

    H. Pan, H. Shapourian, and C.-M. Jian, Topologi- cal Modes in Monitored Quantum Dynamics (2024), arXiv:2411.04191

    2024

  118. [126]

    T. E. Lee, Anomalous Edge State in a Non-Hermitian Lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 133903 (2016)

    2016

  119. [127]

    Yao and Z

    S. Yao and Z. Wang, Edge States and Topological In- variants of Non-Hermitian Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 086803 (2018)

    2018

  120. [128]

    F. K. Kunst, E. Edvardsson, J. C. Budich, and E. J. Bergholtz, Biorthogonal Bulk-Boundary Corre- spondence in Non-Hermitian Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 026808 (2018)

    2018

  121. [129]

    Yokomizo and S

    K. Yokomizo and S. Murakami, Non-Bloch Band The- ory of Non-Hermitian Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 066404 (2019)

    2019

  122. [130]

    Zhang, Z

    K. Zhang, Z. Yang, and C. Fang, Correspondence be- tween Winding Numbers and Skin Modes in Non- Hermitian Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 126402 (2020)

    2020

  123. [131]

    Okuma, K

    N. Okuma, K. Kawabata, K. Shiozaki, and M. Sato, Topological Origin of Non-Hermitian Skin Effects, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 086801 (2020)

    2020

  124. [132]

    G. Lee, T. Jin, Y.-X. Wang, A. McDonald, and A. Clerk, Entanglement Phase Transition Due to Reciprocity Breaking without Measurement or Postselection, PRX Quantum 5, 010313 (2024)

    2024

  125. [133]

    Oshima, K

    H. Oshima, K. Mochizuki, R. Hamazaki, and Y. Fuji, Topology and Spectrum in Measurement-Induced Phase Transitions (2024), arXiv:2412.11097

    2024 arXiv

  126. [134]

    Z. Gong, Y. Ashida, K. Kawabata, K. Takasan, S. Hi- gashikawa, and M. Ueda, Topological Phases of Non- Hermitian Systems, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031079 (2018). 9 END MA TTER Appendix A: F ree fermions under measurement We considerN fermions with creation and annihilation operators c†...

    2018

  127. [135]

    Symmetry and Topology of Monitored Quantum Dynamics

    Thus, ( |ϕ0⟩, |ϕ∆t⟩, · · ·, |ϕt⟩) is a zero mode of Lt ex- tended along the temporal direction. Appendix B: Classifying space of L As discussed in the main text, the dynamics in puri- fying phases requires its non-Hermitian dynamical gen- erator Lt to exhibit a mobility gap at...

    2025

  128. [136]

    We postselect measurement outcomes as follows

    The corresponding Kraus operators are Kd± = (2 cosh Γ)−1e±Γ(d†d−1/2) andKf ± = (2 cosh Γ)−1e±Γ(f †f −1/2), respectively. We postselect measurement outcomes as follows. If the hopping on the b ond is trr ′ =t, we select Kd+ and Kf −; if the hopping on the bond is trr ′ = −t, we...

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.