Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 56 references

Dynamical Quantum Multigraphs

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Removing vertex labels from quantum graphs produces thermodynamic phase transitions — diverging specific heat, critical slowing, and a largest-connected-component order parameter — that are entirely absent from the labeled versions of the s

desk verdict Genuinely useful Hilbert-space construction and clean exact labeled thermodynamics, but the unlabeled 'proper phase transition' claim is not yet established — beta_c likely diverges as N ln N, so the MC peaks are consistent with a zero-temperature crossover. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.08296 v1 pith:RQ3CTC34 submitted 2025-09-10 math-ph hep-thmath.MP

Kassahun H. Betre , Nathan Lewis This is my paper · ORCID
classification math-phhep-thmath.MP MSC 05C8082B2082B26
keywords quantummultigraphsunlabeledgraphsthermodynamicphasetransitionsErdős–RényimodelautomorphismgroupsPólyaenumerationIsingbackground-independentgravity
topics Quantum Gravity
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 builds a Hilbert-space quantization of finite multigraphs — basis states are the graphs themselves, with up to D parallel edges per vertex pair — and does it twice: once with distinguishable (labeled) vertices and once with indistinguishable (unlabeled) vertices, where unlabeled states are the one-dimensional symmetric-group orbits of the labeled ones. Its central claim is that this labeling choice changes the thermodynamics altogether. The free theory on labeled quantum graphs is exactly the Erdős–Rényi–Gilbert G(N,p) random graph model: analytic free energy, no phase transition. On unlabeled graphs the same free Hamiltonian, and also a ferromagnetic Ising-type edge interaction, produce what look like proper thermodynamic phase transitions — diverging specific heat, diverging susceptibility of the largest-connected-component fraction, and critical slowing down — while the labeled versions show nothing. The paper identifies the mechanism: unlabeled ensembles weight every labeled graph by the inverse size of its automorphism group, and the transition occurs where the excited-state graph loses its symmetry; if this survives the thermodynamic limit, treating vertices as indistinguishable is a physical choice, not a bookkeeping one, with direct relevance to background-independent quantum gravity.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing construction is the (anti)symmetrizer projection of the labeled quantum multigraph Hilbert space onto the one-dimensional irreducible representations of the symmetric group S_N: states are built in the occupation graph basis |G_0, ..., G_{D−1}⟩, a weak ordered partition of the complete graph's edge set into D single-particle edge levels, and unlabeled states are the projected orbits. This makes the unlabeled partition function a Pólya–Redfield enumeration Z^u_N = e^{−βJ E_1 N(N−1)/2} Z_{S_N^{(2)}}(1 + e^{βJΔE}) with the cycle index of the pair group, and it produces the Metropolis acceptance ratio for unlabeled sampling that carries the automorphism-group factor |Γ(G')|/|Γ(G

What would settle it

Perform a finite-size scaling study of the specific-heat peak for larger N and compute the mean-field solution the paper identifies as the large-N limit. If the peak position β_c(N) drifts to infinity as N grows, or the peak height saturates instead of growing as a power of N, the transition is not a finite-temperature thermodynamic one. The unlabeled partition function can also be evaluated exactly from the pair-group cycle index at moderate N, giving a direct check of where non-analyticity could appear.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Stated on the paper's own terms: quantum graph ensembles inherit their thermodynamics from the way vertices are treated. For labeled quantum simple graphs with the free Hamiltonian, the canonical ensemble factorizes over the N(N−1)/2 edges and coincides exactly with the Erdős–Rényi–Gilbert G(N,p) model, whose free energy is analytic at every finite β; all its sharp percolation and connectivity thresholds are structural, not thermodynamic. Projecting onto the unlabeled Hilbert space via the (anti)symmetrizer changes the measure: each labeled graph contributes with weight |Γ(G)|/N!, so isomorphism classes with small automorphism groups dominate sharply once the excited-state graph G_1 becomes

Load-bearing premise

That the diverging specific heat and diverging autocorrelation time seen for up to 24 vertices grow into a true singularity in the infinite-N limit; the paper itself leaves open whether the critical inverse temperature is finite or infinite, so the observed peaks could turn out to be a zero-temperature or crossover phenomenon rather than a finite-temperature phase transition.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The free labeled quantum graph ensemble is exactly the Erdős–Rényi–Gilbert G(N,p) model with p = 1/(1+e^{−βJΔE}); its free energy is analytic at every finite temperature, so no thermodynamic phase transition exists in the labeled free theory.
  • Unlabeled free and unlabeled ferromagnetic Ising quantum graphs exhibit the signatures of proper thermodynamic phase transitions: specific heat and susceptibility of the largest-component fraction s_1 diverge as N grows, with critical slowing of the Monte Carlo autocorrelation time.
  • The order parameter for the unlabeled transition is s_1, the fraction of vertices in the largest connected component of the excited-state graph G_1 — a genuine thermodynamic order parameter in the unlabeled case, unlike the merely structural transition in G(N,p).
  • The graph Ising model is equivalent to an Ising model on the line graph of the complete graph, approaching an infinite-range (Curie–Weiss) ferromagnet at large N; its unlabeled version shows a transition while the labeled version does not.
  • The unlabeled antiferromagnet shows no phase transition, and its thermodynamics converges with the labeled system — consistent with the mechanism that transitions appear only where the support of the Gibbs measure crosses between graphs with non-trivial and trivial automorphism groups.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The identified mechanism — a sharp change wherever the Gibbs measure shifts between graph classes with non-trivial and trivial automorphism groups — suggests a design principle for models of emergent spacetime: any Hamiltonian whose unique ground state is the complete graph should produce a connectivity-ordering transition in an unlabeled ensemble and none in a labeled one. The paper only speculat
  • The unresolved question of whether the critical inverse temperature is finite or infinite decides whether the transition is a finite-temperature thermodynamic one or a zero-temperature (quantum) phenomenon; a mean-field calculation of the type the paper lists as future work would also fix the critical exponents and test the paper's speculation that all unlabeled models with the same ground state s
  • Extending to D ≥ 2 multigraph layers, the occupation graph basis generalizes naturally to weak ordered partitions into D blocks, so one could test whether successive edge-level condensations produce a cascade of transitions — a testable extension the paper names as future work.
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 / 3 minor

Summary. The paper constructs Hilbert spaces for labeled and unlabeled finite quantum multigraphs, develops occupation-number and ladder-operator tools, and then studies canonical-ensemble thermodynamics of the D=2 (simple-graph) sector for two Hamiltonians: the free Hamiltonian and an Ising-type interaction on edges. The labeled free partition function is computed exactly and shown to reproduce the Erdős–Rényi–Gilbert G(N,p) model with p = 1/(1+e^{-βJΔE}); the unlabeled free partition function is expressed exactly via Pólya’s cycle index. Monte Carlo simulations for N ≤ 24 are used to argue that the unlabeled free and unlabeled ferromagnetic Ising systems exhibit proper thermodynamic phase transitions—marked by diverging specific heat, susceptibility, and autocorrelation time—whereas the labeled systems do not, and the antiferromagnetic system does not. The central claim is that removing vertex labels changes the thermodynamics qualitatively.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, the paper makes a useful conceptual point for background-independent quantum gravity and for statistical mechanics of random graphs: the labeled/unlabeled distinction can change thermodynamic behavior, not just enumeration weights. The paper has clear strengths: the free labeled partition function derivation (Eqs. 76–81) is exact and clean; the unlabeled free partition function via Pólya’s cycle index (Eq. 85) is exact; the Metropolis acceptance rule for unlabeled graphs is correctly derived from detailed balance and validated against exact enumeration for N ≤ 10 (Appendix A); and no fitted parameters enter the central derivations. The main weakness is that the headline claim of proper thermodynamic phase transitions rests on Monte Carlo data for N ≤ 24 with no finite-size scaling, and the paper itself leaves open whether the critical inverse temperature is finite or infinite.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4A, Fig. 8, and §5] The abstract’s claim of “proper thermodynamic phase transitions near the critical temperature” is not supported by the evidence presented. The peaks in c and χ_{s1} in Fig. 8 grow with N, but no finite-size scaling is given, and §5 explicitly states that the transition is “at possibly infinite inverse temperature (at zero temperature)” and defers the finite/infinite β_c question to future work. The normalization J = 2/(N−1) makes this concern quantitative: the edge Boltzmann variable is x = βJΔE = 2βΔE/(N−1), so a fixed physical x means β ∼ N. The transition is tied to G1 becoming connected / acquiring a trivial automorphism group; for G1 with edge probability p1 = 1/(1+e^x), the random-graph threshold p1 ∼ ln N/N gives x ∼ ln N and hence β_c(N) ∼ (N/2) ln N / ΔE → ∞. The observed peaks are therefore fully compatible with a zero-temperature or crossover phenomenon rather than a finite-te
  2. [§4B1 and Eq. (91)] The same load-bearing issue applies to the ferromagnetic Ising claim. The paper states in §4B1 that “it is not clear whether the critical temperature β_c goes to infinity or converges to a finite value,” yet Fig. 12 is interpreted as evidence of “an actual second-order phase transition.” With J = 1/\binom{N-1}{2}, the line-graph Curie–Weiss coupling in Eq. (91) is J_ij ∼ J(E0+E1)L_ij, and each spin sees O(N) neighbors of strength O(J N) = O(1/N); the standard Curie–Weiss critical temperature then scales as β_c ∼ N → ∞. Thus, without finite-size scaling or an analytic treatment, the growing peaks in c, χ_m, and χ_{s1} for N ≤ 24 cannot distinguish a genuine finite-temperature transition from an increasingly sharp zero-temperature crossover. The paper’s own admission in §5 that this is open undermines the strength of the claim made in the abstract.
  3. [§4A, order parameter and thermodynamic status] The paper uses the fraction of vertices in the largest connected component, s1, as the order parameter, and cites divergence of its MC susceptibility as evidence of a thermodynamic phase transition. But s1 is a nonlocal percolation observable, and for labeled G(N,p) the same observable has structural thresholds (p ∼ 1/N and p ∼ ln N/N) with an analytic free energy; the paper correctly notes this for the labeled case. For the unlabeled case, no analogous analytic free-energy non-analyticity is established. Diverging MC fluctuations of a structural observable at finite N do not by themselves prove a thermodynamic transition in the N → ∞ limit. The authors should either derive a non-analyticity in the free energy (e.g., via the Pólya expression Eq. (85)) or perform a scaling collapse that distinguishes a genuine transition from a finite-N crossover.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Eq. (80)] The displayed result for ⟨I^0_g⟩ omits the factor J in the Boltzmann weight: the probability should be 1/(1+e^{-βJΔE})^{|E_g|}, consistent with Eq. (81). As written, 1/(e^{-βΔE}+1)^{|E_g|} is dimensionally inconsistent with Eq. (76)–(78).
  2. [Eq. (11)] The action of L_- is written as “0, n=1”; the intended condition is almost certainly “0, n=0”. As written, L_-|0⟩ is undefined.
  3. [Lemma 3.3 proof] The proof of idempotence ends with “= |G⟩”, but with the normalization used in Eq. (49), SS|G⟩ = S|G⟩, not |G⟩. The final equality should be S|G⟩ (and correspondingly A|G⟩ for AA). The current text would imply S acts as the identity on labeled states, which contradicts the preceding discussion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the central derivations are self-contained, with no fitted input renamed as a prediction and no load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

Circularity pass: the load-bearing steps are derived from explicit, self-contained constructions rather than being equivalent to their inputs. The labeled free partition function is computed directly by factorization in Eq. (76), and the free energy, internal energy, and specific heat in Eqs. (77)-(79) follow analytically; the identification with the Erdős–Rényi–Gilbert G(N,p) model in Eqs. (80)-(81) is a consequence of that factorization, not an input. The unlabeled partition function in Eqs. (82)-(85) follows from Pólya enumeration, and the Monte Carlo acceptance probability in Eq. (72) is derived from detailed balance with the exact automorphism-weight factor; Appendix A validates the sampling against exact enumeration for small N. The claimed unlabeled phase transition is therefore a numerical observation supported by direct simulation, not a parameter fitted to the quantity being predicted. There are no self-citations by the present authors: the cited Quantum Graphity work [27,28] is prior independent work, and the consistency reference to Evnin–Krioukov [12,13] is not load-bearing. The paper's own limitation statements—Section 4B1 noting that 'it is not clear whether the critical temperature β_c goes to infinity or converges to a finite value' and Section 5 saying the transition occurs 'at possibly infinite inverse temperature (at zero temperature)'—are extrapolation/correctness concerns about whether finite-size peaks survive in the thermodynamic limit, not circularity, because the finite-N results are not constructed to equal the claimed thermodynamic-limit conclusion. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and no circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on a quantization prescription (tensor-product edge Hilbert spaces), a choice of what 'unlabeled' means (S_N projection), and a sampling ergodicity assumption. No new particles, forces, or fields are introduced. The only hand-chosen scales are J and the one-particle energies E0, E1.

free parameters (2)
  • J scaling factor = 2/(N-1) for free theory; 1/C(N-1,2) for Ising theory
    Hand-chosen N-dependent coupling to make internal energy extensive. The existence and location of the unlabeled phase transition may depend on this scaling, so it is a free modeling choice.
  • one-particle energy levels E0, E1 = E0=0, E1=1 in the simulations
    Toy-model energy levels. The transition temperature is set by Delta E = E1 - E0, but no data are fitted; these are inputs.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The edge Hilbert spaces are independent tensor factors and basis kets correspond one-to-one to multigraphs.
    Section 2B-C. This is the quantization prescription inherited from Quantum Graphity and is the foundation of the Hilbert space construction.
  • domain assumption The physical Hilbert space of unlabeled quantum graphs is obtained by projecting onto 1D irreducible representations (trivial and sign) of the symmetric group S_N.
    Section 3, Eqs. (47)-(49). This is the definition of 'unlabeled' used throughout; alternative definitions (e.g., a quotient set without quantum superposition) would change the thermodynamics.
  • domain assumption The edge-flip Metropolis chain with acceptance ratio |Gamma(G')|/|Gamma(G)| is ergodic and converges to the unlabeled Boltzmann distribution.
    Section 4, Eqs. (72)-(74). The numerical phase-transition claims depend on this sampling being unbiased; validated only for N=7-10 against exact enumeration in Appendix A.
  • standard math Polya's cycle index formula for D(N,m) and the pair group action is valid.
    Eqs. (84)-(85). Standard enumeration result used for the exact unlabeled free partition function.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamical Quantum Multigraphs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RQ3CTC34

@misc{pith2026250908296,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamical Quantum Multigraphs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RQ3CTC34}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.08296}
}
abstract

Motivated by applications in background-independent quantum gravity, we discuss the quantization of labeled and unlabeled finite multigraphs with a maximum edge count. We provide a unified way to represent quantum multigraphs with labeled or unlabeled vertices, which enables the study of quantum multigraphs as dynamical microscopic degrees of freedom and not just as representations of relations among quantum states of particles. The quantum multigraphs represent a quantum mechanical treatment of the relations themselves and give rise to Hilbert space realizations of relations. After defining the Hilbert space, we focus on quantum simple graphs and explore the thermodynamics resulting from two simple models, a free Hamiltonian and an Ising-type Hamiltonian (with interactions among nearest-neighbor edges). We show that removing the distinction among vertices by considering unlabeled vertices gives rise to a qualitatively different thermodynamics. We find that the free theory of labeled quantum simple graphs is the Erd\H{o}s--R\'enyi--Gilbert $G(N,p)$ model of random graphs. This model has analytic free energy and hence no thermodynamic phase transition. On the other hand, the unlabeled quantum graphs give rise to proper thermodynamic phase transitions in both the free and the ferromagnetic Ising models, characterized by divergence in the specific heat and critical slowing near the critical temperature. The thermodynamic phase transition has an order parameter given as the fraction of vertices in the largest connected component. Although this is similar to the phase transition in the $G(N,p)$ model, in this case it represents the actual thermodynamic phase transition.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.08296 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. A directed multigraph, digraph, and simple graph together with their adjacency matrices. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (Left) A diagrammatic representation of a quantum digraph with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (Left) A diagrammatic representation of a quantum multigraph with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (12 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. A diagrammatic representation of the unlabeled quantum multigraph given in the occupation graph basis as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. A labeled graph [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (Left) The edge [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Graphs of the autocorrelation time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Graphs of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Ground states of the graph Ising model for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. The complete graph [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Plots of autocorrelation times for the unlabeled (left) and labeled (right) ferromagnetic Ising graph systems. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. (Left column) Graphs of the internal energy per vertex ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. (Left column) Graphs of the internal energy per vertex ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Graphs of the autocorrelation time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Graphs of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_15.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The free labeled quantum graph system effectively becomes the Erd˝ os–R´ enyi–Gilbert random graph model; it has no thermodynamic phase transitions

    work page

  2. [2]

    Modern Graph Theory

    LABELED QUANTUM MUL TIGRAPHS The goal of this section is to generally describe quantum versions of finite multigraphs withNvertices where the maximum number of edges between any two vertices is fixed atD. The resulting space is a Hilbert space whose basis vectors can be put into a one-to-one correspondence with the set of multigraphs onNnodes and maximum ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    distinguishable

    UNLABELED QUANTUM MUL TIGRAPHS In this section we construct the Hilbert space of unlabeled quantum multigraphs withNvertices. In many com- binatorial problems we are not interested in making a distinction between two isomorphic graphs, i.e., if the only distinction between two graphs is in the labeling of their vertices and not in the underlying adjacency...

    work page

  4. [4]

    DYNAMICAL QUANTUM GRAPHS We now introduce a general dynamics on quantum multigraphs. After formulating a general Hamiltonian that is diagonal in the occupation graph basis, we focus specifically on quantum graphs (i.e.,D= 2) and study the thermodynamics of two simple Hamiltonians. The first is the non-interacting or free Hamiltonian (H 0) and the second i...

    work page

  5. [5]

    The Ising model of the labeled quantum graphs does not have thermodynamic phase transitions

    work page

  6. [6]

    This phase transition is associated with the emergence of a connected component in the excited state that includes almost all vertices

    The unlabeled quantum graphs, both the free system and the ferromagnetic Ising system, appear to have proper thermodynamic phase transitions marked by diverging specific heat and critical slowing down near the phase transition. This phase transition is associated with the emergence of a connected component in the excited state that includes almost all vertices

    work page

  7. [7]

    graph energy

    The unlabeled Ising antiferromagnet has no phase transition. In addition, the labeled and unlabeled antiferro- magnets have converging thermodynamic functions. To introduce dynamics to quantum multigraphs, first consider the case where the one-particle Hilbert spaceH= Span{|0⟩. . . ,|D−1⟩}is spanned by eigenvectors of some one-particle HamiltonianH, withH...

    work page

  8. [8]

    Ferromagnetic system Similarly to the infinite-range Ising model, the unlabeled graph ferromagnetic system has a sharp transition marked by critical slowing, divergence of the specific heat per vertexc, and divergence of susceptibilitiesχ S1 and χm ≡β N 2 ⟨m2⟩ − ⟨m⟩2 (see Fig.12). This is strongly suggestive of an actual second-order phase transition in t...

    work page

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    There is no evidence of a phase transition in both the unlabeled and labeled antiferromagnetic Ising graph systems

    Antiferromagnetic system Fig.13 shows the MC simulation results for unlabeled and labeled antiferromagnetic graph systems atE 0 = +0.5, E1 = 1.0. There is no evidence of a phase transition in both the unlabeled and labeled antiferromagnetic Ising graph systems. AsNincreases, t...

  2. [10]

    SUMMAR Y AND FUTURE WORK We extended the notion of quantum labeled graphs to labeled and unlabeled quantum multigraphs. The Hilbert space associated with the labeled finite multigraphs for a fixed number of verticesNand dimensionDof the one- particle Hilbert space has basis ke...

  3. [11]

    J. C. Baez. An introduction to spin foam models of quantum gravity and BF theory. InGeometry and Quantum Physics, volume 543 ofLecture Notes in Physics, pages 25–93. Springer, Berlin, 2000

    2000

  4. [12]

    Quantum automorphism groups of finite graphs.Proc

    Julien Bichon. Quantum automorphism groups of finite graphs.Proc. Am. Math. Soc., 131(3):665–673, 2003

    2003

  5. [13]

    Academic Press, London, 1985

    B´ ela Bollob´ as.Random Graphs. Academic Press, London, 1985

    1985

  6. [14]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 1998

    B´ ela Bollob´ as.Modern graph theory, volume 184. Springer Science & Business Media, 1998

    1998

  7. [15]

    Random graphs, volume 73 of.Cambridge studies in advanced mathematics, 2001

    B´ ela Bollob´ as. Random graphs, volume 73 of.Cambridge studies in advanced mathematics, 2001

    2001

  8. [16]

    The phase transition in the erdos-r´ enyi random graph process.Erd¨ os centennial, 25:59–110, 2013

    B´ ela Bollob´ as and Oliver Riordan. The phase transition in the erdos-r´ enyi random graph process.Erd¨ os centennial, 25:59–110, 2013

    2013

  9. [17]

    Oriented matroids—combinatorial structures underlying loop quantum gravity

    Johannes Brunnemann and David Rideout. Oriented matroids—combinatorial structures underlying loop quantum gravity. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 27(20):205008, 2010

    2010

  10. [18]

    Zero-error communication via quantum channels, noncommutative graphs, and a quantum lov´ asz number.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 59(2):1164–1174, 2012

    Runyao Duan, Simone Severini, and Andreas Winter. Zero-error communication via quantum channels, noncommutative graphs, and a quantum lov´ asz number.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 59(2):1164–1174, 2012

    2012

  11. [19]

    Polynomial-time approximation algorithms for the antifer- romagnetic ising model on line graphs.Combinatorics, Probability and Computing, 30(6):905–921, 2021

    Martin Dyer, Marc Heinrich, Mark Jerrum, and Haiko M¨ uller. Polynomial-time approximation algorithms for the antifer- romagnetic ising model on line graphs.Combinatorics, Probability and Computing, 30(6):905–921, 2021

    2021

  12. [20]

    Erd˝ os and A

    P. Erd˝ os and A. R´ enyi. On random graphs i.Publicationes Mathematicae Debrecen, 6:290–297, 1959

    1959

  13. [21]

    Erd˝ os and A

    P. Erd˝ os and A. R´ enyi. Asymmetric graphs.Acta Mathematica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 14(3-4):295–315, 1963

    1963

  14. [22]

    Ensemble inequivalence and phase transitions in unlabeled networks, 2024

    Oleg Evnin and Dmitri Krioukov. Ensemble inequivalence and phase transitions in unlabeled networks, 2024

    2024

  15. [23]

    Ensemble inequivalence and phase transitions in unlabeled networks.Phys

    Oleg Evnin and Dmitri Krioukov. Ensemble inequivalence and phase transitions in unlabeled networks.Phys. Rev. Lett., 134:207401, 2025

    2025

  16. [24]

    Feynman.Statistical Mechanics: A Set Of Lectures

    R.P. Feynman.Statistical Mechanics: A Set Of Lectures. Advanced Books Classics. Avalon Publishing, 1998

    1998

  17. [25]

    Fienberg

    Stephen E. Fienberg. A brief history of statistical models for network analysis and open challenges.Journal of Computa- tional and Graphical Statistics, 21(4):825–839, 2012

    2012

  18. [26]

    Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 2018

    Sacha Friedli and Yvan Velenik.Statistical Mechanics of Lattice Systems: A Concrete Mathematical Introduction. Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 2018

    2018

  19. [27]

    E. N. Gilbert. Random Graphs.The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 30(4):1141 – 1144, 1959

    1959

  20. [28]

    Quantum symmetry in multigraphs (part i).arXiv e-prints, pages arXiv–2302, 2023

    Debashish Goswami and Sk Asfaq Hossain. Quantum symmetry in multigraphs (part i).arXiv e-prints, pages arXiv–2302, 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    Quantum symmetry in multigraphs (part ii).Infinite Dimensional Analysis, Quantum Probability and Related Topics, 27:2440012, 2024

    Debashish Goswami and Sk Asfaq Hossain. Quantum symmetry in multigraphs (part ii).Infinite Dimensional Analysis, Quantum Probability and Related Topics, 27:2440012, 2024

    2024

  22. [30]

    Addison-Wesley series in mathematics

    Frank Harary.Graph Theory. Addison-Wesley series in mathematics. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1969

    1969

  23. [31]

    Elsevier, 2014

    Frank Harary and Edgar M Palmer.Graphical enumeration. Elsevier, 2014

    2014

  24. [32]

    Simplicial quantum gravity.arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.00226, 2022

    James B Hartle. Simplicial quantum gravity.arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.00226, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  25. [33]

    M. Hein, W. D¨ ur, J. Eisert, R. Raussendorf, M. Van den Nest, and H. J. Briegel. Entanglement in graph states and its applications, 2006

    2006

  26. [34]

    M. Hein, J. Eisert, and H. J. Briegel. Multiparty entanglement in graph states.Phys. Rev. A, 69:062311, 2004

    2004

  27. [35]

    John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2nd edition, 1987

    Kerson Huang.Statistical Mechanics. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2nd edition, 1987

    1987

  28. [36]

    Uniform sampling modulo a group of symmetries using markov chain simulation

    Mark Jerrum. Uniform sampling modulo a group of symmetries using markov chain simulation. Technical Report ECS- LFCS-93-272, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, 1993

    1993

  29. [37]

    Quantum graphity: a model of emergent locality.Physical Review D, 77(10):104029, 2008

    Tomasz Konopka, Fotini Markopoulou, and Simone Severini. Quantum graphity: a model of emergent locality.Physical Review D, 77(10):104029, 2008

    2008

  30. [38]

    Quantum graphity.arXiv preprint hep-th/0611197, 2006

    Tomasz Konopka, Fotini Markopoulou, and Lee Smolin. Quantum graphity.arXiv preprint hep-th/0611197, 2006

    2006 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Quantum graphs: an introduction and a brief survey.arXiv preprint arXiv:0802.3442, 2008

    Peter Kuchment. Quantum graphs: an introduction and a brief survey.arXiv preprint arXiv:0802.3442, 2008

    2008 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Emergence of gravity from interacting simplices.International Journal of Modern Physics A, 24(23):4271– 4286, 2009

    Sung-Sik Lee. Emergence of gravity from interacting simplices.International Journal of Modern Physics A, 24(23):4271– 4286, 2009

    2009

  33. [41]

    Exactly solved dynamics for an infinite-range spin system.Phys

    Edoardo Milotti. Exactly solved dynamics for an infinite-range spin system.Phys. Rev. E, 63:026116, Jan 2001

    2001

  34. [42]

    Exactly solved dynamics for an infinite-range spin system

    Edoardo Milotti. Exactly solved dynamics for an infinite-range spin system. ii. antiferromagnetic interactions.Phys. Rev. E, 65:027102, Jan 2002

    2002

  35. [43]

    A compositional approach to quantum functions.Journal of Mathematical Physics, 59(8), 2018

    Benjamin Musto, David Reutter, and Dominic Verdon. A compositional approach to quantum functions.Journal of Mathematical Physics, 59(8), 2018

    2018

  36. [44]

    Oxford University Press, 02 1999

    M E J Newman and G T Barkema.Monte Carlo Methods in Statistical Physics. Oxford University Press, 02 1999

    1999

  37. [45]

    Markov chains on orbits of permutation groups.arXiv preprint arXiv:1408.2052, 2014

    Mathias Niepert. Markov chains on orbits of permutation groups.arXiv preprint arXiv:1408.2052, 2014

    arXiv

  38. [46]

    Oriented matroid theory and loop quantum gravity in (2+ 2) and eight dimensions.Revista mexicana de f ´ ısica, 57(5):400–405, 2011

    Juan A Nieto. Oriented matroid theory and loop quantum gravity in (2+ 2) and eight dimensions.Revista mexicana de f ´ ısica, 57(5):400–405, 2011

    2011

  39. [47]

    Crystal statistics

    Lars Onsager. Crystal statistics. i. a two-dimensional model with an order-disorder transition.Phys. Rev., 65:117–149, Feb 1944

    1944

  40. [48]

    Entangled graphs: Bipartite entanglement in multiqubit systems.Physical Review A, 67(1):012322, 2003

    Martin Plesch and Vladim ´ ır Buˇ zek. Entangled graphs: Bipartite entanglement in multiqubit systems.Physical Review A, 67(1):012322, 2003. 32

    2003

  41. [49]

    R. Qu, J. Wang, Z.-S. Li, and Y.-R. Bao. Encoding hypergraphs into quantum states.Phys. Rev. A, 87:022311, 2013

    2013

  42. [50]

    Rossi, M

    M. Rossi, M. Huber, D. Bruß, and C. Macchiavello. Quantum hypergraph states.New J. Phys., 15:113022, 2013

    2013

  43. [51]

    Rovelli and L

    C. Rovelli and L. Smolin. Spin networks and quantum gravity.Phys. Rev. D, 52:5743–5759, 1995

    1995

  44. [52]

    The infinite range ising model, landau theory and critical exponents

    Gordon Semenoff. The infinite range ising model, landau theory and critical exponents. Lecture Notes. Accessed: September 11, 2025

    2025

  45. [53]

    Streater and A.S

    R.F. Streater and A.S. Wightman.PCT, Spin and Statistics, and All that. Princeton landmarks in mathematics and physics. Princeton University Press, 2000

    2000

  46. [54]

    Quantum symmetry groups of finite spaces.Commun

    Shuzhou Wang. Quantum symmetry groups of finite spaces.Commun. Math. Phys., 195:195–211, 1998

    1998

  47. [55]

    Testing correlation of unlabeled random graphs.The Annals of Applied Probability, 33(4):2519–2558, 2023

    Yihong Wu, Jiaming Xu, and Sophie H Yu. Testing correlation of unlabeled random graphs.The Annals of Applied Probability, 33(4):2519–2558, 2023

    2023

  48. [56]

    Quantum multigraph states and multihypergraph states.Physical Review A, 109(6):062407, 2024

    Xiao-Dong Zhang, Bin-Bin Cai, and Song Lin. Quantum multigraph states and multihypergraph states.Physical Review A, 109(6):062407, 2024. Appendix A: V alidation of MC Sampling Strategy for Unlabeled Graphs Here we show a comparison of the MC and exact distributions of the inte...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.