Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

In Brownian spin SYK models, 1/N corrections beyond leading order are essential to capture the true late-time plateau of operator growth.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 03:27 UTC pith:VTNZYDRO

load-bearing objection Genuinely new perturbative machinery for operator-size dynamics, with a qualitative plateau claim—but the infinite-matrix extension is uncontrolled and the late-time results ride on it. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.07952 v3 pith:VTNZYDRO submitted 2026-02-08 quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mechhep-th

Higher-Order Corrections to Scrambling Dynamics in Brownian Spin SYK Models

Tingfei Li , Miao Wang , Jianghui Yu This is my paper
classification quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mechhep-th
keywords operator growthscramblingBrownian SYKoperator size distributiongenerating function1/N expansionopen quantum systemslate-time plateau
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Operator growth—how a simple operator spreads into a superposition of increasingly many-body operators—is the microscopic mechanism behind quantum scrambling. This paper studies the full probability distribution of Pauli-string weights in Brownian spin SYK models with arbitrary interaction order, using a generating function that turns the master equation into a non-Hermitian differential operator. The authors develop a systematic 1/N expansion and obtain closed-form expressions for the first- and second-order corrections to the operator-size dynamics. Their central conclusion is that the leading-order dilute-limit solution, which is lower-triangular and decouples modes, gives the wrong late-time behavior; higher-order corrections lift the triangularity, couple sectors, and set the true asymptotic plateau. They demonstrate this explicitly for two- and three-body interactions, showing agreement with numerical simulation and arguing that the full operator-size distribution is a more refined probe of chaos than the mean size alone.

Core claim

The paper claims that the operator-size distribution in a Brownian spin SYK model can be solved perturbatively to any order in 1/N via a generating-function representation, yielding the closed form G^(n)(x,t)=D_x^(n)G_init(x_t)+K_x^(n)G_init(x)|_{x→x_t}, with x_t fixed by the leading-order flow. This formula holds for arbitrary initial operator distributions, including those localized at weight m, for which corrections up to order m−1 are required. The authors find that in two-body models all initial conditions converge at late times to the same universal plateau, while in three-body models parity is preserved and the plateau takes two distinct values depending on the parity of the initial w

What carries the argument

The central object is the generating function G(x,t)=Σ_w b_w(t)x^w, which converts the master equation for the operator-weight distribution into a partial differential equation ∂_t G = M_x G with M_x a non-Hermitian differential operator in the auxiliary variable x. The operator M_x is expanded in powers of 1/N, turning the eigenvalue problem into a perturbative one. At leading order, the eigenfunctions obey the power-law structure G^(0)_k(x)=(G^(0)_1(x))^k. Higher-order corrections are represented as differential operators O_x^(n) and Λ_x^(n) acting on these power-law eigenfunctions, which ultimately yields a closed expression for the time-dependent generating function for any initial distr

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the finite-size transition matrix M can be safely extended to an infinite-dimensional matrix M_∞ while treating 1/N as the perturbative parameter; the paper states this introduces an uncontrolled error and no quantitative error estimate is provided, so if M_∞ misrepresents the dynamics when the distribution spreads to w ~ N, the whole perturbative framework loses its foundation.

What would settle it

Solve the exact finite-N master equation (e.g., N=100) for an initial operator of weight w0=4 with two-body interactions, run to times t >> N, and compare the plateau of ⟨w⟩_c to the second-order perturbative prediction. If the perturbative plateau deviates from exact numerics beyond the claimed O(1/N^3) accuracy in the dilute regime (w0 << N), the central claim that higher-order corrections capture late-time behavior would be falsified.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The leading-order lower-triangular approximation of the transition matrix is insufficient for late-time operator growth; subleading 1/N terms must be included to obtain the correct asymptotic plateau.
  • For two-body interactions, all initial operator-size distributions converge to the same universal late-time plateau, independent of the initial weight.
  • For three-body interactions, the parity of the initial operator weight is dynamically protected, yielding two distinct plateaus—even initial weights reach roughly twice the odd plateau.
  • The generating-function perturbation theory provides a systematic route to compute the full operator-size distribution (not just the mean) at 1/N accuracy, enabling finer probes of scrambling and OTOC behavior.
  • The framework naturally incorporates decoherence through a depolarizing rate κ and mixed interaction orders up to L, so it covers open and imperfect-unitary scrambling settings.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the infinite-dimensional extension of the transition matrix is controlled, the same perturbative generating-function machinery could likely be applied to Krylov complexity and other operator-growth diagnostics in non-integrable settings, which the paper floats as a speculation.
  • The parity protection seen for three-body interactions suggests a generalization: for q-body interactions, weight mod (q−1) may be approximately conserved at late times, so higher q could exhibit similar sectorized plateaus—this is a testable extrapolation.
  • The paper's conclusion that higher-order terms are 'qualitatively essential' implies that experiments measuring ROTOC plateaus in Brownian circuits must include 1/N corrections even when the system is deep in the dilute regime, since the leading-order plateau differs from the true one.
  • A natural stress test is to initialize distributions broad enough to sample weights near N; the uncontrolled error in the infinite-dimensional extension may then become significant, and the perturbative plateau is expected to fail—unexplored in the paper.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a generating-function method for the operator-size distribution b_w(t) in Brownian spin SYK models with two- and three-body interactions. It derives the exact finite-N master equation (3.9), formally extends the transition matrix to an infinite-dimensional M_∞, solves the leading-order dilute-limit dynamics explicitly, and computes first- and second-order 1/N corrections for two- and three-body interactions. The main physical claim is that higher-order corrections qualitatively change the late-time dynamics: they lift the lower-triangular structure, produce a universal plateau for two-body interactions, and give parity-dependent plateaus for three-body interactions. The analytic results are compared with direct numerical solution of the master equations for N=100 and selected initial weights.

Significance. If the M_∞ approximation is controlled, the paper provides a genuine technical advance: a systematic 1/N perturbation theory for a non-Hermitian generating-function operator, explicit first- and second-order corrections, and predictions for late-time plateaus beyond the leading-order dilute limit. The paper has notable strengths: the finite-N master equation is exact, the leading-order eigenfunctions are explicit, no parameters are fitted, and the numerical comparisons in Figs. 2–4 show good agreement for the tested cases. The significance is conditional, however, because the central asymptotic claims rest on the uncontrolled M_∞ extension, which is acknowledged in Section 6.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.1, Eq. (3.10); §4.1, Eq. (4.1); §6] The entire perturbative construction uses the formal infinite-dimensional extension M_∞, but Section 6 states that this introduces an uncontrolled error and gives no estimate. This is not merely a technicality: Eq. (4.1) shows that the continuation is not a Markov generator outside the physical domain. For w>N+1 the leftward rate 2(N−w+1)(w−1)/N becomes negative, and the diagonal coefficient −2w((w−1)+3(N−w))/(3N)−2κw can become positive for w>(3N−1)/2. The claimed late-time plateau is determined by the ground state of M_∞, which may have support at large w where the continuation is unphysical. The numerical checks in Figs. 2–4 use κ=0.5 and w0≤3, so they do not cover the regime where this issue is acute (e.g., κ=0 or initial distributions requiring higher perturbative orders). A quantitative bound showing that the finite-N ground state is exponentially close to the M_∞ ground state in t
  2. [§4.3, Eq. (4.25)] The argument that 'each insertion of M_I∞ shifts the distribution one step left' and hence the plateau is 1/(r−r_eff) is an interaction-picture heuristic, not a proof. The perturbation series contains secular terms of order (t/N)^n, so all orders contribute at t≳N; the paper computes only up to second order. The failure of the second-order result for w0=4 in Fig. 2 shows that the proposed order-by-order hierarchy is not sufficient for arbitrary initial distributions. The abstract and Eq. (1.8) promise a closed solution at any order, but the required resummation or a precise validity domain is not given. I recommend stating clearly which initial weights and parameter ranges are covered by the second-order results, and treating the universal plateau for general w0 as a conjecture unless an all-order argument is supplied.
  3. [§5, Eq. (5.7) and Appendix A] The parity-protected plateau claim for three-body interactions depends on the zero-overlap statement in the paragraph after Eq. (5.7). Because M_∞ is non-Hermitian, the relevant overlap must be computed with the left eigenvectors defined in Eq. (3.25). The text does not specify this, and the second-order eigenfunction expressions in Appendix A are long and unverified. Please clarify the left/right overlap argument and, ideally, verify the parity plateau directly from the finite-N master equation (5.1).
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (3.9)] The summation ranges for p and m are implicit ('p odd, m+p≤n'). Define the ranges explicitly, especially m≥0.
  2. [§5, after Eq. (5.4)] The displayed leading-order eigenfunction appears to contain a typo: it shows κ r/(1+κ) x^2 in the denominator, whereas Eq. (3.37) and the effective parameter r_eff = r/(1+κ) require r/(1+κ) x^2.
  3. [Fig. 2 caption] 'All four cases converge to the same universal late-time plateau' is misleading for w0=1, where the leading-order result already gives the plateau; clarify that the plateau is universal only after sufficient higher-order corrections are included.
  4. [§4.1 and §4.3] The notation NNL is used for second order; define it at first use. Also, Eq. (3.36) gives ⟨w⟩_c → w0/(1−r_eff), while Sec. 4.3 states the plateau as 1/(r−r_eff). The two agree only for r=1; reconcile the notation for general r.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained up to the acknowledged M∞ approximation.

full rationale

The paper's central chain starts from the exact finite-N master equation (Eq. 1.3) and then formally extends the transition matrix to M∞ while retaining explicit N-dependence (Eqs. 1.4, 3.10). This is an approximation whose error is explicitly acknowledged as uncontrolled in Section 6, but it is not circular: the perturbative solution is obtained by solving the eigenvalue problem order by order, and the resulting closed form (Eq. 1.8) is not equivalent to an input by construction. The effective parameter r_eff is introduced as a shorthand for a_n r/(a_n + κ), which emerges from the leading-order eigenfunction consistency condition (Eqs. 3.32, 3.37), not fitted to the quantities being predicted. The late-time plateaus are computed from the perturbative spectrum and are compared against numerical simulations of the finite-N equation, so they are genuine predictions rather than renamed inputs. The leading-order two-body result intentionally reproduces prior work [24] and is presented as a benchmark, not as a new claim. The only self-citation, ref. [26] by the same first author, appears in a contextual footnote about noise effects on OTOC diagnostics and is not load-bearing for any derivation. The acknowledged lack of a quantitative error estimate for the M∞ extension is a correctness/rigor concern, not a circularity concern. Therefore no circular step is exhibited, and the appropriate score is 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

No data-fitting free parameters: model inputs (a_n, κ, r, N) are stated and set by hand in the numerics (a2=1 or a3=1, κ=0.5, r=1, N=100); r_eff is fixed by the eigenfunction equation, not tuned. No new physical entities are proposed; the contribution is a calculational technique. The load-bearing axioms are the Brownian noise model, the dilute limit, and the self-admittedly uncontrolled M_infinity extension.

axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Gaussian Brownian random couplings with delta-function time covariance (Eq. 2.3)
    The entire ensemble-averaged master equation (3.9) rests on this noise model; only quadratic-in-H terms survive the average.
  • domain assumption Dilute limit w << N with 1/N as perturbative parameter, not strict N -> infinity (footnote 2)
    The lower-triangular LO structure and the O(1/N) expansion of M_x depend on this regime; beyond it the method is not justified.
  • ad hoc to paper The infinite-dimensional extension M -> M_infinity is an excellent approximation in the dilute limit
    Section 6: the extension 'introduces an uncontrolled error' and 'a quantitative error estimate is not provided here'; rigorous proof deferred to future work. All results live inside this approximation.
  • ad hoc to paper Each insertion of the perturbation M_I shifts the operator-size distribution exactly one (two-body) or two (three-body) steps left, controlling the t -> infinity asymptotics
    Section 4.3 heuristic interaction-picture argument used to derive the universal late-time plateau and the order-(m-1) correction requirement; no rigorous resummation or error bound is given.
  • standard math Non-Hermitian perturbation theory with a complete bi-orthogonal left/right eigenfunction basis (contour pairing, Eq. 3.25)
    Standard spectral theory for non-Hermitian operators; the paper verifies bi-orthogonality for the two-body case and assumes it in the perturbative expansion.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 22518 in / 28765 out tokens · 276748 ms · 2026-08-03T03:27:16.999753+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate operator growth in a Brownian spin Sachdev--Ye--Kitaev (SYK) model with random all-to-all interactions, focusing on the full operator-size distribution. For Hamiltonians containing interactions of order two up to $L$, we derive a closed master equation for the Pauli-string expansion coefficients and recast their dynamics into a generating-function formulation suitable for the large-$N$ limit. This approach allows us to diagonalize the leading-order evolution operator explicitly and obtain exact solutions for arbitrary initial operator distributions, including the effects of decoherence. Going beyond leading order, we develop a systematic $1/N$ expansion that captures higher-order corrections to the operator-size dynamics and the late-time behavior. Our results demonstrate that higher-order effects play a crucial role in operator scrambling and that the full operator-size distribution provides a more refined probe of quantum chaos in Brownian and open quantum systems.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Towards a Refinement of Krylov Complexity: Scrambling, Classical Operator Growth and Replicas

    hep-th 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    LogK complexity via replicas distinguishes genuine scrambling from saddle effects in quantum and classical systems and refines the measure for integrable cases.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 11 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Lewis-Swan, A

    R.J. Lewis-Swan, A. Safavi-Naini, A.M. Kaufman and A.M. Rey,Dynamics of quantum information,Nature Rev. Phys.1(2019) 627 [1908.11747]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  2. [2]

    Xu and B

    S. Xu and B. Swingle,Scrambling dynamics and out-of-time-ordered correlators in quantum many-body systems,PRX Quantum5(2024)

    2024

  3. [3]

    Larkin and Y.N

    A.I. Larkin and Y.N. Ovchinnikov,Quasiclassical method in the theory of superconductivity, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics(1969)

    1969

  4. [4]

    R. Fan, P. Zhang, H. Shen and H. Zhai,Out-of-time-order correlation for many-body localization,Science Bulletin62(2017) 707

    2017

  5. [5]

    J. Li, R. Fan, H. Wang, B. Ye, B. Zeng, H. Zhai et al.,Measuring out-of-time-order correlators on a nuclear magnetic resonance quantum simulator,Physical Review X7(2017)

    2017

  6. [6]

    K.X. Wei, C. Ramanathan and P. Cappellaro,Exploring localization in nuclear spin chains, Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018) 070501

    2018

  7. [7]

    Meier, J

    E.J. Meier, J. Ang’ong’a, F.A. An and B. Gadway,Exploring quantum signatures of chaos on a floquet synthetic lattice,Phys. Rev. A100(2019) 013623

    2019

  8. [8]

    Y. Gu, A. Kitaev and P. Zhang,A two-way approach to out-of-time-order correlators,Journal of High Energy Physics2022(2022)

    2022

  9. [9]

    Li, T.-G

    Y. Li, T.-G. Zhou, Z. Wu, P. Peng, S. Zhang, R. Fu et al.,Emergent universal quench dynamics in randomly interacting spin models,Nature Physics20(2024) 1966–1972

    2024

  10. [10]

    Nahum, S

    A. Nahum, S. Vijay and J. Haah,Operator spreading in random unitary circuits,Physical Review X8(2018)

    2018

  11. [11]

    von Keyserlingk, T

    C. von Keyserlingk, T. Rakovszky, F. Pollmann and S. Sondhi,Operator hydrodynamics, otocs, and entanglement growth in systems without conservation laws,Physical Review X8(2018)

    2018

  12. [12]

    Parker, X

    D.E. Parker, X. Cao, A. Avdoshkin, T. Scaffidi and E. Altman,A universal operator growth hypothesis,Physical Review X9(2019) . – 28 –

    2019

  13. [13]

    Kim and D.A

    H. Kim and D.A. Huse,Ballistic Spreading of Entanglement in a Diffusive Nonintegrable System,Phys. Rev. Lett.111(2013) 127205 [1306.4306]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  14. [14]

    Ho and D.A

    W.W. Ho and D.A. Abanin,Entanglement dynamics in quantum many-body systems,Physical Review B95(2017)

    2017

  15. [15]

    Nahum, J

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

    2017

  16. [16]

    Swann, D

    T. Swann, D. Bernard and A. Nahum,Spacetime picture for entanglement generation in noisy fermion chains, 2023

    2023

  17. [17]

    Roberts, D

    D.A. Roberts, D. Stanford and A. Streicher,Operator growth in the syk model,Journal of High Energy Physics2018(2018)

    2018

  18. [18]

    Qi and A

    X.-L. Qi and A. Streicher,Quantum epidemiology: operator growth, thermal effects, and syk, Journal of High Energy Physics2019(2019)

    2019

  19. [19]

    Lucas,Non-perturbative dynamics of the operator size distribution in the sachdev–ye–kitaev model,Journal of Mathematical Physics61(2020)

    A. Lucas,Non-perturbative dynamics of the operator size distribution in the sachdev–ye–kitaev model,Journal of Mathematical Physics61(2020)

    2020

  20. [20]

    Zhang and Z

    P. Zhang and Z. Yu,Dynamical transition of operator size growth in quantum systems embedded in an environment,Physical Review Letters130(2023)

    2023

  21. [21]

    Zhang and Y

    P. Zhang and Y. Gu,Operator size distribution in large n quantum mechanics of majorana fermions,Journal of High Energy Physics2023(2023)

    2023

  22. [22]

    Schuster and N.Y

    T. Schuster and N.Y. Yao,Operator growth in open quantum systems,Phys. Rev. Lett.131 (2023) 160402

    2023

  23. [23]

    X.-L. Qi, E.J. Davis, A. Periwal and M. Schleier-Smith,Measuring operator size growth in quantum quench experiments, 2019

    2019

  24. [24]

    LiTenn, T

    N.Y. LiTenn, T. Zhou and B. Swingle,Scrambling dynamics with imperfections in a solvable model,2505.00070

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  25. [25]

    Li, T.-G

    Y.-C. Li, T.-G. Zhou, S. Zhang, Z. Wu, L. Zhao, H. Yin et al.,Error-resilient reversal of quantum chaotic dynamics enabled by scramblons,Physical Review Letters136(2026)

    2026

  26. [26]

    Li,Noise effects on the diagnostics of quantum chaos,Phys

    T. Li,Noise effects on the diagnostics of quantum chaos,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 086008 [2503.01279]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Swingle and N

    B. Swingle and N. Yunger Halpern,Resilience of scrambling measurements,Phys. Rev. A97 (2018) 062113

    2018

  28. [28]

    Lashkari, D

    N. Lashkari, D. Stanford, M. Hastings, T. Osborne and P. Hayden,Towards the fast scrambling conjecture,Journal of High Energy Physics2013(2013)

    2013

  29. [29]

    Saad, S.H

    P. Saad, S.H. Shenker and D. Stanford,A semiclassical ramp in syk and in gravity, 2019

    2019

  30. [30]

    Jian and B

    S.-K. Jian and B. Swingle,Note on entropy dynamics in the brownian syk model,Journal of High Energy Physics2021(2021)

    2021

  31. [31]

    Stanford, Z

    D. Stanford, Z. Yang and S. Yao,Subleading weingartens,Journal of High Energy Physics2022 (2022)

    2022

  32. [32]

    Erd˝ os and D

    L. Erd˝ os and D. Schr¨ oder,Phase transition in the density of states of quantum spin glasses, Mathematical Physics, Analysis and Geometry17(2014) 441–464. – 29 –

    2014

  33. [33]

    Baldwin and B

    C. Baldwin and B. Swingle,Quenched vs annealed: Glassiness from sk to syk,Physical Review X10(2020)

    2020

  34. [34]

    Berkooz, P

    M. Berkooz, P. Narayan and J. Sim´ on,Chord diagrams, exact correlators in spin glasses and black hole bulk reconstruction,Journal of High Energy Physics2018(2018)

    2018

  35. [35]

    S¨ underhauf, L

    C. S¨ underhauf, L. Piroli, X.-L. Qi, N. Schuch and J.I. Cirac,Quantum chaos in the Brownian SYK model with large finiteN: OTOCs and tripartite information,JHEP11(2019) 038 [1908.00775]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  36. [36]

    Yin and A

    C. Yin and A. Lucas,Bound on quantum scrambling with all-to-all interactions,Phys. Rev. A 102(2020) 022402 [2005.07558]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  37. [37]

    Swingle and M

    B. Swingle and M. Winer,Bosonic model of quantum holography,Phys. Rev. B109(2024) 094206 [2311.01516]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  38. [38]

    Hanada, A

    M. Hanada, A. Jevicki, X. Liu, E. Rinaldi and M. Tezuka,A model of randomly-coupled pauli spins,Journal of High Energy Physics2024(2024)

    2024

  39. [39]

    Anschuetz, D

    E.R. Anschuetz, D. Gamarnik and B.T. Kiani,Bounds on the ground state energy of quantum p-spin hamiltonians, 2024

    2024

  40. [40]

    Xu,Dynamics of operator size distribution in q-local quantum brownian syk and spin models, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical58(2025) 045301

    S. Xu,Dynamics of operator size distribution in q-local quantum brownian syk and spin models, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical58(2025) 045301

    2025

  41. [41]

    P. Basu, S. Das and P. Nandy,Complexity of quadratic quantum chaos, 2025

    2025

  42. [42]

    Kitaev,A simple model of quantum holography,

    A. Kitaev,A simple model of quantum holography,

  43. [43]

    Polchinski and V

    J. Polchinski and V. Rosenhaus,The spectrum in the sachdev-ye-kitaev model,Journal of High Energy Physics2016(2016) 1–25

    2016

  44. [44]

    Maldacena and D

    J. Maldacena and D. Stanford,Remarks on the sachdev-ye-kitaev model,Physical Review D94 (2016)

    2016

  45. [45]

    Jevicki, K

    A. Jevicki, K. Suzuki and J. Yoon,Bi-Local Holography in the SYK Model,JHEP07(2016) 007 [1603.06246]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  46. [46]

    Jevicki and K

    A. Jevicki and K. Suzuki,Bi-local holography in the syk model: Perturbations,1608.07567

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  47. [47]

    Zhang and Y

    P. Zhang and Y. Gu,Operator size distribution in large N quantum mechanics of Majorana fermions,JHEP10(2023) 018 [2212.04358]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  48. [48]

    T. Xu, T. Scaffidi and X. Cao,Does scrambling equal chaos?,Phys. Rev. Lett.124(2020) 140602 [1912.11063]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  49. [49]

    Rabinovici, A

    E. Rabinovici, A. S´ anchez-Garrido, R. Shir and J. Sonner,Krylov complexity, 2025

    2025

  50. [50]

    Gamayun, M.A

    O. Gamayun, M.A. Mir, O. Lychkovskiy and Z. Ristivojevic,Exactly solvable models for universal operator growth,Journal of High Energy Physics2025(2025)

    2025

  51. [51]

    Lashkari, D

    N. Lashkari, D. Stanford, M. Hastings, T. Osborne and P. Hayden,Towards the fast scrambling conjecture,Journal of High Energy Physics2013(2013) . – 30 –

    2013