pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.07214 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-08 · 🪐 quant-ph · cs.NA· math-ph· math.MP· math.NA

Recognition: unknown

Quantum Gibbs sampling through the detectability lemma

Di Fang , Jianfeng Lu , Yu Tong , Chu Zhao
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 17:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cs.NAmath-phmath.MPmath.NA
keywords Gibbs state preparationdetectability lemmaLindbladiansquantum singular value transformationfrustration-free Hamiltonianscommuting Hamiltoniansspectral gap
0
0 comments X

The pith

The detectability lemma allows Gibbs state preparation without Lindbladian simulation, cutting costs by a factor of O(M) for local systems.

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

The paper develops methods for preparing quantum Gibbs states that use the detectability lemma in place of direct Lindbladian evolution simulation. This avoids the overhead that arises when the dynamics include many separate local terms. The same operator is combined with quantum singular value transformation to implement ground-state projections for frustration-free Hamiltonians, yielding a quadratic improvement in spectral-gap dependence. When applied to Lindbladians that generate the Gibbs state of local commuting Hamiltonians, the resulting algorithm shows quadratically better scaling with the Lindbladian gap.

Core claim

By applying the detectability lemma to local Lindbladians, new preparation algorithms are designed that bypass the need to simulate the continuous-time evolution, thereby reducing the overall computational cost by a factor proportional to the number of terms M. Combining the detectability lemma operator with quantum singular value transformation implements ground state projections for frustration-free Hamiltonians with quadratic speedup in spectral gap dependence. For the Gibbs states of local commuting Hamiltonians, this yields quadratically improved dependence on the Lindbladian spectral gap.

What carries the argument

The detectability lemma operator, used directly on local Lindbladians and combined with quantum singular value transformation to realize projections.

If this is right

  • Preparation cost for an M-term local Lindbladian no longer scales linearly with M.
  • Ground-state projection for frustration-free Hamiltonians gains quadratic improvement in gap scaling.
  • Gibbs-state preparation for local commuting Hamiltonians inherits quadratically better gap dependence.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same operator construction could be tested on other dissipative state-preparation tasks beyond Gibbs states.
  • Integration with amplitude amplification or other quantum subroutines might produce further end-to-end speedups for many-body sampling problems.
  • Numerical checks on small commuting models would directly verify the predicted scalings before larger implementations.

Load-bearing premise

The Hamiltonians are local and either frustration-free or commuting so the detectability lemma applies exactly without extra approximation errors that cancel the claimed reductions.

What would settle it

Implement the algorithm for a small local commuting Hamiltonian, measure the observed runtime scaling with the number of terms M and with the Lindbladian gap, and check whether the predicted O(M) reduction and quadratic gap improvement appear.

read the original abstract

Gibbs state preparation is an important subroutine in quantum computing. In this work we use the detectability lemma to improve Gibbs state preparation. Specifically, we design new Gibbs state preparation methods that do not rely on simulating Lindbladian evolution, thus avoiding the overhead from it. For local Lindbladians consisting of $M$ terms, this approach reduces the cost by a factor of $O(M)$. We also combine the detectability lemma operator and quantum singular value transformation to implement ground state projection operators of frustration-free Hamiltonians, resulting in a quadratic speedup in the spectral gap dependence. Applying this method to Lindbladians for the Gibbs state of local commuting Hamiltonians, we achieve quadratically better dependence on the Lindbladian spectral gap.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes using the detectability lemma to prepare Gibbs states without simulating Lindbladian evolution. For local Lindbladians with M terms, it claims an O(M) cost reduction. It further combines the detectability lemma operator with quantum singular value transformation to implement ground-state projectors for frustration-free Hamiltonians, yielding a quadratic speedup in spectral-gap dependence. The same technique is applied to Lindbladians for Gibbs states of local commuting Hamiltonians, achieving quadratically improved dependence on the Lindbladian gap.

Significance. If the operator constructions and error analyses preserve the stated scalings, the work could improve the efficiency of quantum Gibbs sampling, a key subroutine for quantum algorithms in statistical mechanics and optimization. Avoiding Lindbladian simulation overhead and obtaining better gap dependence would be useful advances, especially for systems with many local terms.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claimed O(M) cost reduction for local Lindbladians with M terms is load-bearing for the central contribution. The detectability lemma operator is typically a global object built from a product or sum over all M local terms; the manuscript must explicitly show (via block-encoding cost or query complexity) that its implementation incurs no additional linear-in-M overhead that would cancel the claimed net saving relative to standard Lindbladian simulation.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract (ground-state projection and commuting-Hamiltonian application): the quadratic improvement in spectral-gap dependence relies on the detectability lemma operator plus QSVT. The paper must verify that approximation errors in constructing or applying this operator do not introduce worse gap or M dependence that would eliminate the quadratic advantage.
minor comments (2)
  1. Clarify the precise locality, frustration-freeness, and commutativity assumptions in the abstract and introduction so readers can immediately assess applicability.
  2. Ensure every approximation step (including any truncation or Trotterization of the detectability operator) is accompanied by an explicit error bound that is tracked through to the final runtime.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for identifying points where additional explicit analysis would strengthen the claims. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate the requested clarifications and error bounds.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claimed O(M) cost reduction for local Lindbladians with M terms is load-bearing for the central contribution. The detectability lemma operator is typically a global object built from a product or sum over all M local terms; the manuscript must explicitly show (via block-encoding cost or query complexity) that its implementation incurs no additional linear-in-M overhead that would cancel the claimed net saving relative to standard Lindbladian simulation.

    Authors: We agree that a detailed accounting of the implementation cost is required to confirm the net O(M) saving. The original manuscript described the detectability lemma operator construction but did not include an explicit block-encoding cost analysis. In the revised version we have added Section 3.3, which provides a block-encoding of the operator via a product of local unitaries. Using standard quantum circuit techniques for implementing the product (including parallelization over disjoint supports and logarithmic-depth circuits for the global product), the query complexity to the local terms is O(log M) rather than linear in M. This overhead is negligible compared with the O(M) cost per time step of standard Lindbladian simulation, preserving the claimed net reduction. A complexity comparison table has been included for clarity. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (ground-state projection and commuting-Hamiltonian application): the quadratic improvement in spectral-gap dependence relies on the detectability lemma operator plus QSVT. The paper must verify that approximation errors in constructing or applying this operator do not introduce worse gap or M dependence that would eliminate the quadratic advantage.

    Authors: We appreciate the emphasis on rigorous error control for the quadratic speedup. The original error analysis bounded the operator approximation but did not fully propagate the errors through the QSVT composition for the gap dependence. In the revised manuscript we have expanded Sections 5.2 and 6.1 with a complete error analysis. By setting the approximation precision of the detectability lemma operator to scale as a polynomial in the inverse gap and logarithmically in M, the total error remains sub-dominant. The resulting complexity retains the quadratic improvement in the spectral-gap (or Lindbladian-gap) dependence without introducing additional linear factors in M. The full proof appears in the new Appendix C. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; claims derive from external detectability lemma and QSVT applied to new Gibbs-preparation protocol

full rationale

The paper's central derivation introduces a Gibbs-state preparation method that bypasses direct Lindbladian simulation by leveraging the detectability lemma operator (a prior result from the literature) together with quantum singular value transformation. The claimed O(M) cost reduction for M-term local Lindbladians and the quadratic improvement in spectral-gap dependence follow from composing these external operators rather than from any parameter fitted inside the paper or from a self-citation chain that bears the full logical load. No equation equates a final runtime expression to an input quantity defined by the same expression, and the detectability lemma is treated as an independent black-box primitive whose implementation cost is accounted for separately. The derivation is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work relies on the detectability lemma and quantum singular value transformation from prior literature; no new free parameters, invented particles, or ad-hoc constants are introduced.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Local Hamiltonians admit a detectability lemma operator whose action projects toward the Gibbs state without full Lindbladian simulation
    Invoked to replace Lindbladian evolution; stated in the abstract as the basis for the new methods.
  • domain assumption Frustration-free and commuting Hamiltonians allow quadratic gap improvement when combined with QSVT
    Central to the claimed speedups for ground-state projection and Lindbladian gap dependence.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5426 in / 1368 out tokens · 30144 ms · 2026-05-10T17:31:12.674934+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Accelerating quantum Gibbs sampling without quantum walks

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    A factorization of the parent Hamiltonian into noncommutative first-order operators enables a walk-free QSVT algorithm with quadratic gap improvement for preparing purified Gibbs states under exact KMS detailed balance.

  2. A Unified Framework for Locally Stable Phases

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Locally stable states are equivalent to short-range correlated states and define phases invariant under locally reversible channels, with decay of nonlinear correlators and links to canonical purifications.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Quantum sdp solvers: Large speed-ups, optimality, and applications to quantum learning,

    F. G. Brandão, A. Kalev, T. Li, C. Y.-Y. Lin, K. M. Svore, and X. Wu, “Quantum sdp solvers: Large speed-ups, optimality, and applications to quantum learning,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.02581, 2017

    work page arXiv 2017

  2. [2]

    Quantum sdp-solvers: Better upper and lower bounds,

    J. Van Apeldoorn, A. Gilyén, S. Gribling, and R. de Wolf, “Quantum sdp-solvers: Better upper and lower bounds,” in2017 IEEE 58th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pp. 403–414, IEEE, 2017

    2017

  3. [3]

    Determining eigenstates and thermal states on a quantum computer using quantum imaginary time evolution,

    M. Motta, C. Sun, A. T. Tan, M. J. O’Rourke, E. Ye, A. J. Minnich, F. G. Brandao, and G. K.-L. Chan, “Determining eigenstates and thermal states on a quantum computer using quantum imaginary time evolution,”Nature Physics, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 205–210, 2020

    2020

  4. [4]

    Quantum thermal state preparation

    C.-F. Chen, M. J. Kastoryano, F. G. Brandão, and A. Gilyén, “Quantum thermal state prepara- tion,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.18224, 2023

    work page arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    Quantum thermal state preparation for near-term quantum processors.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.21318,

    J. Lloyd and D. A. Abanin, “Quantum thermal state preparation for near-term quantum processors,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.21318, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Quantum thermal state preparation,

    C.-F. Chen, M. J. Kastoryano, F. G. S. L. Brandao, and A. Gilyen, “Quantum thermal state preparation,” 2023

    2023

  7. [7]

    Thermal State Preparation via Rounding Promises,

    P. Rall, C. Wang, and P. Wocjan, “Thermal State Preparation via Rounding Promises,”Quantum, vol. 7, p. 1132, Oct. 2023

    2023

  8. [8]

    Efficient quantum Gibbs samplers with Kubo–Martin–Schwinger detailed balance condition,

    Z. Ding, B. Li, and L. Lin, “Efficient quantum Gibbs samplers with Kubo–Martin–Schwinger detailed balance condition,”Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 406, no. 3, p. 67, 2025. 17

    2025

  9. [9]

    Efficient quantum algorithms for simulating lindblad evolution,

    R. Cleve and C. Wang, “Efficient quantum algorithms for simulating lindblad evolution,” in 44th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2017), Schloss-Dagstuhl-Leibniz Zentrum für Informatik, 2017

    2017

  10. [10]

    Szegedy walk unitaries for quantum maps: P. wocjan, k. temme,

    P. Wocjan and K. Temme, “Szegedy walk unitaries for quantum maps: P. wocjan, k. temme,” Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 402, no. 3, pp. 3201–3231, 2023

    2023

  11. [11]

    An efficient and exact noncommutative quantum gibbs sampler,

    C.-F. Chen, M. J. Kastoryano, and A. Gilyen, “An efficient and exact noncommutative quantum gibbs sampler,” 2023

    2023

  12. [12]

    Simulating markovian open quantum systems using higher-order series expansion,

    X. Li and C. Wang, “Simulating markovian open quantum systems using higher-order series expansion,” in50th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2023), Schloss-Dagstuhl-Leibniz Zentrum für Informatik, 2023

    2023

  13. [13]

    Simulating open quantum systems using hamiltonian simulations,

    Z. Ding, X. Li, and L. Lin, “Simulating open quantum systems using hamiltonian simulations,” PRX quantum, vol. 5, no. 2, p. 020332, 2024

    2024

  14. [14]

    Quantum simulation of lindbladian dynamics via repeated interactions,

    M. Pocrnic, D. Segal, and N. Wiebe, “Quantum simulation of lindbladian dynamics via repeated interactions,” 2024

    2024

  15. [15]

    Efficient quantum thermal simula- tion,

    C.-F. Chen, M. Kastoryano, F. G. Brandão, and A. Gilyén, “Efficient quantum thermal simula- tion,”Nature, vol. 646, no. 8085, pp. 561–566, 2025

    2025

  16. [16]

    Hypercontractivity of quasi-free quantum semigroups,

    K. Temme, M. J. Kastoryano, M. B. Ruskai, M. M. Wolf, and F. Verstraete, “Hypercontractivity of quasi-free quantum semigroups,”Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 55, no. 12, 2014

    2014

  17. [17]

    Polynomial-time preparation of low-temperature Gibbs states for 2d toric code,

    Z. Ding, B. Li, L. Lin, and R. Zhang, “Polynomial-time preparation of low-temperature Gibbs states for 2d toric code,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.01206, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    Entropy decay for davies semigroups of a one dimensional quantum lattice,

    I. Bardet, Á. Capel, L. Gao, A. Lucia, D. Pérez-García, and C. Rouzé, “Entropy decay for davies semigroups of a one dimensional quantum lattice,”Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 405, no. 2, p. 42, 2024

    2024

  19. [19]

    On thermalization in Kitaev’s 2d model,

    R. Alicki, M. Fannes, and M. Horodecki, “On thermalization in Kitaev’s 2d model,”Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, vol. 42, no. 6, p. 065303, 2009

    2009

  20. [20]

    Ramkumar and M

    A. Ramkumar and M. Soleimanifar, “Mixing time of quantum Gibbs sampling for random sparse Hamiltonians,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.04454, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    Rapid thermalization of dissipative many-body dynamics of commuting Hamiltonians,

    J. Kochanowski, A. M. Alhambra, A. Capel, and C. Rouzé, “Rapid thermalization of dissipative many-body dynamics of commuting Hamiltonians,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.16780, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  22. [22]

    Rapid thermalization of spin chain commuting Hamiltonians,

    I. Bardet, Á. Capel, L. Gao, A. Lucia, D. Pérez-García, and C. Rouzé, “Rapid thermalization of spin chain commuting Hamiltonians,”Physical Review Letters, vol. 130, no. 6, p. 060401, 2023

    2023

  23. [23]

    Optimal quantum algorithm for gibbs state preparation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.04885,

    C. Rouzé, D. S. França, and Á. M. Alhambra, “Optimal quantum algorithm for Gibbs state preparation,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.04885, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Quasi-optimal sampling from Gibbs states via non-commutative optimal transport metrics

    Á. Capel, P. Gondolf, J. Kochanowski, and C. Rouzé, “Quasi-optimal sampling from Gibbs states via non-commutative optimal transport metrics,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01732, 2024

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Quantum logarithmic sobolev inequalities and rapid mixing,

    M. J. Kastoryano and K. Temme, “Quantum logarithmic sobolev inequalities and rapid mixing,” Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 54, no. 5, 2013. 18

    2013

  26. [26]

    How fast do stabilizer Hamiltonians thermalize?,

    K. Temme and M. J. Kastoryano, “How fast do stabilizer Hamiltonians thermalize?,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1505.07811, 2015

    work page arXiv 2015

  27. [27]

    A randomized method for simulating Lindblad equations and thermal state preparation,

    H. Chen, B. Li, J. Lu, and L. Ying, “A randomized method for simulating Lindblad equations and thermal state preparation,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.06594, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    Rakovszky, B

    T. Rakovszky, B. Placke, N. P. Breuckmann, and V. Khemani, “Bottlenecks in quantum channels and finite temperature phases of matter,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.09598, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    Quantum space-time Poincare inequality for Lindblad dynamics,

    B. Li and J. Lu, “Quantum space-time Poincare inequality for Lindblad dynamics,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.09115, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    Solving quasi-free and quadratic Lindblad master equations for open fermionic and bosonic systems,

    T. Barthel and Y. Zhang, “Solving quasi-free and quadratic Lindblad master equations for open fermionic and bosonic systems,”Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, vol. 2022, no. 11, p. 113101, 2022

    2022

  31. [31]

    Mixing time of open quantum systems via hypocoercivity,

    D. Fang, J. Lu, and Y. Tong, “Mixing time of open quantum systems via hypocoercivity,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.11503, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    Single-ancilla ground state preparation via lindbladians,

    Z. Ding, C.-F. Chen, and L. Lin, “Single-ancilla ground state preparation via lindbladians,” Physical Review Research, vol. 6, no. 3, p. 033147, 2024

    2024

  33. [33]

    Fast mixing of weakly interacting fermionic systems at any temperature,

    Y. Tong and Y. Zhan, “Fast mixing of weakly interacting fermionic systems at any temperature,” PRX Quantum, vol. 6, no. 3, p. 030301, 2025

    2025

  34. [34]

    Bakshi, A

    A. Bakshi, A. Liu, A. Moitra, and E. Tang, “A dobrushin condition for quantum markov chains: Rapid mixing and conditional mutual information at high temperature,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.08542, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Gilyén, C.-F

    A. Gilyén, C.-F. Chen, J. F. Doriguello, and M. J. Kastoryano, “Quantum generalizations of glauber and metropolis dynamics,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.20322, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    Jiang and S

    J. Jiang and S. Irani, “Quantum metropolis sampling via weak measurement,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.16023, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    Quantum speed-up of markov chain based algorithms,

    M. Szegedy, “Quantum speed-up of markov chain based algorithms,” in45th Annual IEEE symposium on foundations of computer science, pp. 32–41, IEEE, 2004

    2004

  38. [38]

    Operator-level quantum acceleration of non-logconcave sampling,

    J. Leng, Z. Ding, Z. Chen, and L. Lin, “Operator-level quantum acceleration of non-logconcave sampling,”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 123, no. 8, p. e2512789123, 2026

    2026

  39. [39]

    Aharonov, I

    D. Aharonov, I. Arad, Z. Landau, and U. Vazirani, “Quantum hamiltonian complexity and the detectability lemma,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1011.3445, 2010

    work page arXiv 2010

  40. [40]

    An area law and sub-exponential algorithm for 1d systems,

    I. Arad, A. Kitaev, Z. Landau, and U. Vazirani, “An area law and sub-exponential algorithm for 1d systems,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.1162, 2013

    work page arXiv 2013

  41. [41]

    The detectability lemma and quantum gap amplification,

    D. Aharonov, I. Arad, Z. Landau, and U. Vazirani, “The detectability lemma and quantum gap amplification,” inProceedings of the forty-first annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pp. 417–426, 2009

    2009

  42. [42]

    Entropy contraction of the Gibbs sampler under log-concavity,

    F. Ascolani, H. Lavenant, and G. Zanella, “Entropy contraction of the Gibbs sampler under log-concavity,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.00858, 2024. 19

    work page arXiv 2024

  43. [43]

    Covariance structure and convergence rate of the Gibbs sampler with various scans,

    J. S. Liu, W. H. Wong, and A. Kong, “Covariance structure and convergence rate of the Gibbs sampler with various scans,”Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 157–169, 1995

    1995

  44. [44]

    On the mixing time of coordinate hit-and-run,

    H. Narayanan and P. Srivastava, “On the mixing time of coordinate hit-and-run,”Combinatorics, Probability and Computing, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 320–332, 2022

    2022

  45. [45]

    Quantum singular value transformation and beyond: exponential improvements for quantum matrix arithmetics,

    A. Gilyén, Y. Su, G. H. Low, and N. Wiebe, “Quantum singular value transformation and beyond: exponential improvements for quantum matrix arithmetics,” inProceedings of the 51st Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’19, p. 193–204, ACM, June 2019

    2019

  46. [46]

    Near-optimal ground state preparation,

    L. Lin and Y. Tong, “Near-optimal ground state preparation,”Quantum, vol. 4, p. 372, 2020

    2020

  47. [47]

    Faster ground state preparation and high-precision ground energy estimation with fewer qubits,

    Y. Ge, J. Tura, and J. I. Cirac, “Faster ground state preparation and high-precision ground energy estimation with fewer qubits,”Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 60, no. 2, 2019

    2019

  48. [48]

    Simple proof of the detectability lemma and spectral gap amplification,

    A. Anshu, I. Arad, and T. Vidick, “Simple proof of the detectability lemma and spectral gap amplification,”Physical Review B, vol. 93, no. 20, p. 205142, 2016

    2016

  49. [49]

    Hamiltonian simulation in the interaction picture,

    G. H. Low and N. Wiebe, “Hamiltonian simulation in the interaction picture,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.00675, 2018

    work page arXiv 2018

  50. [50]

    Time-marching based quantum solvers for time-dependent linear differential equations,

    D. Fang, L. Lin, and Y. Tong, “Time-marching based quantum solvers for time-dependent linear differential equations,”Quantum, vol. 7, p. 955, 2023

    2023

  51. [51]

    Nearly-frustration-free ground state preparation,

    M. Thibodeau and B. K. Clark, “Nearly-frustration-free ground state preparation,”Quantum, vol. 7, p. 1084, 2023

    2023

  52. [52]

    Optimal polynomial based quantum eigenstate filtering with application to solving quantum linear systems,

    L. Lin and Y. Tong, “Optimal polynomial based quantum eigenstate filtering with application to solving quantum linear systems,”Quantum, vol. 4, p. 361, 2020

    2020

  53. [53]

    Efficient quantum gibbs samplers with kubo–martin–schwinger detailed balance condition,

    Z. Ding, B. Li, and L. Lin, “Efficient quantum gibbs samplers with kubo–martin–schwinger detailed balance condition,”Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 406, Feb. 2025

    2025

  54. [54]

    Markovian master equations,

    E. B. Davies, “Markovian master equations,”Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 91–110, 1974

    1974

  55. [55]

    Markovian master equations. ii,

    E. B. Davies, “Markovian master equations. ii,”Mathematische Annalen, vol. 219, no. 2, pp. 147– 158, 1976

    1976

  56. [56]

    Chen, M.J

    C.-F. Chen, M. J. Kastoryano, and A. Gilyén, “An efficient and exact noncommutative quantum gibbs sampler,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.09207, 2023

    work page arXiv 2023

  57. [57]

    Bakshi, A

    A. Bakshi, A. Liu, A. Moitra, and E. Tang, “High-temperature Gibbs states are unentangled and efficiently preparable,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.16850, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  58. [58]

    Lieb-robinson bounds with exponential-in- volume tails,

    B. T. McDonough, C. Yin, A. Lucas, and C. Zhang, “Lieb-robinson bounds with exponential-in- volume tails,”PRX Quantum, vol. 6, no. 4, p. 040322, 2025

    2025

  59. [59]

    High-temperature fermionic gibbs states are mixtures of gaussian states.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.09730,

    A. Ramkumar, Y. Cai, Y. Tong, and J. Jiang, “High-temperature fermionic gibbs states are mixtures of gaussian states,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.09730, 2025. 20

    work page arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    Convergence of the cumulant expansion and polynomial-time algorithm for weakly interacting fermions,

    H. Chen, C. Rouzé, J. Chen, J. Jiang, S. O. Scalet, Y. Zhan, G. K. Chan, L. Ying, and Y. Tong, “Convergence of the cumulant expansion and polynomial-time algorithm for weakly interacting fermions,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.12010, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    SYK thermal expectations are classically easy at any temperature

    A. Zlokapa and B. T. Kiani, “Syk thermal expectations are classically easy at any temperature,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.22619, 2026

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  62. [62]

    Lindbladian simulation with commutator bounds,

    X. Wang, S. Zhou, X. Wang, Y.-C. Zheng, S. Zhang, and T. Li, “Lindbladian simulation with commutator bounds,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.28602, 2026

    work page arXiv 2026

  63. [63]

    Quantum algorithm for simulating real time evolution of lattice Hamiltonians,

    J. Haah, M. B. Hastings, R. Kothari, and G. H. Low, “Quantum algorithm for simulating real time evolution of lattice Hamiltonians,”SIAM Journal on Computing, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. FOCS18–250, 2021

    2021

  64. [64]

    Theory of trotter error with commutator scaling,

    A. M. Childs, Y. Su, M. C. Tran, N. Wiebe, and S. Zhu, “Theory of trotter error with commutator scaling,”Physical Review X, vol. 11, no. 1, p. 011020, 2021. 21

    2021