Advertisement

Onset of random matrix behavior in scrambling systems

  • Hrant GharibyanEmail author
  • Masanori Hanada
  • Stephen H. Shenker
  • Masaki Tezuka
Open Access
Regular Article - Theoretical Physics
First Online:

Abstract

The fine grained energy spectrum of quantum chaotic systems is widely believed to be described by random matrix statistics. A basic scale in such a system is the energy range over which this behavior persists. We define the corresponding time scale by the time at which the linearly growing ramp region in the spectral form factor begins. We call this time tramp. The purpose of this paper is to study this scale in many-body quantum systems that display strong chaos, sometimes called scrambling systems. We focus on randomly coupled qubit systems, both local and k-local (all-to-all interactions) and the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev (SYK) model. Using numerical results, analytic estimates for random quantum circuits, and a heuristic analysis of Hamiltonian systems we find the following results. For geometrically local systems with a conservation law we find tramp is determined by the diffusion time across the system, order N2 for a 1D chain of N qubits. This is analogous to the behavior found for local one-body chaotic systems. For a k-local system like SYK the time is order log N but with a different prefactor and a different mechanism than the scrambling time. In the absence of any conservation laws, as in a generic random quantum circuit, we find tramp ∼ log N, independent of connectivity.

Keywords

AdS-CFT Correspondence Field Theories in Lower Dimensions Quantum Dissipative Systems Random Systems 
Download to read the full article text

Notes

Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

References

  1. [1]
    F. Haake, Quantum Signatures of Chaos, Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. (2006).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    M. Serbyn and J.E. Moore, Spectral statistics across the many-body localization transition, Phys. Rev. B 93 (2016) 041424 [arXiv:1508.07293].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    A. Altland and D. Bagrets, Quantum ergodicity in the SYK model, Nucl. Phys. B 930 (2018) 45 [arXiv:1712.05073] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    A. Chan, A. De Luca and J.T. Chalker, Spectral statistics in spatially extended chaotic quantum many-body systems, arXiv:1803.03841 [INSPIRE].
  5. [5]
    P. Kos, M. Ljubotina and T. Prosen, Many-body quantum chaos: Analytic connection to random matrix theory, Phys. Rev. X 8 (2018) 021062 [arXiv:1712.02665] [INSPIRE].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Y.-Z. You, A.W.W. Ludwig and C. Xu, Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Model and Thermalization on the Boundary of Many-Body Localized Fermionic Symmetry Protected Topological States, Phys. Rev. B 95 (2017) 115150 [arXiv:1602.06964] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    A.M. García-García and J.J.M. Verbaarschot, Spectral and thermodynamic properties of the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 126010 [arXiv:1610.03816] [INSPIRE].
  8. [8]
    J.S. Cotler et al., Black Holes and Random Matrices, JHEP 05 (2017) 118 [arXiv:1611.04650] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    S. Sachdev and J. Ye, Gapless spin fluid ground state in a random, quantum Heisenberg magnet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993) 3339 [cond-mat/9212030] [INSPIRE].
  10. [10]
    A. Kitaev, A Simple Model of Quantum Holography, talks at KITP (2015) [http://online.kitp.ucsb.edu/online/entangled15/kitaev/] [http://online.kitp.ucsb.edu/online/entangled15/kitaev2/].
  11. [11]
    A. Kitaev and S.J. Suh, The soft mode in the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model and its gravity dual, JHEP 05 (2018) 183 [arXiv:1711.08467] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    J. Maldacena and D. Stanford, Remarks on the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 106002 [arXiv:1604.07818] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    A.I. Larkin and Y.N. Ovchinnikov, Quasiclassical method in the theory of superconductivity, Sov. Phys. JETP 28 (1969) 1200 [http://www.jetp.ac.ru/cgi-bin/dn/e_028_06_1200.pdf].
  14. [14]
    P. Hayden and J. Preskill, Black holes as mirrors: Quantum information in random subsystems, JHEP 09 (2007) 120 [arXiv:0708.4025] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Y. Sekino and L. Susskind, Fast Scramblers, JHEP 10 (2008) 065 [arXiv:0808.2096] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    A. Almheiri, D. Marolf, J. Polchinski, D. Stanford and J. Sully, An Apologia for Firewalls, JHEP 09 (2013) 018 [arXiv:1304.6483] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    A. Kitaev, Hidden Correlations in the Hawking Radiation and Thermal Noise, talk given at Fundamental Physics Prize Symposium, Nov. 10, 2014, and Stanford SITP seminars Nov. 11, 2014 and Dec. 18, 2014 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQ9qN8j7EZI].
  18. [18]
    N. Lashkari, D. Stanford, M. Hastings, T. Osborne and P. Hayden, Towards the Fast Scrambling Conjecture, JHEP 04 (2013) 022 [arXiv:1111.6580] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    S.H. Shenker and D. Stanford, Black holes and the butterfly effect, JHEP 03 (2014) 067 [arXiv:1306.0622] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    S.H. Shenker and D. Stanford, Multiple Shocks, JHEP 12 (2014) 046 [arXiv:1312.3296] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    D.A. Roberts, D. Stanford and L. Susskind, Localized shocks, JHEP 03 (2015) 051 [arXiv:1409.8180] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    S.H. Shenker and D. Stanford, Stringy effects in scrambling, JHEP 05 (2015) 132 [arXiv:1412.6087] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    J. Maldacena, S.H. Shenker and D. Stanford, A bound on chaos, JHEP 08 (2016) 106 [arXiv:1503.01409] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    B. Altshuler and B. Shklovskii, Repulsion of energy levels and conductivity of small metal samples, Sov. Phys. JETP 64 (1986) 127 [http://www-thphys.physics.ox.ac.uk/talks/CMTjournalclub/sources/AltshulerShklovskii.pdf].
  25. [25]
    L. Erdős and A. Knowles, The Altshuler-Shklovskii Formulas for Random Band Matrices I: the Unimodular Case, Commun. Math. Phys. 333 (2015) 1365.ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    A.M. García-García, Y. Jia and J.J.M. Verbaarschot, Universality and Thouless energy in the supersymmetric Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Model, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 106003 [arXiv:1801.01071] [INSPIRE].
  27. [27]
    T. Banks, L. Susskind and M.E. Peskin, Difficulties for the Evolution of Pure States Into Mixed States, Nucl. Phys. B 244 (1984) 125.ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    J. Emerson, E. Livine and S. Lloyd, Convergence conditions for random quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. A 72 (2005) 060302 [quant-ph/0503210].
  29. [29]
    R. Oliveira, O.C.O. Dahlsten and M.B. Plenio, Efficient Generation of Generic Entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 (2007) 130502 [quant-ph/0605126].
  30. [30]
    J. Emerson, Y.S. Weinstein, M. Saraceno, S. Lloyd and D.G. Cory, Pseudo-random unitary operators for quantum information processing, Science 302 (2003) 2098.ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    D. Gross, K. Audenaert and J. Eisert, Evenly distributed unitaries: On the structure of unitary designs, J. Math. Phys. 48 (2007) 052104 [quant-ph/0611002].
  32. [32]
    L. Arnaud and D. Braun, Efficiency of producing random unitary matrices with quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. A 78 (2008) 062329 [arXiv:0807.0775].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [33]
    A. Harrow and R. Low. Efficient quantum tensor product expanders and k-designs, Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 5687 (2009) 548 [arXiv:0811.2597].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. [34]
    A.W. Harrow and R.A. Low, Random quantum circuits are approximate 2-designs, Commun. Math. Phys. 291 (2009) 257 [arXiv:0802.1919].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. [35]
    W.G. Brown and L. Viola, Convergence rates for arbitrary statistical moments of random quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 (2010) 250501 [arXiv:0910.0913].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. [36]
    W. Brown and O. Fawzi, Scrambling speed of random quantum circuits, arXiv:1210.6644 [INSPIRE].
  37. [37]
    F. Brandao, A. Harrow and M. Horodecki, Local random quantum circuits are approximate polynomial-designs, Commun. Math. Phys. 346 (2016) 397 [arXiv:1208.0692].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. [38]
    E. Onorati, O. Buerschaper, M. Kliesch, W. Brown, A.H. Werner and J. Eisert, Mixing properties of stochastic quantum Hamiltonians, Commun. Math. Phys. 355 (2017) 905 [arXiv:1606.01914] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. [39]
    Y. Nakata, C. Hirche, M. Koashi and A. Winter, Efficient Quantum Pseudorandomness with Nearly Time-Independent Hamiltonian Dynamics, Phys. Rev. X 7 (2017) 021006 [arXiv:1609.07021] [INSPIRE].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. [40]
    L. Banchi, D. Burgarth and M.J. Kastoryano, Driven Quantum Dynamics: Will It Blend?, Phys. Rev. X 7 (2017) 041015 [arXiv:1704.03041] [INSPIRE].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. [41]
    A. Nahum, S. Vijay and J. Haah, Operator Spreading in Random Unitary Circuits, Phys. Rev. X 8 (2018) 021014 [arXiv:1705.08975] [INSPIRE].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. [42]
    C. von Keyserlingk, T. Rakovszky, F. Pollmann and S. Sondhi, Operator hydrodynamics, OTOCs and entanglement growth in systems without conservation laws, Phys. Rev. X 8 (2018) 021013 [arXiv:1705.08910] [INSPIRE].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. [43]
    V. Khemani, A. Vishwanath and D.A. Huse, Operator spreading and the emergence of dissipation in unitary dynamics with conservation laws, arXiv:1710.09835 [INSPIRE].
  44. [44]
    J. Preskill, Quantum computing and the entanglement frontier, arXiv:1203.5813 [INSPIRE].
  45. [45]
    C. Neill et al., A blueprint for demonstrating quantum supremacy with superconducting qubits, Science 360 (2018) 195 [arXiv:1709.06678].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. [46]
    A.W. Harrow and A. Montanaro, Quantum computational supremacy, Nature 549 (2017) 203.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. [47]
    A. Bouland, B. Fefferman, C. Nirkhe, U. Vazirani Quantum Supremacy and the Complexity of Random Circuit Sampling, arXiv:1803.04402.
  48. [48]
    T. Rakovszky, F. Pollmann and C.W. von Keyserlingk, Diffusive hydrodynamics of out-of-time-ordered correlators with charge conservation, arXiv:1710.09827 [INSPIRE].
  49. [49]
    D.A. Roberts and B. Yoshida, Chaos and complexity by design, JHEP 04 (2017) 121 [arXiv:1610.04903] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. [50]
    J. Cotler, N. Hunter-Jones, J. Liu and B. Yoshida, Chaos, Complexity and Random Matrices, JHEP 11 (2017) 048 [arXiv:1706.05400] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. [51]
    F.J. Dyson, Statistical theory of the energy levels of complex systems. I, J. Math. Phys. 3 (1962) 140 [INSPIRE].
  52. [52]
    M.L. Mehta, Random matrices, vol. 142, Academic Press (2004).Google Scholar
  53. [53]
    T. Guhr, A. Müller-Groeling and H.A. Weidenmuller, Random matrix theories in quantum physics: Common concepts, Phys. Rept. 299 (1998) 189 [cond-mat/9707301] [INSPIRE].
  54. [54]
    J. Flores, M. Horoi, M. Müller and T.H. Seligman, Spectral statistics of the two-body random ensemble revisited, Phys. Rev. E 63 (2001) 026204 [cond-mat/0006144] [INSPIRE].
  55. [55]
    A. Altland and D. Bagrets, Quantum ergodicity in the SYK model, Nucl. Phys. B 930 (2018) 45 [arXiv:1712.05073] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. [56]
    L. Erdős and D. Schröder, Phase transition in the density of states of quantum spin glasses, Math. Phys. Anal. Geom. 17 (2014) 441 [arXiv:1407.1552].MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  57. [57]
    E. Brézin and S. Hikami, Spectral form factor in a random matrix theory, articlePhys. Rev. E 55 (1997) 4067 [cond-mat/9608116].
  58. [58]
    E. Brézin and S. Hikami, Extension of level-spacing universality, Phys. Rev. E 56 (1997) 264 [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  59. [59]
    K. Papadodimas and S. Raju, Local Operators in the Eternal Black Hole, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 211601 [arXiv:1502.06692] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. [60]
    A. Gaikwad and R. Sinha, Spectral Form Factor in Non-Gaussian Random Matrix Theories, arXiv:1706.07439 [INSPIRE].
  61. [61]
    D. Bagrets, A. Altland and A. Kamenev, Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model as Liouville quantum mechanics, Nucl. Phys. B 911 (2016) 191 [arXiv:1607.00694] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  62. [62]
    D. Stanford and E. Witten, Fermionic Localization of the Schwarzian Theory, JHEP 10 (2017) 008 [arXiv:1703.04612] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  63. [63]
    F. Haake, H.-J. Sommers and J. Weber, Fluctuations and ergodicity of the form factor of quantum propagators and random unitary matrices, J. Phys. A 32 (1999) 6903.ADSMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. [64]
    P. Diaconis and S.N. Evans, Linear Functionals of Eigenvalues of Random Matrices, Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 353 (2001) 2615.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  65. [65]
    J.P. Keating, N. Linden and H.J. Wells, Random matrices and quantum spin chains, Markov Process. Related Fields 21 (2015) 537 [arXiv:1403.1114].MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  66. [66]
    J.P. Keating, N. Linden and H.J. Wells, Spectra and Eigenstates of Spin Chain Hamiltonians, Commun. Math. Phys. 338 (2015) 81 [arXiv:1403.1121].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  67. [67]
    A. Pal and D.A. Huse, The many-body localization transition, arXiv:1003.2613.
  68. [68]
    D.J. Luitz, N. Laflorencie and F. Alet, Many-body localization edge in the random-field Heisenberg chain, Phys. Rev. B 91 (2015) 081103 [arXiv:1411.0660].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. [69]
    K. Agarwal, E. Altman, E. Demler, S. Gopalakrishnan, D.A. Huse and M. Knap, Rare-region effects and dynamics near the many-body localization transition, Annalen Phys. 529 (2017) 1600326 [arXiv:1611.00770].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. [70]
    P. Saad, S.H. Shenker and D. Stanford, A semiclassical ramp in SYK and in gravity, in progress.Google Scholar
  71. [71]
    L.L. Ng, Heisenberg Model, Bethe Ansatz and Random Walks, Senior Honors Thesis, Harvard University (1996) [https://services.math.duke.edu/ng/math/papers/senior-thesis.pdf].
  72. [72]
    M. Karabach, G. Müller, H. Gould and J. Tobochnik, Introduction to the Bethe Ansatz I, Comput. Phys. 11 (1997) 36 [cond-mat/9809162].
  73. [73]
    J.R.G. Mendonca, Exact eigenspectrum of the symmetric simple exclusion process on the complete, complete bipartite and related graphs, J. Phys. A 46 (2013) 295001 [arXiv:1207.4106].MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  74. [74]
    E.H. Lieb and D.W. Robinson, The finite group velocity of quantum spin systems, Commun. Math. Phys. 28 (1972) 251 [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. [75]
    D.A. Roberts, D. Stanford and A. Streicher, Operator growth in the SYK model, JHEP 06 (2018) 122 [arXiv:1802.02633] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. [76]
    J.T. Chalker, I.V. Lerner and R.A. Smith, Random Walks through the Ensemble: Linking Spectral Statistics with Wave-Function Correlations in Disordered Metals, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 (1996) 554 [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hrant Gharibyan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Masanori Hanada
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Stephen H. Shenker
    • 1
  • Masaki Tezuka
    • 5
  1. 1.Stanford Institute for Theoretical PhysicsStanford UniversityStanfordU.S.A.
  2. 2.Yukawa Institute for Theoretical PhysicsKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  3. 3.The Hakubi Center for Advanced ResearchKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  4. 4.Department of PhysicsUniversity of ColoradoBoulderU.S.A.
  5. 5.Department of PhysicsKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations