Abstract
For any state in a D-dimensional Hilbert space with a choice of basis, one can define a discrete version of the Wigner function — a quasi-probability distribution which represents the state on a discrete phase space. The Wigner function can, in general, take on negative values, and the amount of negativity in the Wigner function has an operational meaning as a resource for quantum computation. In this note, we study the growth of Wigner negativity for a generic initial state under time evolution with chaotic Hamiltonians. We introduce the Krylov-Wigner function, i.e., the Wigner function defined with respect to the Krylov basis (with appropriate phases), and show that this choice of basis minimizes the early time growth of Wigner negativity in the large D limit. We take this as evidence that the Krylov basis (with appropriate phases) is ideally suited for a dual, semi-classical description of chaotic quantum dynamics at large D. We also numerically study the time evolution of the Krylov-Wigner function and its negativity in random matrix theory for an initial pure state. We observe that the negativity broadly shows three phases: it rises gradually for a time of \( O\left(\sqrt{D}\right) \), then hits a sharp ramp and finally saturates close to its upper bound of \( \sqrt{D} \).
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
D. Gottesman, The Heisenberg representation of quantum computers, in the proceedings of the 22nd International Colloquium on Group Theoretical Methods in Physics, Hobart, Australia, July 13–17 (1998) [quant-ph/9807006] [INSPIRE].
S. Aaronson and D. Gottesman, Improved simulation of stabilizer circuits, Phys. Rev. A 70 (2004) 052328 [quant-ph/0406196] [INSPIRE].
A. Mari and J. Eisert, Positive Wigner Functions Render Classical Simulation of Quantum Computation Efficient, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 230503 [INSPIRE].
V. Veitch, C. Ferrie, D. Gross and J. Emerson, Negative quasi-probability as a resource for quantum computation, New J. Phys. 14 (2012) 113011 [INSPIRE].
H. Pashayan, J.J. Wallman and S.D. Bartlett, Estimating Outcome Probabilities of Quantum Circuits Using Quasiprobabilities, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 070501 [INSPIRE].
X. Wang, M.M. Wilde and Y. Su, Quantifying the magic of quantum channels, New J. Phys. 21 (2019) 103002 [INSPIRE].
E.P. Wigner, On the quantum correction for thermodynamic equilibrium, Phys. Rev. 40 (1932) 749 [INSPIRE].
A. Dhar, G. Mandal and S.R. Wadia, Classical Fermi fluid and geometric action for c = 1, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 8 (1993) 325 [hep-th/9204028] [INSPIRE].
A. Dhar, G. Mandal and S.R. Wadia, Nonrelativistic fermions, coadjoint orbits of W(infinity) and string field theory at c = 1, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 7 (1992) 3129 [hep-th/9207011] [INSPIRE].
H. Lin, O. Lunin and J.M. Maldacena, Bubbling AdS space and 1/2 BPS geometries, JHEP 10 (2004) 025 [hep-th/0409174] [INSPIRE].
V. Balasubramanian, J. de Boer, V. Jejjala and J. Simon, The Library of Babel: On the origin of gravitational thermodynamics, JHEP 12 (2005) 006 [hep-th/0508023] [INSPIRE].
W.K. Wootters, A Wigner-function formulation of finite-state quantum mechanics, Annals Phys. 176 (1987) 1 [INSPIRE].
U. Leonhardt, Quantum-State Tomography and Discrete Wigner Function, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 4101 [INSPIRE].
S. Heiss and S. Weigert, Discrete Moyal-type representations for a spin, Phys. Rev. A 63 (2000) 012105.
C. Miquel, J.P. Paz and M. Saraceno, Quantum computers in phase space, Phys. Rev. A 65 (2002) 062309.
K.S. Gibbons, M.J. Hoffman and W.K. Wootters, Discrete phase space based on finite fields, Phys. Rev. A 70 (2004) 062101 [INSPIRE].
D. Gross, Hudson’s theorem for finite-dimensional quantum systems, J. Math. Phys. 47 (2006) 122107 [INSPIRE].
C. Cormick et al., Classicality in discrete Wigner functions, Phys. Rev. A 73 (2006) 012301.
J. Emerson, D. Gottesman, S.A.H. Mousavian and V. Veitch, The resource theory of stabilizer quantum computation, New J. Phys. 16 (2014) 013009 [arXiv:1307.7171] [INSPIRE].
C.D. White, C.J. Cao and B. Swingle, Conformal field theories are magical, Phys. Rev. B 103 (2021) 075145 [arXiv:2007.01303] [INSPIRE].
Z.-W. Liu and A. Winter, Many-Body Quantum Magic, PRX Quantum 3 (2022) 020333 [arXiv:2010.13817] [INSPIRE].
X. Turkeshi, A. Dymarsky and P. Sierant, Pauli Spectrum and Magic of Typical Quantum Many-Body States, arXiv:2312.11631 [INSPIRE].
P. Niroula et al., Phase transition in magic with random quantum circuits, arXiv:2304.10481 [INSPIRE].
J.R. Fliss, Knots, links, and long-range magic, JHEP 04 (2021) 090 [arXiv:2011.01962] [INSPIRE].
L. Leone, S.F.E. Oliviero, Y. Zhou and A. Hamma, Quantum Chaos is Quantum, Quantum 5 (2021) 453.
S.F.E. Oliviero, L. Leone and A. Hamma, Transitions in entanglement complexity in random quantum circuits by measurements, Phys. Lett. A 418 (2021) 127721.
K. Goto, T. Nosaka and M. Nozaki, Probing chaos by magic monotones, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 126009 [arXiv:2112.14593] [INSPIRE].
V. Balasubramanian, P. Caputa, J.M. Magan and Q. Wu, Quantum chaos and the complexity of spread of states, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 046007 [arXiv:2202.06957] [INSPIRE].
D.E. Parker et al., A Universal Operator Growth Hypothesis, Phys. Rev. X 9 (2019) 041017 [arXiv:1812.08657] [INSPIRE].
S.-K. Jian, B. Swingle and Z.-Y. Xian, Complexity growth of operators in the SYK model and in JT gravity, JHEP 03 (2021) 014 [arXiv:2008.12274] [INSPIRE].
E. Rabinovici, A. Sánchez-Garrido, R. Shir and J. Sonner, Operator complexity: a journey to the edge of Krylov space, JHEP 06 (2021) 062 [arXiv:2009.01862] [INSPIRE].
P. Caputa, J.M. Magan and D. Patramanis, Geometry of Krylov complexity, Phys. Rev. Res. 4 (2022) 013041 [arXiv:2109.03824] [INSPIRE].
M.A. Nielsen, A geometric approach to quantum circuit lower bounds, Quant. Inf. Comput. 6 (2006) 213 [quant-ph/0502070] [INSPIRE].
M.A. Nielsen, M.R. Dowling, M. Gu and A.C. Doherty, Quantum Computation as Geometry, Science 311 (2006) 1133 [quant-ph/0603161] [INSPIRE].
R. Jefferson and R.C. Myers, Circuit complexity in quantum field theory, JHEP 10 (2017) 107 [arXiv:1707.08570] [INSPIRE].
S. Chapman, M.P. Heller, H. Marrochio and F. Pastawski, Toward a Definition of Complexity for Quantum Field Theory States, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) 121602 [arXiv:1707.08582] [INSPIRE].
A.R. Brown and L. Susskind, Second law of quantum complexity, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 086015 [arXiv:1701.01107] [INSPIRE].
V. Balasubramanian, M. Decross, A. Kar and O. Parrikar, Quantum Complexity of Time Evolution with Chaotic Hamiltonians, JHEP 01 (2020) 134 [arXiv:1905.05765] [INSPIRE].
V. Balasubramanian et al., Complexity growth in integrable and chaotic models, JHEP 07 (2021) 011 [arXiv:2101.02209] [INSPIRE].
B. Craps, O. Evnin and G. Pascuzzi, A Relation between Krylov and Nielsen Complexity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132 (2024) 160402 [arXiv:2311.18401] [INSPIRE].
J.S. Cotler et al., Black Holes and Random Matrices, JHEP 05 (2017) 118 [Erratum ibid. 09 (2018) 002] [arXiv:1611.04650] [INSPIRE].
M. Berkooz, M. Isachenkov, V. Narovlansky and G. Torrents, Towards a full solution of the large N double-scaled SYK model, JHEP 03 (2019) 079 [arXiv:1811.02584] [INSPIRE].
H.W. Lin, The bulk Hilbert space of double scaled SYK, JHEP 11 (2022) 060 [arXiv:2208.07032] [INSPIRE].
J. Maldacena, D. Stanford and Z. Yang, Conformal symmetry and its breaking in two dimensional Nearly Anti-de-Sitter space, PTEP 2016 (2016) 12C104 [arXiv:1606.01857] [INSPIRE].
E. Rabinovici, A. Sánchez-Garrido, R. Shir and J. Sonner, A bulk manifestation of Krylov complexity, JHEP 08 (2023) 213 [arXiv:2305.04355] [INSPIRE].
L. Susskind, Computational Complexity and Black Hole Horizons, Fortsch. Phys. 64 (2016) 24 [arXiv:1403.5695] [INSPIRE].
L. Susskind, Entanglement is not enough, Fortsch. Phys. 64 (2016) 49 [arXiv:1411.0690] [INSPIRE].
D. Stanford and L. Susskind, Complexity and Shock Wave Geometries, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 126007 [arXiv:1406.2678] [INSPIRE].
B. Czech, Einstein Equations from Varying Complexity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) 031601 [arXiv:1706.00965] [INSPIRE].
P. Caputa and J.M. Magan, Quantum Computation as Gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) 231302 [arXiv:1807.04422] [INSPIRE].
P. Saad, S.H. Shenker and D. Stanford, JT gravity as a matrix integral, arXiv:1903.11115 [INSPIRE].
A. Kenfack and K. Życzkowski, Negativity of the Wigner function as an indicator of non-classicality, J. Opt. B 6 (2004) 396 [INSPIRE].
R.L. Hudson, When is the wigner quasi-probability density non-negative?, Rept. Math. Phys. 6 (1974) 249.
F. Soto and P. Claverie, When is the Wigner function of multidimensional systems nonnegative?, J. Math. Phys. 24 (1983) 97 [INSPIRE].
F. Soto-Eguibar and P. Claverie, Time evolution of the Wigner function, J. Math. Phys. 24 (1983) 1104.
S.D. Bartlett, B.C. Sanders, S.L. Braunstein and K. Nemoto, Efficient Classical Simulation of Continuous Variable Quantum Information Processes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 097904 [INSPIRE].
S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, Universal quantum computation with ideal Clifford gates and noisy ancillas, Phys. Rev. A 71 (2005) 022316 [quant-ph/0403025] [INSPIRE].
I. Kourkoulou and J. Maldacena, Pure states in the SYK model and nearly-AdS2 gravity, arXiv:1707.02325 [INSPIRE].
V. Balasubramanian, J.M. Magan and Q. Wu, Tridiagonalizing random matrices, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 126001 [arXiv:2208.08452] [INSPIRE].
L.G. Yaffe, Large n Limits as Classical Mechanics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 54 (1982) 407 [INSPIRE].
M. Van Raamsdonk, Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement, Gen. Rel. Grav. 42 (2010) 2323 [arXiv:1005.3035] [INSPIRE].
N. Lashkari, M.B. McDermott and M. Van Raamsdonk, Gravitational dynamics from entanglement ‘thermodynamics’, JHEP 04 (2014) 195 [arXiv:1308.3716] [INSPIRE].
T. Faulkner et al., Gravitation from Entanglement in Holographic CFTs, JHEP 03 (2014) 051 [arXiv:1312.7856] [INSPIRE].
T. Faulkner et al., Nonlinear Gravity from Entanglement in Conformal Field Theories, JHEP 08 (2017) 057 [arXiv:1705.03026] [INSPIRE].
A. Lewkowycz and O. Parrikar, The holographic shape of entanglement and Einstein’s equations, JHEP 05 (2018) 147 [arXiv:1802.10103] [INSPIRE].
S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from AdS/CFT, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 181602 [hep-th/0603001] [INSPIRE].
L. Susskind and J. Glogower, Quantum mechanical phase and time operator, Physics Physique Fizika 1 (1964) 49 [INSPIRE].
P. Carruthers and M.M. Nieto, Phase and angle variables in quantum mechanics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 40 (1968) 411 [INSPIRE].
Acknowledgments
We thank Sujay Ashok, Vijay Balasubramanian, Pawel Caputa, Jackson Fliss, Abhijit Gadde, Prahladh Harsha, Rohit Kalloor, Gautam Mandal, Shiraz Minwalla, Harshit Rajgadia and Sandip Trivedi for useful discussions and comments on an earlier version of the draft. We are grateful to Pruthvi Suryadevara for his significant help with numerical computations. We acknowledge supported from the Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India, under project identification number RTI 4002. We are grateful to the long term workshop YITP-T-23-01 held at YITP, Kyoto University, where part of this work was done.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
ArXiv ePrint: 2402.13694
Visiting student at TIFR. (Anirban Ganguly)
Rights and permissions
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.
About this article
Cite this article
Basu, R., Ganguly, A., Nath, S. et al. Complexity growth and the Krylov-Wigner function. J. High Energ. Phys. 2024, 264 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2024)264
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2024)264