Learning the structure of open quantum systems
Abstract: We design an algorithm for learning the coefficients of an $n$-qubit constant-local Lindbladian to $\varepsilon$ error with $O(g d2 \log(n) / \varepsilon2)$ total evolution time, where $g$ is the single-site energy and $d$ is the (approximate) degree of the interaction graph. Though Lindbladians present new challenges not present in the special case of Hamiltonians, our algorithm achieves the suite of desiderata attained by state-of-the-art Hamiltonian learning algorithms: (1) it uses non-adaptive, ancilla-free randomized Pauli measurement circuits with a time resolution of only $Θ(1/g)$; (2) it works without knowledge of the structure of the unknown Lindbladian; (3) it depends on a smooth form of degree, thereby supporting the learning of quasi-local and power-law Lindbladians. Our algorithm is a simple iterative method, where the objective function consists of Fourier coefficients of the Lindbladian restricted to few-site regions. Its analysis identifies the difficulty unique to open systems, which we call "confusing" terms. For settings where the "confusion" is limited, the performance of the algorithm improves. We demonstrate this for the case of structure learning of Hamiltonians from access to real-time evolution, where we obtain a new algorithm that is significantly simpler than previous work. In addition, using the same iterative method, we design the first efficient algorithm for structure learning Hamiltonians from high-temperature Gibbs states.
Paper Prompts
Sign up for free to create and run prompts on this paper using GPT-5.
Top Community Prompts
Explain it Like I'm 14
1) What this paper is about
This paper shows how to figure out the “rules” that control how a noisy quantum system changes over time. These rules are written as a mathematical object called a Lindbladian. The authors design a simple, efficient method (an algorithm) that learns all the important numbers in the Lindbladian by running easy experiments on a quantum device and looking at the outcomes.
Why this matters: Real quantum devices are not perfectly isolated—they lose information to their surroundings. That’s “open” system behavior, and Lindbladians describe it. Learning these rules lets scientists understand, verify, and improve quantum systems and quantum simulations.
2) The key questions
In plain terms, the paper asks:
- Given an unknown noisy quantum process on n qubits, can we learn which parts of the system interact and how strong those interactions are?
- Can we do this using very simple experiments (no helper qubits, no fancy controls), and do it efficiently as the system gets bigger?
- Can the same ideas also make learning easier for the special case without noise (just a Hamiltonian), and even when we only get to look at snapshots of thermal states (Gibbs states) instead of time evolution?
3) How the method works (everyday explanation)
First, some simple ideas:
- Qubits: quantum bits, the basic units of quantum information.
- Open system: a system that interacts with its environment (so its evolution is not perfectly reversible).
- Lindbladian: a “recipe” that tells you how an open quantum system changes over time. It includes a Hamiltonian part (coherent, like a musical note) and a dissipative part (noisy, like static).
- Pauli measurements: very simple, standard measurements (think of checking along X, Y, or Z directions on each qubit).
What the algorithm does:
- It runs many short, simple experiments: 1) Prepare a simple quantum state (a Pauli eigenstate). 2) Let the unknown process act for a short time t. 3) Measure in a Pauli basis.
- From these outcomes, it computes special averages that act like “local Fourier coefficients.” Think of this like listening not to the whole orchestra at once, but to small groups of instruments, and extracting the specific notes they play. These local Fourier-like numbers are chosen so that, to first order in time, each one mostly picks out one interaction strength in the Lindbladian.
- It then uses an iterative “guess-and-correct” loop:
- Start with a guess for all the interaction strengths.
- Compare what your guess predicts to what the experiments actually measured.
- Nudge the guess toward the truth.
- Repeat until the guess is accurate.
The big challenge (unique to open systems):
- “Confusing terms”: because the system is open and we only measure locally, several different interaction terms can partially “masquerade” as one another in the local data. The authors handle this by:
- Using carefully chosen local Fourier-like averages.
- Applying rounding: they repeatedly zero out very small estimated terms so only the truly “meaningful” interactions remain. This keeps the estimation problem stable and focused on the few strong interactions near each qubit.
Technical words turned simple:
- Total evolution time: how many seconds of “system running time” you need across all experiments combined (more experiments or longer runs both increase this).
- Time resolution: the smallest time step you must be able to control (smaller is harder physically).
- Single-site energy g: an upper bound on how strongly a single qubit can be involved in interactions.
- Approximate degree d: roughly, how many “noticeably strong” interactions touch any given qubit after ignoring tiny ones.
4) Main results and why they matter
Here are the headline guarantees (stated informally):
- Simplicity of experiments: No helper (ancilla) qubits, no adaptivity, just randomized Pauli preparations and measurements with short-time evolutions. This makes the method practical.
- Efficiency: To reach a small error ε, the total evolution time scales like O(g * d² * log n / ε²), and the time steps only need to be as fine as about 1/g. In words: the stronger the local activity (g) and the more significant neighbors each qubit has (d), the more experiments you need—but only mildly (quadratically in d), and only logarithmically in the system size n.
- Structure learning: The algorithm does not assume you know which interaction terms are nonzero. It discovers the network of interactions from scratch.
They also show the method adapts to several important physical settings:
- Geometrically local systems (each qubit talks to only a few nearby neighbors): needs only about log n / ε² total evolution time (with constant-size time steps).
- General k-local systems: still efficient, with a polynomial dependence on k.
- Long-range systems:
- Quasi-local (fast-decaying interactions): still near the same cost as local.
- Power-law decays: cost grows smoothly as the decay gets slower; as decay gets faster, you recover the local-like efficiency.
Extra bonuses for Hamiltonians (closed systems):
- A simpler algorithm for learning Hamiltonians from time evolution with total evolution time about O(g * log n / ε²) and time resolution about 1/g.
- The first efficient algorithm (with guarantees) for learning Hamiltonians from high-temperature Gibbs states (thermal snapshots), using about O(log n / (β ε)²) copies, where β is the inverse temperature.
Why important: These are near-optimal scalings and use very simple experiments. They avoid a common pitfall in earlier methods: having to solve a giant, ill-conditioned linear system (which can make the required resources blow up). The paper carefully designs the learning procedure and analysis to bypass that instability.
5) What this could change
- Better diagnostics for quantum devices: With simple measurements, labs can learn the detailed noise-and-interaction structure of their systems, helping them calibrate and improve performance.
- Stronger quantum simulation and verification: Accurately learning open-system dynamics supports trustworthy quantum simulation of materials, chemistry, and thermal processes.
- New tools beyond closed systems: Extending learning from Hamiltonians to general Lindbladians opens the door to controlling and engineering dissipation (useful for fast state preparation, e.g., Gibbs states).
- Foundations for scalable learning: The method scales gently with system size (logarithmically in n) and uses only basic operations—key for near-term and future quantum platforms.
Overall, the paper delivers a simple, robust, and broadly applicable way to learn how noisy quantum systems behave, and it does so with strong performance guarantees that match or improve upon previous work in important regimes.
Knowledge Gaps
Knowledge gaps, limitations, and open questions
Below is a concise list of the main uncertainties, assumptions, and unaddressed issues that remain after this work. Each point is phrased to guide future research directions.
Scalings, optimality, and lower bounds
- Tightness of degree dependence for Lindbladian learning: The total evolution time scales as (Theorem 1). It is unknown whether the quadratic dependence on the (approximate) degree is information-theoretically necessary for Lindbladians (as opposed to the linear-in-sparsity scaling achieved for Hamiltonians). Establishing lower bounds or improving the -dependence remains open.
- Optimality of the quantum resource trade-off: The algorithm achieves the standard quantum limit in (), but it is unclear if the - and -dependences can be improved while maintaining constant time resolution and ancilla-free measurements. A precise trade-off frontier between total evolution time, time resolution, and classical runtime remains undetermined.
- Sample/experiment optimality: The number of experiments may be improvable; there are no matching lower bounds for Lindbladian structure learning in this access model.
Algorithmic and computational limitations
- Quasi-polynomial classical runtime in general: The classical runtime is quasi-polynomial in due to truncated-series computations (via techniques from Haah et al.). While Remark 1 shows a way to make the classical time polynomial, it worsens time resolution and total evolution time. Achieving both polynomial classical time and optimal (or near-optimal) quantum resources is open.
- Dependence on a priori bounds: The algorithm requires known bounds on the local one-spin energy and the approximate degree . It is not analyzed how performance degrades if these bounds are unknown, misspecified, or must be estimated from data. Designing procedures that adaptively estimate or remove these assumptions is open.
- Sensitivity to rounding thresholds: The iterative procedure relies on thresholding (rounding small coefficients to zero) to control “confusion” among terms. There is no principled, data-driven prescription for threshold schedules under finite-sample noise. Robust selection strategies and their statistical guarantees remain to be developed.
- Explicit constants and practicality: Key guarantees (e.g., bounds and constants like ) are not fully quantified, hindering practical parameter setting. Making hidden constants explicit to guide experimental implementations is an open task.
Modeling assumptions and robustness
- Markovian, time-independent dynamics: The analysis assumes time-independent, Markovian Lindbladian evolution. Robustness to time-dependent generators or non-Markovian dynamics is not established. Extending the framework to weakly non-Markovian or slowly time-varying settings is open.
- Noise and SPAM robustness: The method assumes ideal state preparation and Pauli measurements. Sensitivity to state-preparation-and-measurement (SPAM) errors, drift, or calibration noise is not analyzed. Developing error-mitigation or robust estimation techniques is needed.
- Identifiability and small-coefficient detection: Guarantees are stated in -norm/“local” -norm on coefficients. There is no explicit support-recovery (structure-identification) result under finite samples (e.g., false discovery control, minimal detectable interaction strength, or incoherence-like conditions to guarantee exact support recovery). Characterizing identifiability thresholds is open.
- Error metrics beyond coefficient norms: It is unclear how - or -norm errors on coefficients translate to operational distances between channels (e.g., diamond norm of ), or to prediction errors for observables over time. Providing such stability/continuity bounds is open.
- Assumption of qubits and Pauli basis: The framework is developed for qubits with Pauli expansions. Extending to higher local dimensions (qudits) and generalized operator bases (e.g., Gell-Mann matrices) is not analyzed.
“Confusion” phenomenon and measurement design
- Quantifying and mitigating “confusion”: The paper introduces “confusing” terms (cross-contributions in local Fourier coefficients) and addresses them via rounding. However, a general characterization of when confusion becomes severe (e.g., worst-case system topologies, long-range patterns) and how to optimally design measurements to minimize it (beyond local Pauli choices) is not provided.
- Alternative measurement/estimation strategies: It is unknown whether different circuits (e.g., randomized compilations, twirling, or carefully chosen local unitaries) could produce local statistics with better-conditioned mappings (reducing the need for amplification and thresholding), improving robustness and -dependence.
Scope of applicability and generalizations
- Long-range interactions at and below the “barrier”: For power-law decay with exponent (lattice dimension ), guarantees are provided; for , the problem is not addressed (noting a known barrier). Whether any nontrivial guarantees are possible near or below the barrier remains open.
- Sparse (nonlocal) regime: The work focuses on the local regime with logarithmic-in- evolution time. Adapting the framework to the sparse-but-nonlocal setting (potentially with different resource trade-offs) is left to future work.
- Ancilla assistance: The approach is ancilla-free by design. It remains unknown whether access to ancillas (or entangled probes) could reduce the -dependence, improve constants, or enhance robustness while maintaining favorable time resolution.
- Time resolution constraints: The method requires time resolution . The impact of coarser control on (hardware-limited resolution or bounded timing jitter) on accuracy and complexity is not quantified.
Hamiltonian-specific extensions
- Optimal complexity for Hamiltonian structure learning: The paper’s Hamiltonian result achieves total time with , independent of . It remains open whether one can simultaneously achieve Heisenberg scaling in with no -dependence, or prove that the dependence on effective sparsity in prior work is necessary in this access model.
- Gibbs-state access at low temperature: The structure-learning algorithm from Gibbs states requires (high temperature). Extending to low temperatures (where cluster expansions diverge) or characterizing in general models remains open. It is also unclear how to generalize to quasi-local or long-range Hamiltonians in the Gibbs-state setting.
Explicit open questions posed by the authors
- Is the dependence in total evolution time for Lindbladian learning fundamental, or can it be improved to linear (or better), analogous to Hamiltonian learning?
- For Hamiltonians, is dependence on effective sparsity necessary to achieve Heisenberg scaling in this access model, or can one attain Heisenberg scaling without -dependence?
- Can one efficiently perform Hamiltonian structure learning from Gibbs states at any temperature (i.e., beyond the high-temperature regime where cluster expansions converge)?
Practical Applications
Immediate Applications
Below are actionable use cases that can be deployed on current quantum platforms or research labs, leveraging the paper’s ancilla-free, non-adaptive Pauli prepare–evolve–measure workflow and its guarantees for local, quasi-local, and power-law Lindbladians.
- Quantum hardware calibration and noise identification (sector: hardware/software)
- Use case: Learn a device’s local open-system dynamics (Lindbladian coefficients) to build accurate, site- and interaction-specific noise models for superconducting, ion-trap, and spin-qubit processors.
- Workflow/product: “Lindbladian Noise Mapper” tool that runs randomized Pauli state preparations, lets the system evolve for t ≥ Θ(1/g), measures in Pauli bases, and outputs an interaction graph with coherent and dissipative coefficients and confidence intervals.
- Dependencies/assumptions: Dynamics are time-independent and Markovian; local one-spin energy bound g and approximate degree d are modest; sufficient coherence to reach t ≈ 1/g; ability to prepare/measure in multiple Pauli bases; total experiment count scales as O(g2 d2 log n/ε2). Classical post-processing may be quasi-polynomial unless adopting the paper’s time-resolution/overhead trade-off.
- Noise-aware compilation and error mitigation (sector: software, compilers)
- Use case: Integrate learned Lindbladians into simulation and compilation to place gates, schedule idles, and select dynamical decoupling tailored to correlated multi-qubit dissipation.
- Workflow/product: Compiler plugin that consumes the learned interaction graph and adjusts gate placement, idle durations, and pulse shapes to minimize error accumulation; simulator back-end parameterized by the learned superoperator.
- Dependencies/assumptions: Noise is stable over calibration windows; compiler supports channel- or Pauli-Lindblad noise models; Markovianity holds at relevant timescales.
- Analog quantum simulator validation (sector: research labs, AMO)
- Use case: Certify whether a Rydberg/ion/atom array simulator implements the intended Hamiltonian plus weak dissipation by reconstructing the local Lindbladian from real-time evolution.
- Workflow/product: “Structure certificate” reporting nonzero local terms and strengths; spot-check long-range tails for quasi-local/power-law decays.
- Dependencies/assumptions: Preparation of product states in multiple bases is feasible; time resolution meets Θ(1/g); long-range interactions fit the quasi-local or power-law assumptions.
- Verification of engineered dissipation (sector: control, quantum sensing)
- Use case: Test driven-dissipative protocols (stabilization, reservoir engineering, dissipative state preparation) by learning the actually realized dissipator and comparing it to the design.
- Workflow/product: Pass/fail thresholds on learned dissipative terms; automated alerts for “confusing” terms that mask small target couplings.
- Dependencies/assumptions: Experiment access to the driven dynamics is non-adaptive; structure learning tolerates approximate degree d; the “confusion” effect is limited or mitigated by thresholding in the iterative solver (as per the paper).
- High-temperature Gibbs-state Hamiltonian structure learning (sector: condensed matter/AMO, materials)
- Use case: Reconstruct the interaction graph of spin models directly from thermal equilibrium states in cold-atom or trapped-ion systems at sufficiently high temperature.
- Workflow/product: “GibbsGraph” module estimating nonzero Hamiltonian terms using O(log n/(β ε)2) copies at β < βc; outputs a sparse interaction map with bounds.
- Dependencies/assumptions: Ability to prepare and measure multiple copies of ρβ (high-T regime, β < βc); access to local Pauli expectation values/correlators; sample complexity and measurement toolbox align with platform capabilities.
- Quantum networking node/link characterization (sector: telecom, quantum internet)
- Use case: Characterize memory nodes and short links by learning their local open-system maps (e.g., correlated dephasing/relaxation) for network-level error budgeting.
- Workflow/product: Site-wise Lindbladian identification integrated into network calibration; comparison across nodes.
- Dependencies/assumptions: Nodes can be isolated for local experiments; Markovian approximation holds; sufficient control for Pauli-basis prep/measurement.
- Device benchmarking and reporting (sector: policy/standards, industry consortia)
- Use case: Establish benchmark metrics (e.g., learned g and approximate degree d per site; list of dominant dissipators) as part of vendor-neutral performance reports.
- Workflow/product: Benchmark protocol and reporting template based on the paper’s evolution-time and time-resolution bounds; reproducible datasets and learned-structure summaries.
- Dependencies/assumptions: Community agreement on Markovian benchmarks; reproducible prepare–evolve–measure pipelines.
- Education and training modules (sector: education)
- Use case: Lab curricula for identifying open-system dynamics using simple, ancilla-free randomized Pauli experiments and iterative recovery.
- Workflow/product: Teaching kits and open-source notebooks implementing the local Fourier estimator and rounding-based iterative solver.
- Dependencies/assumptions: Access to small quantum devices/simulators; students can prepare and measure Pauli eigenstates.
- Digital twins and performance prediction (sector: software, digital engineering)
- Use case: Build device-specific digital twins by inserting learned Lindbladians into circuit simulators and job schedulers to forecast error rates and throughput.
- Workflow/product: Continuous update of a device twin using periodic structure-learning runs; scenario testing for workloads.
- Dependencies/assumptions: Noise stationarity between learning cycles; simulator supports channel composition.
- Procurement and acceptance testing (sector: industry)
- Use case: Include “Lindbladian structure certificate” as an acceptance criterion for new hardware deliveries or maintenance releases.
- Workflow/product: Automated test suite running the paper’s experiments and thresholds on acceptable g, d, and dominant dissipators.
- Dependencies/assumptions: Sufficient measurement time in factory tests; vendor cooperation for access and data sharing.
Long-Term Applications
The following opportunities require further research, scaling, or ecosystem development (e.g., handling non-Markovianity, reducing classical overhead, or engineering long-range dissipators).
- Closed-loop, online calibration and drift tracking (sector: control software)
- Vision: Always-on re-identification of Lindbladian structure to detect and correct drift in real time, feeding updates to compilers and schedulers.
- Needed advances: Faster classical solvers or adopting the paper’s trade-off (smaller t, larger evolution time) for polynomial post-processing; streaming estimators; robust change detection.
- Non-Markovian and time-dependent extensions (sector: academia, advanced platforms)
- Vision: Generalize the framework to systems with memory and time-varying couplings (beyond the paper’s time-independent, Markovian assumption).
- Needed advances: Theory for “confusing terms” under memory kernels; experimental protocols with ancillas or multi-time correlators.
- Large-scale characterization for fault-tolerant systems (sector: hardware, error correction)
- Vision: Scalable structure learning on thousands of qubits with quasi-local/power-law interactions to inform code choice and layout.
- Needed advances: Parallelization strategies, hierarchical/region-growing estimators, and improved bounds for high d without quadratic penalty; tighter control of the “confusion” effect.
- Decoder and code design tailored to learned noise (sector: fault tolerance)
- Vision: Design decoders and code deformations that exploit the learned spatial and channel structure (e.g., correlated dissipators, long-range couplings).
- Needed advances: Stable noise over error-correction timescales; integration of channel models into decoders; certification of benefits across workloads.
- Certified dissipative state preparation and quantum thermodynamics (sector: quantum algorithms, energy/materials)
- Vision: Engineer and verify Lindbladians for fast Gibbs/thermal state preparation (as in recent literature) using the paper’s learning guarantees for quasi-local and power-law regimes.
- Needed advances: High-fidelity dissipator engineering; standards for certification using learned coefficients; management of confusion in dense long-range settings.
- Quantum annealers and Ising machines calibration (sector: optimization hardware)
- Vision: Map and mitigate environment-induced dynamics in annealers to improve schedule design and solution quality.
- Needed advances: Adaptation to continuous-time control; experiments that reconcile thermal, control, and environmental channels; consistent high-T regime access for Gibbs-based identification.
- Materials and chemistry model discovery (sector: materials science, pharma)
- Vision: From thermal or dynamical data in quantum simulators (or specialized spectrometers), reconstruct effective Hamiltonians/dissipators to parameterize models of complex materials.
- Needed advances: Reliable preparation of ρβ across phases; measurement toolkits for non-commuting observables; extending Gibbs-state learning to lower temperatures (beyond β < βc).
- Regulatory and certification frameworks (sector: policy/standards)
- Vision: Third-party certification of open-system dynamics (including reported g, d, and dominant terms), compliance baselines for safety-critical quantum applications.
- Needed advances: Consensus metrics and protocols; reference implementations; interoperability with platform-specific control stacks.
- Cross-platform “noise fingerprints” and marketplace transparency (sector: industry, procurement)
- Vision: Public, comparable noise fingerprints derived from learned Lindbladians to guide user and buyer decisions across vendors and technologies.
- Needed advances: Uniform reporting schemas; benchmarks that control for device size and task; privacy-preserving disclosure of sensitive parameters.
- Sensor and metrology optimization (sector: quantum sensing)
- Vision: Learn dissipative channels in quantum sensors (NV centers, trapped ions) to design optimal sensing sequences and dynamical decoupling tailored to correlated noise.
- Needed advances: Adapting the method to sensing-specific constraints; verifying Markovian approximations; integrating learned models into sequence optimizers.
Key dependencies and assumptions impacting feasibility
- Markovian, time-independent dynamics: Core assumption for the Lindbladian model and the learning guarantees; non-Markovian environments require extensions.
- Locality and approximate degree: Performance depends on k-locality and the smooth “approximate degree” d; dense coupling (high d) increases experiment/time budgets and “confusion.”
- Time resolution and evolution windows: Requires timing control at scale t ≥ Θ(1/g). Very small 1/g demands fine timing; very large 1/g demands long coherence windows.
- Experimental primitives: Ability to prepare Pauli eigenstates and measure in Pauli bases; access to the system’s evolution under its native dynamics without ancillary qubits.
- Sample and compute budgets: Experiments scale as O(g2 d2 log n/ε2); classical post-processing may be quasi-polynomial unless adopting the paper’s suggested trade-off (smaller time resolution, larger total evolution time) to achieve polynomial overhead.
- High-temperature regime for Gibbs-state learning: Requires β < βc; access to multiple copies of ρβ and multi-basis measurements; cluster expansion convergence limits low-temperature applicability.
- Confusing terms: In dissipative settings, local Fourier coefficients mix multiple terms; the paper’s rounding strategy mitigates this, but performance degrades if many large terms are “confusable” (e.g., high d or dense long-range couplings).
Glossary
- Adjoint (of a Lindbladian): The dual superoperator defined to satisfy a trace inner-product relation with the Lindbladian. "The adjoint of a Lindbladian is defined such that $\tr(X \mathcal{L}(Y)) = \tr(\mathcal{L}^\dagger(X) Y)$ for any operators ."
- Ancilla-free: Requiring no ancillary qubits in the quantum circuit or experiment. "it uses non-adaptive, ancilla-free randomized Pauli measurement circuits with a time resolution of only ;"
- Approximate degree: A smooth version of degree that counts only interactions above a chosen threshold. "The approximate degree of can be viewed as a smooth version of the degree: it measures the degree of a modified Lindbladian, obtained by disregarding sufficiently small interactions from ."
- Cluster expansion: A high-temperature series technique in statistical mechanics that may fail (diverge) at low temperatures. "the cluster expansion diverges at low temperatures."
- Coherent part: The Hamiltonian (unitary) component of a Lindbladian generator. "We refer to the first sum in \Cref{eq:lind-main} as the coherent or Hamiltonian part, while the second sum is the dissipative part."
- Convex optimization: A class of optimization methods used for finding zeros or minima of convex functions. "using tools from convex optimization."
- Dissipative part: The non-unitary component of open-system dynamics capturing system–environment interactions. "We refer to the first sum in \Cref{eq:lind-main} as the coherent or Hamiltonian part, while the second sum is the dissipative part."
- Effective sparsity: A sparsity notion that captures how many parameters effectively contribute, even if many are small. "However, similar parameters, e.g.\ the ``effective sparsity'' parameter in~\cite{bakshi2024structure}, have been considered previously."
- Fourier coefficients: Coefficients obtained by expanding an operator or channel in a Fourier-like (Pauli) basis. "the objective function consists of Fourier coefficients of the Lindbladian restricted to few-site regions."
- Fourier inversion: Recovering coefficients of a function or operator from its Fourier components. "Inspired by Fourier inversion, we consider expectation values of the form"
- Geometrically local: Interactions confined to nearby sites on an underlying geometry or lattice. "we present an algorithm for structure learning an unknown geometrically local Lindbladian given access to its real-time dynamics"
- Gibbs state: The thermal state of a quantum system at inverse temperature , proportional to . "access to copies of the Gibbs state $\rho_\beta \triangleq e^{-\beta H}/\tr(e^{-\beta H})$"
- Heisenberg limit: The ultimate scaling limit in quantum metrology that cannot be achieved here for channel learning. "The Heisenberg limit is not possible to attain for learning Lindbladians, as they define a quantum channel."
- High-temperature Gibbs states: Thermal states at sufficiently small (high temperature) where certain expansions and algorithms apply. "the first efficient algorithm for structure learning Hamiltonians from high-temperature Gibbs states."
- Inverse temperature: The parameter in the Gibbs state, equal to . "for some critical inverse temperature ."
- Iverson bracket: Notation that evaluates predicates to 1 (true) or 0 (false). "We use the Iverson bracket: $\iver{G} = 1$ if the proposition is true and $0$ otherwise."
- Lindbladian: The generator of Markovian open-system quantum dynamics appearing in the Lindblad master equation. "which evolve according to a Lindbladian (assuming that the evolution is time-independent and Markovian)."
- Local one-norm: A per-site bound on the sum of absolute values of coefficients of terms involving that site. "known bounds on the local one-norm $\lonorm{L} \leq g$"
- Markovian: Memoryless dynamics where the future depends only on the present state. "describes its evolution under Markovian dynamics via the master equation"
- Master equation: A differential equation governing the time evolution of open quantum systems. "describes its evolution under Markovian dynamics via the master equation"
- Newton–Raphson iteration: A root-finding method used here in a simplified form for parameter updates. "we display a simplified version of the Newton-Raphson iteration used in~\cite{haah2024learning}"
- Pauli eigenbasis: A measurement basis consisting of eigenstates of Pauli operators. "measure in a Pauli eigenbasis."
- Pauli eigenstate: A quantum state that is an eigenvector of a Pauli operator. "prepare a Pauli eigenstate"
- Pauli operator: Tensor products of single-qubit I, X, Y, Z matrices forming a basis for operators. "where , , and are -qubit Pauli operators."
- Power-law decay: Interaction strengths that decay polynomially with distance. "with -power-law decay for ."
- Quasi-local: Interactions that decay with distance, allowing effective locality beyond strict geometric locality. "quasi-local Lindbladians"
- Quasi-polynomial: A time complexity scaling like for some constant . "our algorithm is only quasi-polynomial for arbitrary parameters ."
- Quantum channel: A completely positive trace-preserving map describing physical quantum evolutions. "can be naturally interpreted as a Fourier coefficient of the channel ."
- Richardson iterations: A simple fixed-point (gradient-like) iterative method for solving linear or nonlinear equations. "including Richardson iterations,"
- Standard quantum limit: The typical scaling limit for estimation without entanglement-enhanced resources. "Thus, the standard quantum limit of is the optimal dependence on the error parameter."
- Structure learning: Identifying which terms (interactions) are present in the unknown generator or Hamiltonian. "we present an algorithm for structure learning an unknown geometrically local Lindbladian"
- Superoperator: A linear map acting on operators (matrices) rather than on state vectors. "we define a superoperator as a linear map from to ."
- Time resolution: The minimal time step or smallest evolution duration accessible in experiments. "time resolution of only "
- Trotterization: Product-formula simulation technique that approximates evolution under a sum of non-commuting generators. "it uses Trotterization to simulate access to $e^{-\ii(H - \widehat{H})}$"
- Unitary evolution: Reversible evolution governed by a Hamiltonian without dissipation. "While evolution under a Hamiltonian $e^{-\ii Ht}$ is always unitary"
Collections
Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.