The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
General Entanglement Scaling Laws from Time Evolution
Open accessAbstract
We establish a general scaling law for the entanglement of a large class of ground states and dynamically evolving states of quantum spin chains: we show that the geometric entropy of a distinguished block saturates, and hence follows an entanglement-boundary law. These results apply to any ground state of a gapped model resulting from dynamics generated by a local Hamiltonian, as well as, dually, to states that are generated via a sudden quench of an interaction as recently studied in the case of dynamics of quantum phase transitions. We achieve these results by exploiting ideas from quantum information theory and tools provided by Lieb-Robinson bounds. We also show that there exist noncritical fermionic systems and equivalent spin chains with rapidly decaying interactions violating this entanglement-boundary law. Implications for the classical simulatability are outlined.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Indeed, this fact is related to correlation and entanglement spreading according to the Lieb-Robinson theorem that states that, after a sufficiently large time, states can become strongly entangled ([91-96], see also [97]).”
From Can one trust quantum simulators? (2012) · cites this paper as [92]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Entanglement in Quantum Critical Phenomena
Vidal, G., Latorre, J. I., Rico, E., & Kitaev, A. (2003) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.90.227902 · Cited by 2,793
Bhatia, R. (1997) · Graduate texts in mathematics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-0653-8 · Cited by 2,334
Persistent Entanglement in Arrays of Interacting Particles
Briegel, H. J., & Raussendorf, R. (2001) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.86.910 · Cited by 1,950
Scaling of entanglement close to a quantum phase transition
Osterloh, A., Amico, L., Falci, G., & Fazio, R. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/416608a · Cited by 1,860
Srednicki, M. (1993) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.71.666 · Cited by 1,858
Entanglement in a simple quantum phase transition
Osborne, T. J., & Nielsen, M. A. (2002) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.66.032110 · Cited by 1,472
Self-citationThe finite group velocity of quantum spin systems
Lieb, E. H., & Robinson, D. W. (1972) · Communications in Mathematical Physics · doi:10.1007/bf01645779 · Cited by 1,463
Quantum source of entropy for black holes
Bombelli, L., Koul, R. K., Lee, J., & Sorkin, R. D. (1986) · Physical Review D · doi:10.1103/physrevd.34.373 · Cited by 1,439
Finitely correlated states on quantum spin chains
Fannes, M., Nachtergaele, B., & Werner, R. F. (1992) · Communications in Mathematical Physics · doi:10.1007/bf02099178 · Cited by 1,422
Quantum Communication through an Unmodulated Spin Chain
Bose, S. (2003) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.91.207901 · Cited by 1,407
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- P. Calabrese, J. Stat. Mech., 2004, P002
- 10.1103/PhysRevB.72.045141 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–201 of 201
Quantum Simulation of Motzkin Spin Chains with Rydberg Atoms
Anonymous, Barghathi, H., Maestro, A. D., & Mukherjee, R. (2026) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/ph91-6pg2
Metadata
- Authors
- Eisert, J., & Osborne, T. J.
- Affiliations
- London Institute for Mathematical Sciences (GB)
- Royal Holloway University of London (GB)
- Venue
- Physical Review Letters
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2006-10-12
- Volume
- 97
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 150404-150404
- ISSN
- 0031-9007 (ISSN-L)
- 1079-7114
- OpenAlex
- W2062419763
- Cited by
- 201
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 18
- FWCI
- 9.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Physical Review Letters (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum many-body systems
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Information and Cryptography
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Condensed Matter Physics › Theoretical and Computational Physics
- Keywords
- quantum spin chains, geometric entropy, Lieb-Robinson bound, sudden quench, quantum phase transitions, gapped ground states, fermionic systems, quantum information
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
