Sequential Generation of Two-dimensional Super-area-law States with Local Parent Hamiltonian

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2505.02914
• Title: Sequential Generation of Two-dimensional Super-area-law States with Local Parent Hamiltonian
• Author: Wucheng Zhang (Princeton University)
• Classification: quant-ph (quantum physics), cond-mat.stat-mech (statistical mechanics)
• Publication Date: October 28, 2025 (arXiv v2)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.02914

Abstract

This paper constructs highly entangled two-dimensional quantum states by exploiting the correspondence between d-dimensional stochastic processes and d+1-dimensional quantum states. The entanglement structure of these states can be tuned between area law, sub-volume law, and volume law regimes. This correspondence also enables sequential generation protocols: these states can be prepared through a sequence of unitary transformations acting on auxiliary systems. The paper further discusses conditions under which these states possess local, frustration-free parent Hamiltonians.

Research Background and Motivation

Research Problems

1. Construction difficulty of super-area-law states: While one-dimensional super-area-law states (such as Motzkin chains) are well understood, their construction and characterization in two-dimensional systems remains an open problem
2. Preparation efficiency: Traditional adiabatic evolution methods require finely tuned Hamiltonians or non-local interactions, and are limited by vanishing energy gaps
3. Dimensional extension challenges: Automata theory becomes computationally infeasible above one dimension, and standard variational methods (such as PEPS) cannot effectively represent super-area-law entanglement

Significance

• Quantum information perspective: Entanglement entropy scaling is a core information-theoretic characteristic for understanding many-body quantum states
• Experimental feasibility: Preparation of super-area-law states on current quantum platforms remains challenging
• Theoretical significance: Establishing systematic connections between classical stochastic dynamics and quantum entanglement structure

Limitations of Existing Methods

• One-dimensional restriction: Methods like Motzkin spin chains are primarily focused on one-dimensional systems
• Computational complexity: Bond dimension of tensor network methods like PEPS exhibits super-polynomial growth for super-area-law states
• Preparation difficulty: Adiabatic evolution may involve super-polynomial time complexity (energy gap ~ q^(-L³))

Research Motivation

Utilize the correspondence between classical surface growth models (deposition-evaporation models) and quantum states to construct two-dimensional states with tunable entanglement structure, and provide practical sequential generation schemes.

Core Contributions

1. Establishing correspondence framework: Propose a systematic correspondence between d-dimensional stochastic processes and d+1-dimensional quantum states, particularly mapping deposition-evaporation surface growth models to two-dimensional quantum states
2. Constructing tunable entangled states: Explicitly construct two-dimensional quantum states with entanglement entropy tunable across three scaling regimes:
   • p < 1/2: area law S ~ O(L)
   • p = 1/2: sub-volume law S ~ O(L^(5/4))
   • p > 1/2: volume law S ~ O(L²)
3. Sequential generation protocol: Provide practical preparation schemes based on quantum channels, using O(L²) five-level systems (labeled 0, r, g, E, F) as emitters
4. Local parent Hamiltonian: Construct a frustration-free local parent Hamiltonian such that the generated states are its ground states
5. Explicit entanglement calculation: Compute entanglement entropy through Schmidt decomposition, revealing its relationship with the classical surface contour area: S = α⟨A⟩ + S_uncolored

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Input: Deposition-evaporation dynamics parameter p (deposition probability) and system size L×L
Output: Two-dimensional quantum state |Ψ⟩ whose entanglement structure is controlled by p
Constraints:

• Adjacent lattice point height difference ≤ 1
• Boundary conditions: h₀(t) = h_(L+1)(t) = 0
• Initial/final states are "horizon" configurations

Model Architecture

1. Classical Model Encoding

Update rules for the deposition-evaporation model:

• Deposition (probability p): h_i(t+Δt) = min{h_(i-1)(t), h_(i+1)(t)} + 1
• Evaporation (probability 1-p): h_i(t+Δt) = max{h_(i-1)(t), h_(i+1)(t)} - 1

In the continuum limit, corresponding to KPZ/EW equations:

∂h/∂t = (1/2)∂²h/∂x² - (λ_p/2)(∂h/∂x)² + η(x,t)

where the sign of λ_p is determined by p-1/2.

2. Quantum State Construction

Map the height field h_i(t) to lattice points on a two-dimensional square lattice, with spin-1/2 particles located on edges:

• Physical spins: s_(i±1/2, t±1/2), encoding height differences
• Color spins: c ∈ {0, r, g}, located at vertices, implementing color matching

Uncolored state:

|Ψ_uncolored⟩ = Σ_α √p_α |α⟩

where p_α is the probability of trajectory α.

Colored state:

|Ψ_colored⟩ = Σ_α Σ_(c⃗∈C_α) √p_α |α, c⃗⟩

Color matching condition: blocks of the same height deposited/evaporated must have the same color.

3. Schmidt Decomposition and Entanglement Calculation

Perform Schmidt decomposition on spatial slice t=L/2:

|Ψ_colored⟩ = Σ_(h_x) Σ_(c⃗_hx) √(2^(-A_hx) p_hx) |w^(c⃗_hx)_(L,hx)⟩ ⊗ |w^(c⃗_hx)_(R,hx)⟩

Entanglement entropy:

S = α⟨A⟩ + S_uncolored

where:

• α = log 2
• ⟨A⟩: average area under the surface
• S_uncolored = -Σ p_hx log p_hx

Technical Innovations

1. Dimensional Lifting Mapping

Innovatively map d-dimensional classical stochastic processes to d+1-dimensional quantum states, with the time dimension becoming one of the spatial dimensions. This allows statistical properties of classical surface growth to directly translate into quantum entanglement structure.

2. Color Matching Mechanism

Introduce color degrees of freedom to implement "block memory": deposited blocks must match colors during subsequent evaporation. This leads to exponential enhancement of entanglement entropy (2^A term), which is key to achieving super-area-law scaling.

3. Height Constraint Locality

The constraint that adjacent height differences ≤ 1 ensures all dynamical rules can be implemented with local operators, which is crucial for constructing local parent Hamiltonians.

4. Reflective vs. Absorbing Boundaries

Provide two approaches to enforce h ≥ 0:

• Reflective boundary: Evaporation forbidden at h=0, probability renormalized
• Absorbing boundary: Post-select trajectories with h ≥ 0

Both give identical entanglement scaling, but reflective boundary is more suitable for sequential generation.

Experimental Setup

Theoretical Analysis Framework

This work is primarily theoretical construction without numerical experiments, but verifies entanglement scaling through analytical calculations:

1. Entanglement Entropy Scaling Analysis

Based on known results from KPZ/EW theory:

p < 1/2 (stable phase):

• Midpoint height: ⟨h(L/2, t)⟩ ~ O(1)
• Fluctuations: W(t) ~ O(1)
• Entanglement entropy: S ~ O(L)

p = 1/2 (EW critical point):

• Midpoint height: ⟨h(L/2, t)⟩ ~ t^(1/4) ~ L^(1/4)
• Saturation time: T ~ L²
• ⟨A⟩ ~ L^(5/4)
• Entanglement entropy: S ~ L^(5/4)

p > 1/2 (KPZ phase):

• Midpoint height: ⟨h(L/2, t)⟩ ~ t ~ L
• Saturation time: T ~ L
• ⟨A⟩ ~ L²
• Entanglement entropy: S ~ L²

2. Parent Hamiltonian Verification

Constructed Hamiltonian form:

H = Σ_(i,t) (Σ_k Σ_c Σ_S⃗ Π^(k,c,S⃗)_(i,t)) + Π_initial + Π_final 
    + Π_left + Π_right + Π_color + H_Gauss

Verification of each projection operator includes:

• Locality: action range ≤ one lattice point neighborhood
• Frustration-free: |Ψ⟩ satisfies all local constraints
• Ground state uniqueness (in appropriate subspace)

Sequential Generation Protocol Verification

Emitter Design

• Hilbert space: H_em = ⊗^L (each stack ~ O(L) five-level systems)
• Total resources: O(L²) five-level systems
• Initial state: Reference state of alternating E-F stacks

Unitary Evolution

Apply U_n at each step n:

• n odd: U_E updates E stack
• n even: U_F updates F stack

Local decomposition:

U_F = U_b U_L U_R ∏_(j=1)^((L-1)/2-1) U_(F,j)
U_E = ∏_(j=1)^((L-1)/2) U_(E,j)

Matrix Element Verification

Explicitly provide all non-zero matrix elements (see Appendix D2), for example:

⟨F_Ec_Ec, ↑↑, 0|U_(F,j)|F_Ec_Ec, ↓↓, 0⟩ = √((1+p)/2)

Verify probability conservation: sum of probability squares for all possible transitions = 1

Experimental Results

Main Theoretical Results

1. Entanglement Phase Diagram

Construct complete entanglement phase diagram (Figure 4):

2. Entanglement Entropy Decomposition

Explicit calculation shows:

S = α⟨A⟩ + S_uncolored
     ↓         ↓
  leading term    subleading term

Colored vs. uncolored contributions:

• p < 1/2: both terms O(L)
• p = 1/2: α⟨A⟩L^(5/4) >> S_uncoloredL log L
• p > 1/2: α⟨A⟩~L² >> S_uncolored

Color matching plays a decisive role in entanglement enhancement at the critical point and KPZ phase.

3. Parent Hamiltonian Construction Success

Prove that |Ψ_abs,colored⟩ is the ground state of the constructed Hamiltonian:

• Frustration-free: each local projection operator Π satisfies Π|Ψ⟩=0
• Locality: all terms have action range ≤ one lattice point and neighbors
• Energy gap: not explicitly calculated, but structure suggests finite gap exists

Key Findings

1. Anisotropic Features

Unlike isotropic constructions in references 40-42, the present states exhibit anisotropy:

• Spatial slice: S ~ L^(5/4) (at p=1/2)
• Temporal slice: S ~ L log L (L coupled Motzkin chains)

This anisotropy enables sequential generation.

2. Boundary Condition Effects

Reflective vs. absorbing boundary conditions:

• Entanglement scaling: identical (probability distribution far from h=0 dominates)
• Generation efficiency: reflective boundary superior (no need to post-select h≥0)
• Physical realization: reflective boundary corresponds to |Ψ_ref⟩, absorbing to |Ψ_abs⟩

3. Cooling Phase Optimization

Introduce evaporation-dedicated "cooling" phase (p=0, L/2 rounds):

• Deterministically lower surface to horizon
• Improve post-selection success probability from exponentially small to near unity
• Does not affect entanglement entropy lower bound at t=L/2

Comparison with Related Work

This is the first work to achieve sequential generation of super-area-law states in two dimensions.

Related Work

One-dimensional Super-area-law States

• Motzkin chains 10-12: tunable entanglement (area law to volume law), parent Hamiltonian exists
• Fredkin chains 14, 15: similar structure, extensive entanglement
• Automata connection 16-18: pushdown automata correspond to stack memory structure

Two-dimensional Extension Attempts

• Critical fermions 3, 8, 9: logarithmic violation of area law
• Coupled Motzkin walks 40-42: achieve 2D by coupling multiple Motzkin chains, but lose sequential generation capability
• PEPS limitations 43: computational difficulty, cannot effectively represent super-area-law entanglement

Sequential Generation Methods

• Photonic quantum computing 36-39: time-delayed feedback schemes
• MPS/PEPS 26-28: sequential generation protocols
• Holographic states 29, 35: entanglement renormalization circuits

Surface Growth Models

• KPZ equation 45: nonlinear surface growth universality class
• EW equation 46: linear diffusive dynamics
• Ballistic deposition 49-52: discrete growth models

This work innovatively combines surface growth models with quantum state construction, establishing a new research paradigm.

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Correspondence established: Successfully establish systematic mapping from d-dimensional stochastic processes to d+1-dimensional quantum states, with deposition-evaporation model interpolating KPZ/EW dynamics
2. Tunable entanglement structure: Constructed two-dimensional states achieve three entanglement scalings:
   • Area law (p<1/2)
   • Sub-volume law S~L^(5/4) (p=1/2)
   • Volume law S~L² (p>1/2)
3. Practical preparation scheme: Provide sequential generation protocol based on O(L²) auxiliary systems, requiring only local unitary evolution at each step
4. Parent Hamiltonian: Construct local, frustration-free parent Hamiltonian, establishing connection between stochastic dynamics and quantum ground states

Limitations

1. Post-selection Problem

• Absorbing boundary: post-selection success probability exponentially small
• Mitigation strategy: introduce cooling phase, but still requires post-selection to return to horizon
• Experimental challenge: may require multiple runs

2. Anisotropy

• Spatial/temporal slice entanglement differs, limiting certain applications
• Lack of rotational symmetry

3. Unknown Energy Gap

• Energy gap of parent Hamiltonian not explicitly calculated
• Time complexity of adiabatic preparation unknown

4. Resource Requirements

• Requires O(L²) five-level systems as emitters
• Stack depth O(L) may be limited in experiments

5. Theoretical Analysis

• Primarily relies on known results from KPZ/EW theory
• Lacks rigorous mathematical proofs (e.g., fluctuation exponents)

Future Directions

1. Experimental Implementation

• Photonic platform: utilize time-delayed feedback mechanisms
• Ion traps: sequential gate operations
• Superconducting circuits: auxiliary qubit schemes

2. Theoretical Extensions

• Other stochastic processes (directed percolation, contact process)
• Three and higher dimensions
• Open system dynamics

3. Computational Applications

• MBQC resource states: similar to one-dimensional SPT states 63-66
• Quantum simulation: classical statistical mechanics models
• Entanglement transitions: measurement-induced phase transitions

4. Information-theoretic Connections

• Mutual information and classical correlations
• Topological entanglement entropy
• Entanglement spectrum structure

5. Optimization Schemes

• Reduce post-selection overhead
• Improve generation efficiency
• Restore rotational symmetry

In-depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Conceptual Innovation ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Paradigm shift: systematically map classical stochastic processes to quantum entangled states, opening new construction methods
• Dimensional breakthrough: first to achieve sequential generation of super-area-law states in 2D, overcoming difficulties of automata theory in higher dimensions
• Unified framework: unify KPZ/EW universality class, quantum entanglement theory, and sequential generation protocols in one framework

2. Technical Rigor ⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Explicit construction: clearly provide all details of quantum states, parent Hamiltonians, and unitary evolutions
• Analytical calculation: precisely compute entanglement entropy through Schmidt decomposition
• Completeness: cover state construction, entanglement analysis, Hamiltonian, and generation protocol

3. Practical Value ⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Implementability: sequential generation protocol can in principle be implemented on current quantum platforms
• Tunability: control entanglement scaling through single parameter p, facilitating experimental exploration
• Extensibility: framework generalizable to other stochastic processes and dimensions

4. Theoretical Depth ⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Interdisciplinary connection: connect statistical physics, quantum information, and automata theory
• Physical insight: reveal deep connections between classical surface fluctuations and quantum entanglement
• Universality: based on KPZ/EW universality class, results broadly applicable

5. Writing Clarity ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Well-structured, logical flow
• Intuitive figures (Figures 1-3, 5-7)
• Comprehensive appendices (Motzkin review, KPZ derivation, proof details)

Weaknesses

1. Lack of Experimental Verification

• Pure theoretical work, no numerical simulations or experimental data
• Actual impact of post-selection efficiency not quantified
• Finite-size effects not discussed

2. Mathematical Rigor

• Relies on physical arguments from KPZ/EW theory, not rigorous mathematical proofs
• Parent Hamiltonian energy gap not calculated
• Convergence in large L limit not rigorously proven

3. Insufficient Resource Analysis

• Time complexity of sequential generation not detailed
• Quantitative comparison with other preparation methods (variational, adiabatic) lacking
• Feasibility of stack depth O(L) in practical systems questionable

4. Limited Application Scenarios

• Anisotropy limits certain applications (e.g., holographic duality)
• MBQC resource state potential only mentioned, not developed
• Connection to actual physical systems not sufficiently direct

5. Incomplete Comparisons

• Comparison with 40-42 mainly on critical point entanglement scaling
• Other 2D super-area-law construction methods not discussed
• Physical meaning of different boundary conditions not thoroughly explained

Impact Assessment

Short-term Impact (1-2 years)

• Theory: Provides new construction paradigm for 2D super-area-law states, likely to inspire follow-up theoretical work
• Experiment: Offers concrete implementation schemes for photonic/ion trap platforms, may enable proof-of-concept experiments
• Citation potential: High, especially in quantum information and statistical physics intersection

Medium-term Impact (3-5 years)

• Method generalization: Likely extension to other stochastic processes (percolation, reaction-diffusion)
• Application development: Applications in quantum simulation and MBQC gradually clarified
• Experimental realization: Small-scale demonstrations possible on advanced quantum platforms

Long-term Impact (5+ years)

• Paradigm significance: Classical-quantum correspondence may become standard tool for constructing exotic quantum states
• Theory deepening: Promotes understanding of deep connections between entanglement structure and classical information
• Technical maturation: If post-selection problem overcome, may become practical quantum state preparation technique

Applicable Scenarios

1. Quantum Simulation

• Target: Simulate classical stochastic processes (KPZ growth, interface dynamics)
• Advantage: Direct encoding, entanglement structure reflects classical statistics
• Limitation: Requires large auxiliary system

2. Quantum State Engineering

• Target: Prepare resource states with specific entanglement structure
• Advantage: Strong tunability, analytically controllable
• Limitation: Low post-selection efficiency

3. Entanglement Theory Research

• Target: Explore entanglement scaling and phase transitions
• Advantage: Explicitly computable, clear parameter space
• Limitation: Anisotropic, non-rotationally invariant

4. Tensor Network Methods

• Target: Test new tensor network ansätze
• Advantage: Known exact states serve as benchmark
• Limitation: Super-area-law states themselves difficult to represent with standard TN

5. Teaching and Outreach

• Target: Demonstrate classical-quantum correspondence
• Advantage: Intuitive, clear physical picture
• Limitation: Technical details complex

Reproducibility ⭐⭐⭐⭐

Theoretical reproducibility: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

• All constructions explicit, appendices provide complete details
• Schmidt decomposition derivations verifiable
• Parent Hamiltonian matrix elements explicitly given

Numerical reproducibility: ⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Small systems (L~10) verifiable by exact diagonalization
• Sequential generation testable by classical simulation
• Entanglement entropy calculation numerically verifiable

Experimental reproducibility: ⭐⭐⭐

• In principle feasible, but requires overcoming technical challenges
• Post-selection problem main obstacle
• May require advanced quantum platforms

Selected References

Foundational Theory

• 1 Hastings (2007): Area law proof in 1D
• 3 Eisert et al. (2010): Area law review
• 10-12 Motzkin chain series: Prototype of 1D super-area-law states

Surface Growth

• 45 Kardar-Parisi-Zhang (1986): KPZ equation
• 46 Edwards-Wilkinson (1982): EW dynamics
• 48 Morral-Yepes et al. (2024): Deposition-evaporation model and entanglement transitions

Sequential Generation

• 16 Gopalakrishnan (2025): Pushdown automata and sequential generation
• 26-28 PEPS sequential generation series
• 36-39 Photonic quantum computing schemes

2D Super-area-law

• 40 Balasubramanian et al. (2023): Isotropic construction
• 41, 42 Zhang & Klich: Coupled Fredkin/Motzkin chains

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality theoretical physics paper that makes important progress on construction and preparation of two-dimensional super-area-law quantum states. By establishing correspondence between classical stochastic processes and quantum states, the author not only provides new construction methods but also offers practical sequential generation protocols. Despite limitations in experimental verification and post-selection efficiency, its conceptual innovation, technical rigor, and potential impact make it a significant contribution to the field. Recommendation: ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆ (4.5/5)