On the validity of intermediate tracing in multiple quantum interactions

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.10319
• Title: On the validity of intermediate tracing in multiple quantum interactions
• Authors: Reuven Ianconescu, Bin Zhang, Aharon Friedman, Jacob Scheuer, Avraham Gover
• Classification: quant-ph (Quantum Physics)
• Publication Date: October 11, 2025 (arXiv preprint)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.10319

Abstract

This paper investigates the computational efficiency problem in interactions between multiple initially independent quantum systems. When systems interact sequentially, their density matrices must be combined as tensor products and Hamiltonians applied to the composite system. Evaluating the final state of a particular system after multiple successive interactions requires tracing out all other systems from the composite system, which can lead to dramatic growth in system dimensionality. To improve computational efficiency, one can consider retaining only the subsystems involved in the current interaction while tracing out non-interacting systems. For the case of successive interactions between a "target" system and "incident" systems (where incident systems do not interact with each other), this paper proves that under appropriate conditions, systems can be added to the composite system before interaction and traced out after interaction is complete.

Research Background and Motivation

1. Core Problem: The computational complexity problem of multiple quantum system interactions. When multiple quantum systems interact sequentially, the dimensionality of the composite system grows exponentially, resulting in enormous computational resource requirements.
2. Problem Significance:
   • Widespread applications in quantum optics, quantum dot physics, and electron-atom interactions
   • Involves resonant interactions between free and bound electrons (FEBERI)
   • Cutting-edge research in electron beam-induced optical excitation and entanglement generation
3. Limitations of Existing Methods:
   • Traditional approaches require maintaining complete multi-body composite systems
   • Computational complexity grows exponentially with the number of systems
   • Memory requirements may exceed computational capacity
4. Research Motivation:
   • Seeking mathematically rigorous and computationally efficient treatment methods
   • Proving the validity of intermediate tracing operations
   • Providing theoretical foundations for practical quantum system simulations

Core Contributions

1. Theoretical Proof: Provides rigorous mathematical proof of the validity of intermediate tracing operations, demonstrating that systems need only exist in the composite system during their interaction periods
2. Computational Efficiency Optimization: Demonstrates three different system management strategies, with the optimal strategy achieving 60% improvement in computational efficiency
3. Universal Framework: Establishes a general theoretical framework applicable to various quantum interaction problems
4. Numerical Verification: Validates theoretical predictions through concrete examples using three-qubit systems

Detailed Methodology

Task Definition

The research objective is to determine when to add systems to the composite system and when to trace them out in sequential multi-quantum system interactions, maximizing computational efficiency while maintaining computational accuracy.

Theoretical Framework

Basic Setup

Consider two systems: System A (target system interacting with incident systems) and System B (another incident system).

Evolution of System A Alone

The density matrix $\rho_A$ of system A evolves according to Hamiltonian $H_A$: $\frac{d\rho_A}{dt} = i(\rho_A H_A - H_A \rho_A)$

Construction of Composite System

When system B is added, the composite system's density matrix is: $\rho_S = \rho_A \otimes \rho_B$

Individual system density matrices are obtained through partial trace operations: $\rho_A = \text{Tr}_B \rho_S, \quad \rho_B = \text{Tr}_A \rho_S$

Composite System Hamiltonian

Since system B does not interact with A, the Hamiltonian used is: $H_S = H_A \otimes U$ where $U$ is the identity operator.

Key Proof

The equation of motion for the composite system is: $\frac{d\rho_S}{dt} = i[\rho_S, H_S] = i(\rho_S H_S - H_S \rho_S)$

Through tensor product properties and partial trace operations, it can be proven that:

1. The evolution of system A is unaffected by the presence of system B
2. System B remains unchanged: $\frac{d\rho_B}{dt} = 0$

Technical Innovations

1. Mathematical Rigor: Provides complete mathematical proofs rather than relying solely on intuition or numerical verification
2. Universality: Applicable to various different quantum interaction scenarios
3. Practicality: Directly guides system management strategies in actual computations

Experimental Setup

System Configuration

Three qubits (A, B, C) are used for numerical verification:

• Qubit A: positive eigenstate of $\sigma_x$
• Qubit B: positive eigenstate of $\sigma_y$
• Qubit C: positive eigenstate of $\sigma_z$

Interaction Model

Pure spin-spin interactions are employed: $H = \boldsymbol{\sigma} \cdot \boldsymbol{\sigma}$

Numerical Implementation

Time evolution is performed using recursive equations: $\rho^{(n+1)} = \rho^{(n)} + i \cdot dt \cdot (\rho^{(n)}H - H\rho^{(n)})$

• Time step: $dt = 1 \times 10^{-4}$
• Evolution steps: 500

Three Management Strategies

Strategy 1 (Least Efficient)

• Continuously maintains the complete three-qubit system $\rho_{ABC}$
• All interactions occur in 8-dimensional space

Strategy 2 (Moderate Efficiency)

• Constructs complete system initially
• Traces out non-participating systems after first interaction
• Second interaction occurs in 4-dimensional space

Strategy 3 (Most Efficient)

• Retains only systems involved in current interaction
• Both interactions occur in 4-dimensional space

Experimental Results

Main Results

All three strategies produce identical final quantum state parameters:

Qubit A: $r = 0.98913$, $\theta = 95.072°$, $\phi = 6.3053°$Qubit B: $r = 0.99507$, $\theta = 84.299°$, $\phi = 89.424°$Qubit C: $r = 0.99399$, $\theta = 8.481°$, $\phi = -83.706°$

Computational Efficiency Comparison

• Strategy 2 achieves 30% efficiency improvement over Strategy 1
• Strategy 3 achieves 60% efficiency improvement over Strategy 1

Physical Analysis

Verification through measurement probability analysis confirms the physical reasonableness of interactions:

• First interaction (A-B): A and B exchange partial quantum state characteristics; C remains unchanged
• Second interaction (A-C): A and C exchange partial quantum state characteristics; B remains unchanged

Related Work

This paper builds upon the authors' previous research on FEBERI (free electron-bound electron resonant interactions), including related work on:

• Interaction analysis between quantum wave packets and two-level systems
• Multi-electron coherent excitation research
• Quantum origins of spontaneous emission and superradiance phenomena
• Electron beam-induced whispering gallery mode excitation

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Under appropriate conditions, quantum systems need only exist in the composite system during their interaction periods
2. Systems can be added before interaction and traced out immediately after interaction
3. This method significantly improves computational efficiency while maintaining computational accuracy

Practical Applications

This theory provides important guidance for the following research fields:

• Multi-electron-TLS interactions in FEBERI processes
• Interactions between quantum electron wave functions and radiation modes
• Evolution analysis of superradiance phenomena

Limitations

• Requires at most one electron in the interaction region during interaction time
• Applicable when incident systems do not directly interact with each other
• Requires localized interactions between systems

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Rigor: Provides complete mathematical proofs with solid theoretical foundations
2. Practical Value: Directly addresses efficiency problems in quantum many-body computations
3. Strong Universality: Applicable to multiple quantum interaction scenarios
4. Sufficient Verification: Validates theoretical predictions through numerical examples

Weaknesses

1. Limited Application Scope: Only applicable to specific types of interaction patterns
2. Scalability for Complex Systems: May require further extension for more complex interaction networks
3. Lack of Experimental Verification: Absence of experimental verification on actual quantum systems

Impact

1. Theoretical Contribution: Provides important theoretical tools for quantum many-body computations
2. Practical Value: Can significantly improve computational efficiency in relevant quantum simulations
3. Development Potential: Lays foundations for efficient simulation of more complex quantum systems

Applicable Scenarios

• Multi-photon-atom interactions in quantum optics
• Electron-sample interactions in electron microscopy
• Sequential interactions between quantum dots and photons
• Controlled quantum interactions in cold atom systems

References

The paper cites 21 relevant references, primarily covering:

• Fundamental theory of electron beam-induced optical excitation
• Free electron-induced photon entanglement
• PINEM techniques and quantum state tomography
• Electron coupling to whispering gallery modes
• Quantum coherence and superradiance phenomena

Overall Assessment: This is a theoretically rigorous and highly practical quantum physics paper that provides important theoretical foundations and practical methods for efficient computation of multiple quantum system interactions. While the application scope has certain limitations, it holds significant guidance value within its applicable domains.