Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Theoretical analysis demonstrates complex operator growth rates under Lindbladian dynamics, revealing that environmental dissipation does not suppress quantum chaotic complexity growth.
The universal operator-growth hypothesis (OGH) states that in a closed chaotic system the Lanc- zos coeffcients grow linearly, bn ≃ αn, and that the rate α bounds the Lyapunov exponent, λL ≤ 2α. We ask how this structure is modified when the system is coupled to a Markovian environment, so that the generator becomes non-Hermitian. Applying the Arnoldi recursion to the vectorized Lindbladian in the infinite-temperature Wightman inner product, we organize the resulting com- plex growth rate αC = αR + iαI (the real sub-diagonal and complex diagonal Arnoldi coeffcients) around three exact statements. First, the diagonal’s real part is fixed exactly by Re an = −2γ⟨ ˆ G⟩n, identifying the imaginary rate as the rate at which the growing operator accumulates weight in the dissipation channels; its magnitude σG is non-universal (set by the jump operators), but the generator symmetry G† (γ) = −G(−γ) makes bn even and Re an odd in the dissipation strength γ, so universally αI = 2γσG turns on linearly and αR is renormalized only at O(γ2 ). Second, for the large-q SYK model we obtain the closed form αC = J − 2i(q − 2)γ, whose imaginary part is fixed solely by the interaction range. Third, we argue—on the same footing as the OGH itself—that the bound extends as λL ≤ 2αR(γ) with αR(γ) ≤ αR(0) + O(γ), because the dissipator is a local bounded superoperator that narrows the autocorrelation’s analyticity strip by at most O(γ). Rather than merely acquiring a phase, the imaginary rate is an exact, parity-odd measure of dissipative operator spreading, while the complexity-growth rate is protected to O(γ2 ): dissipation does not suppress operator growth.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wakaura et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: