Paper detail

Geometric Complexity of Quantum Channels via Unitary Dilations

Nielsen's geometric approach to quantum circuit complexity provides a Riemannian framework for quantifying the cost of implementing unitary (closed--system) dynamics. For open dynamics, however, the reduced evolution is described by quantum channels and admits many inequivalent Stinespring realizations, so any meaningful complexity notion must specify which microscopic resources are counted as accessible and which transformations are regarded as gauge. We introduce and analyze a geometric complexity functional for families of quantum channels based on unitary dilations. We distinguish an implementation-dependent complexity, defined relative to explicit dilation data, from an intrinsic channel complexity obtained by minimizing over a physically motivated class of admissible dilations (e.g. bounded environment dimension, energy or norm constraints, and penalty structures). The functional has a subtractive form: it compares the geometric cost of the total unitary realization with a canonical surrogate term that removes purely environmental contributions. We justify this subtraction from concise postulates, including closed-system consistency, environment-only neutrality, and invariance under dilation gauge transformations that leave the channel unchanged. This leads to a companion quantity, noise complexity, quantifying the loss of geometric complexity relative to a prescribed ideal closed evolution. We establish a coherence-based lower bound for unitary geometric complexity, derive structural properties such as linear time scaling under time-homogeneous dilations, and obtain dissipator--controlled bounds in the Markovian (GKSL/Lindblad) regime under a standard dilation construction. Finally, we illustrate the framework on canonical benchmark noise models, including dephasing, amplitude damping, and depolarizing (Pauli) channels.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.