Conformal invariance and quantum non-locality in critical hybrid circuits Yaodong Li,1 Xiao Chen,2, 3, 4 Andreas W. W. Ludwig,1 and Matthew P. A. Fisher1 1Department of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 2Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 3Department of Physics and Center for Theory of Quantum Matter, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309 4Department of Physics, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467 (Dated: September 14, 2021) We establish the emergence of a conformal field theory (CFT) ina (1+1)-dimensional hybrid quantum circuit right at the measurement-driven entanglement transition, by revealing space-time conformal covariance of entanglement entropies and mutual information for various subregions at different circuit depths. While the evolution takes place in real time, the spacetime manifold of the circuit appears to host a Euclidean field theory with imaginary time. Throughout the paper we investigate Clifford circuits with several different boundary conditions by injecting physical qubits at the spatial and/or temporal boundaries, all giving consistent characterizations of the underlying “Clifford CFT". We emphasize (super)universal results that are consequences solely of the conformal invariance and do not depend crucially on the precise nature of the CFT. Among these are the infinite entangling speed as a consequence of measurement-induced quantum non-locality, and the critical purification dynamics of a mixed initial state. CONTENTS A. Numerical results 19 B. Determination of pc and Y=T 21 I. Introduction1 V. Discussion and outlook 21 II. The hybrid circuit model and the conjecture4 A. Summary 21 A. The hybrid circuit models with different B. Restatement of the central assumptions 21 boundary conditions4 C. Universality class of the transition and B. Statement of the conjecture and example relationship with critical 2D percolation 22 calculations of entanglement entropy6 D. Outlook 23 C. Finite rectangular geometry and the 1. Extensions within the current framework 23 Schwarz-Christoffel mapping8 2. Implications of non-unitary dynamics 23 3. Experimental relevance 23 III. Results on rectangular circuits 10 A. Circuit with boundary conditions fffa - Acknowledgements 24 Fig.2(a) 10 1. Bipartite entanglement entropies as 3-point A. Review of some elementary results in CFT 24 functions 10 2. Entanglement dynamics 11 B. Purification dynamics of reference qubits in the 3. Mutual information as 4-point functions 11 Clifford Circuit 25 4. Limits of the 4-point function from (1) Operator Product Expansion (OPE) 12 C. The scaling dimension hf jf from \localizable B. Circuit with boundary conditions afaa - entanglement" 27 Fig.2(b) 13 C. Circuit with boundary conditions fafa - D. Parallel results for the Hartley entropy in Haar circuits from minimal cuts in critical first-passage arXiv:2003.12721v3 [quant-ph] 14 Sep 2021 Fig.2(c) 14 1. Bell-pair entanglement entropy at early percolation 28 times 15 2. Bell-pair entanglement entropy at late References 30 times 16 D. Circuit with boundary conditions aaaa - Fig.2(d) 17 I. INTRODUCTION 1. Entanglement entropies as 2-point functions 17 Entanglement is a central concept in quantum physics. 2. Mutual information as 4-point functions 17 It violates classical laws of physics in dramatic ways, and 3. Entanglement dynamics and the absence of makes quantum communication and quantum computa- entanglement lightcone 18 tion fundamentally more powerful than their classical counterparts [1]. In recent years, the entropy of entan- IV. Periodic boundary condition 19 glement has proven useful in condensed matter physics, 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ providing new insights and tools for understanding quan- (a) ~ After: ~ ~ ~ tum states of matter, either in or out of equilibrium, at ~ zero or finite temperature [2{10]. One of the most bizzare aspects of entanglement, namely quantum non-locality, has always involved wave- 2-qubit measurement functions subject to measurements. The measurements, time in the Bell basis albeit local, have non-local influences on the states and their entanglement structure. In the famous EPR ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ thought experiment [11, 12], one destroys entanglement ~ between a pair of distant qubits by making local mea- Before: surements in exchange for perfectly correlated measure- Alice Bob Charlie Eve ment outcomes. Conversely, one can entangle a pair of (b) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ distant qubits with local measurements via a mechanism ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ similar to quantum teleportation [13, 14], without the … two ever needing to talk to one another { a phenomenon known as \entanglement swapping" that has found wide applications in quantum information science [13, 15{17] time (see Fig.1(a) for an illustration). These are examples of \measurement-induced quantum non-locality" in sys- tems of a few qubits, and the experiments usually re- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ quire carefully following specific protocols (that is, mak- … ing the right unitary gates and right measurements at the right place and right time). One is therefore led to the following question: can quantum non-locality show up FIG. 1. Illustration of the entanglement swapping proto- in many-body quantum dynamics under measurements col. (a) An example with four parties. The initial state without fine tuning? Notice that this is never possible consists of two Bell pairs, (Alice, Bob) and (Charlie, Eve), in unitary systems, since information as well as quantum with Alice and Bob far apart, as well as Charlie and Eve. entanglement must evolve in a strictly local fashion, as Suppose Bob and Charlie are spatially proximate and they required by the Lieb-Robinson bound [18, 19]. make a collective 2-qubit measurement in the Bell basis ( f p1 (j00i ± j11i) ; p1 (j01i ± j10i)g)[1]. The measurement 2 2 Recently there has been some interest in a novel phase \swaps" the entangled pairs, and now we have entangled pairs transition in the dynamics of entanglement, driven by (Alice, Eve) and (Bob, Charlie). Notice that Alice and Eve repetitive local measurements in the time evolution of an never directly talked to one another, but nevertheless become otherwise unitary quantum system [20{34]. Such sys- entangled due to the measurement: for each one of the four tems can be conveniently modelled as a \random hy- possible measurement outcomes, Alice and Eve share a differ- brid quantum circuit" [35], composed of both random ent state in the Bell basis. Since the distance between Alice unitary gates that increase entanglement and (on their and Eve is arbitrary, the speed of entanglement is arbitrarily own) \thermalize" the system [36{38], and local mea- large. However, no information is transmitted: in order for surements made at random positions of the circuit that Alice and Eve to know what their wavefunction is, classical in- act against this tendency; the only tuning parameter of formation about the mesurement outcome must be obtained from Bob and Charlie via classical communication. (b) A this model is thus the measurement strength/frequency. many-qubit example of entanglement swapping. In this cir- The phase transition is a consequence of this competi- cuit with nearest neighbor gates, only a finite circuit depth is tion, and separates a \volume-law entangled phase" and required to generate a long-range entangled Bell pair, given an \area-law entangled phase" at low/high strengths of that the initial state is properly set-up and each two-qubit measurements, respectively. Various aspects of the tran- Bell measurement is perfect. This fine-tuned example merely sition have been explored, including numerical charac- serves the purpose of illustrating the possibility of infinite en- terizations of the critical entanglement dynamics (and tangling speed in many-body systems. Notice the similarity \statics" of the steady-state) [22{24, 27, 31, 32]; ana- with the actual circuit in Fig.2. lytic mappings to effective statistical mechanical mod- els [22, 28, 29], interpreting the entanglement transition as a conventional Landau ordering transition; two differ- ence/absence of the transition [20, 21, 25] and evidences ent mappings to properties of 2D critical percolation for for the transition in more realistic contexts [26, 30]; con- the transition in hybrid circuits with Haar random uni- nections to quantum channel capacity and quantum error tary gates (i.e. random matrices sampled from the Haar correction [25, 27, 28, 31]; and implications for classical measure on the unitary group U(4) on two qubits), one simulability of unitary circuits in (2+1)-dimensions [39]. for the 0th R´enyi (Hartley) entropy [22], and another for Curiosities of the transition aside, the numerical acces- the nth R´enyi entropies with n ≥ 1 in the limit of infinite sibility of the model alone makes it a convenient theoret- onsite Hilbert space dimension [29]; the \genericity" of ical platform for investigating non-unitary quantum dy- the transition, e.g. discussions of conditions for the pres- namics. For example, one can ask if the aforementioned 3 measurement-induced quantum non-localtity shows up in locality" is a consequence of broken unitarity, rather than such circuits. In Ref. [24], it was suggested that the dis- of specific protocols/algorithms. entangling capabilities of local measurements are indeed We establish the