- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Unfolded Krylov complexity: Universal chaotic dynamics without false positives

Johanna Erdmenger1, Kyoung-Bum Huh2, Hyun-Sik Jeong3,4, and Juan F. Pedraza5

PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 086021 – Published 27 October, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/tgwh-w5kp

Abstract

A central challenge in diagnosing quantum chaos is to distinguish genuine many-body scrambling from kinematic effects of the spectrum. Krylov state complexity, or spread complexity, has emerged as a powerful diagnostic, with its characteristic growth, peak, and relaxation often taken as signatures of chaos. However, previous work has shown that this criterion can give false positives: saddle-dominated integrable systems may display prominent peaks even without random-matrix level correlations. We argue, based on complementary numerical and analytical evidence, that this ambiguity can be resolved by unfolding the spectrum prior to constructing the ensuing Krylov dynamics. By removing the nonuniversal smooth density of states while retaining microscopic spectral correlations, unfolding suppresses spurious peaks in integrable systems while preserving the universal spectral signatures of chaotic systems. Analytically, the formulation of the Lanczos iteration in terms of orthogonal polynomials yields an exact complexity kernel with a robust near-diagonal structure whose fine-grained features reflect the underlying spectral correlations. Moreover, for the logarithmic model, unfolding can be performed exactly, mapping the spectrum to a uniform lattice and yielding an analytic spread complexity that removes the false-positive peak. These findings establish unfolded Krylov complexity as a more reliable probe of genuine many-body scrambling.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (95)

  1. S. H. Shenker and D. Stanford, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2014) 067.
  2. S. H. Shenker and D. Stanford, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2015) 132.
  3. A. M. García-García and Jacobus J. M. Verbaarschot, Phys. Rev. D 94, 126010 (2016).
  4. J. S. Cotler, G. Gur-Ari, M. Hanada, J. Polchinski, P. Saad, S. H. Shenker, D. Stanford, A. Streicher, and M. Tezuka, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2017) 118; 09 (2018) 002(E).
  5. J. de Boer, E. Llabrés, J. F. Pedraza, and D. Vegh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 201604 (2018).
  6. D. Stanford and E. Witten, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 24, 1475 (2020).
  7. A. Altland and J. Sonner, arXiv:2604.12784.
  8. Y. Sekino and L. Susskind, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2008) 065.
  9. A. I. Larkin and Y. N. Ovchinnikov, Sov. Phys. JETP 28, 1200 (1969), http://jetp.ras.ru/cgi-bin/dn/e_028_06_1200.pdf.
  10. G. P. Berman and G. M. Zaslavsky, Physica A (Amsterdam) 91, 450 (1978).
  11. J. Maldacena, S. H. Shenker, and D. Stanford, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2016) 106.
  12. H. J. Lipkin, N. Meshkov, and A. J. Glick, Nucl. Phys. 62, 188 (1965).
  13. T. Xu, T. Scaffidi, and X. Cao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 140602 (2020).
  14. K. Hashimoto, K.-B. Huh, K.-Y. Kim, and R. Watanabe, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2020) 068.
  15. M. L. Mehta, Random Matrices, Vol. 142 (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2004).
  16. O. Bohigas, M. J. Giannoni, and C. Schmit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 1 (1984).
  17. O. Bohigas, M. J. Giannoni, and C. Schmit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 1 (1984).
  18. T. Guhr, A. Muller-Groeling, and H. A. Weidenmuller, Phys. Rep. 299, 189 (1998).
  19. O. Bohigas and M.-J. Giannoni, Mathematical and Computational Methods in Nuclear Physics (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 31 May 2005).
  20. M. V. Berry and M. Tabor, Proc. R. Soc. A 356, 375 (1977).
  21. D. E. Parker, X. Cao, A. Avdoshkin, T. Scaffidi, and E. Altman, Phys. Rev. X 9, 041017 (2019).
  22. V. Balasubramanian, P. Caputa, J. M. Magan, and Q. Wu, Phys. Rev. D 106, 046007 (2022).
  23. P. Caputa, H.-S. Jeong, S. Liu, J. F. Pedraza, and L.-C. Qu, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2024) 337.
  24. P. Nandy, A. S. Matsoukas-Roubeas, P. Martínez-Azcona, A. Dymarsky, and A. del Campo, Phys. Rep. 1125–1128, 1 (2025).
  25. E. Rabinovici, A. Sánchez-Garrido, R. Shir, and J. Sonner, arXiv:2507.06286.
  26. H.-S. Jeong and J. F. Pedraza, arXiv:2608.26825.
  27. C. Lanczos, J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand. B 45, 255 (1950).
  28. B. Bhattacharjee, X. Cao, P. Nandy, and T. Pathak, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2022) 174.
  29. K.-B. Huh, H.-S. Jeong, and J. F. Pedraza, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2024) 137.
  30. B. Craps, O. Evnin, and G. Pascuzzi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 050402 (2025).
  31. J. Erdmenger, S.-K. Jian, and Z.-Y. Xian, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2023) 176.
  32. O. Bohigas, in Chaos and Quantum Physics (Les Houches Session LII), edited by M.-J. Giannoni, A. Voros, and J. Zinn-Justin (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1989), pp. 87–199.
  33. T. Guhr, J.-Z. Ma, S. Meyer, and T. Wilke, Phys. Rev. D 59, 054501 (1999).
  34. J. M. G. Gómez, R. A. Molina, A. Relaño, and J. Retamosa, Phys. Rev. E 66, 036209 (2002).
  35. I. O. Morales, E. Landa, P. Stránský, and A. Frank, Phys. Rev. E 84, 016203 (2011).
  36. S. Das, S. K. Garg, C. Krishnan, and A. Kundu, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2024) 172.
  37. M. V. Berry, Proc. R. Soc. London 400, 229 (1985).
  38. S. Müller, S. Heusler, P. Braun, F. Haake, and A. Altland, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 014103 (2004).
  39. M. C. Gutzwiller, Chaos in Classical and Quantum Mechanics (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990).
  40. K. F. Ratcliff, Phys. Rev. C 3, 117 (1971).
  41. J. Flores, M. Horoi, M. Müller, and T. H. Seligman, Phys. Rev. E 63, 026204 (2001).
  42. I. O. Morales, E. Landa, P. Stránský, and A. Frank, Phys. Rev. E 84, 016203 (2011).

  43. The extracted fluctuations can depend on the smoothing prescription, including the polynomial degree, motivating alternative unfolding procedures [44, 45, 46, 47, 48].

  44. T. Guhr, J.-Z. Ma, S. Meyer, and T. Wilke, Phys. Rev. D 59, 054501 (1999).
  45. J. M. G. Gómez, R. A. Molina, A. Relaño, and J. Retamosa, Phys. Rev. E 66, 036209 (2002).
  46. I. O. Morales, E. Landa, P. Stránský, and A. Frank, Phys. Rev. E 84, 016203 (2011).
  47. A. A. Abul-Magd and A. Y. Abul-Magd, Physica A (Amsterdam) 396, 185 (2014).
  48. T. Timberlake, Am. J. Phys. 74, 547 (2006).
  49. V. S. Viswanath and G. Müller, The Recursion Method: Application to Many-Body Dynamics (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 1994).
  50. B. N. Parlett, The Symmetric Eigenvalue Problem, Classics in Applied Mathematics (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, 1998).
  51. K. Hashimoto, K. Murata, N. Tanahashi, and R. Watanabe, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2023) 040.
  52. M. Baggioli, K.-B. Huh, H.-S. Jeong, K.-Y. Kim, and J. F. Pedraza, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 023028 (2025).
  53. P. Caputa, N. Gupta, S. S. Haque, S. Liu, J. Murugan, and H. J. R. Van Zyl, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2023) 120.
  54. E. P. Wigner, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 47, 790 (1951).
  55. P. Martinez-Azcona, R. Shir, and A. Chenu, Phys. Rev. B 111, 165108 (2025).
  56. E. Rabinovici, A. Sánchez-Garrido, R. Shir, and J. Sonner, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2021) 062.
  57. E. Rabinovici, A. Sánchez-Garrido, R. Shir, and J. Sonner, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2022) 151.
  58. Y. G. Sinai, Russ. Math. Surv. 25, 137 (1970).
  59. L. A. Bunimovich, Funct. Anal. Appl. 8, 254 (1974).
  60. L. A. Bunimovich, Commun. Math. Phys. 65, 295 (1979).
  61. L. A. Bunimovich, Y. G. Sinai, and N. I. Chernov, Russ. Math. Surv. 46, 47 (1991).
  62. G. Benettin and J. M. Strelcyn, Phys. Rev. A 17, 773 (1978).
  63. H. A. Camargo, V. Jahnke, H.-S. Jeong, K.-Y. Kim, and M. Nishida, Phys. Rev. D 109, 046017 (2024).
  64. E. Bogomolny and C. Schmit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 244102 (2004).
  65. V. Balasubramanian, R. N. Das, J. Erdmenger, and Z.-Y. Xian, J. Stat. Mech. (2025) 033202.
  66. A. N. Zemlyakov and A. B. Katok, Mathematical notes of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR 18, 760 (1975).
  67. P. Caputa, G. Di Giulio, and T. Q. Loc, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2026) 189.
  68. J. Das, S. Das, J. F. Pedraza, and L.-C. Qu, arXiv:2608.19346.
  69. L. Samaj and Z. Bajnok, Introduction to the Statistical Physics of Integrable Many-Body Systems (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2013).
  70. A. Gubin and L. F. Santos, Am. J. Phys. 80, 246 (2012).
  71. H. A. Camargo, K.-B. Huh, V. Jahnke, H.-S. Jeong, K.-Y. Kim, and M. Nishida, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2024) 241.

  72. While the normalized saturation value 1/2 is accurately recovered in the chaotic XXZ chain, the integrable case exhibits small fluctuations around the plateau due to spectral degeneracies [71].

  73. P. Caputa, B. Creed, R. N. Das, S. Demulder, and T. McLoughlin, arXiv:2606.18351.
  74. S. Sachdev and J. Ye, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 3339 (1993).
  75. D. Chowdhury, A. Georges, O. Parcollet, and S. Sachdev, Rev. Mod. Phys. 94, 035004 (2022).
  76. K.-B. Huh, H.-S. Jeong, L. A. Pando Zayas, and J. F. Pedraza, Phys. Rev. D 111, L121902 (2025).
  77. T. Kanazawa and T. Wettig, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2017) 050.
  78. A. M. García-García and Jacobus J. M. Verbaarschot, Phys. Rev. D 94, 126010 (2016).
  79. W. Mück and Y. Yang, Nucl. Phys. B984, 115948 (2022).
  80. V. Balasubramanian, R. N. Das, J. Erdmenger, J. Karl, and H. Verlinde, arXiv:2602.02645.
  81. V. Balasubramanian, P. Caputa, and J. Simón, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2026) 172.
  82. J. Favard, C.R. Hebd. Seances Acad. Sci. 200, 2052 (1935), https://zbmath.org/?format=complete&q=an:61.0288.01.
  83. J. Shohat, C.R. Hebd. Seances Acad. Sci. 207, 556 (1938), https://zbmath.org/0019.40503.
  84. T. M. Apostol, Introduction to Analytic Number Theory, Undergraduate Texts in Mathematics (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1976).
  85. E. B. Christoffel, J. Reine Angew. Math. 1858, 61 (1858).
  86. G. Darboux, J. Math. Pures Appl. 3, 4, 5 (1878), http://www.numdam.org/item/JMPA_1878_3_4__5_0/.
  87. G. Szegő, Orthogonal Polynomials, Colloquium Publications, Vol. 23 (American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1939).
  88. P. Basu, S. Das, and B. Madlala, arXiv:2608.07412.
  89. L.-C. Qu, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2026) 225.
  90. J. F. Pedraza and L.-C. Qu, arXiv:2608.10072.
  91. L.-C. Qu, arXiv:2608.16982.
  92. S. E. Aguilar-Gutierrez, R. N. Das, J. Erdmenger, and Z.-Y. Xian, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2026) 109.
  93. A. Bhattacharya, R. N. Das, B. Dey, and J. Erdmenger, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2024) 179.
  94. P. Nandy, T. Pathak, Z.-Y. Xian, and J. Erdmenger, Phys. Rev. B 111, 064203 (2025).
  95. A. C. den Brinker, in 2020 28th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO) (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 2021), pp. 2279–2283, https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/ 9287544.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 086021– Published 27 October, 2026
  • Received 17 September 2026
  • Accepted 23 September 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation