- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

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

Theoretical limits of protocols for distinguishing different unravelings

J. L. Gaona-Reyes, D. G. A. Altamura, and A. Bassi*

  • *Contact author: abassi@units.it
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 7, 043295 – Published 15 December, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/6qnt-t3wl

Abstract

Stochastic unravelings of Lindblad-type master equations, such as stochastic Schrödinger equations, provide powerful tools to model open quantum systems and continuous measurement processes. The same master equation can be unraveled in different ways; while these unravelings differ at the level of quantum trajectories, by construction they all yield the same averaged dynamics for the density operator. A recent question of both foundational and practical relevance is whether such unravelings can be operationally distinguished, given that certain nonlinear quantities—such as covariances and higher-order moments of conditional expectation values—are unraveling dependent. We show that these quantities cannot be accessed unless the measurement scheme (i.e., the unraveling) is known in advance. This renders any operational protocol to distinguish unravelings fundamentally unfeasible. We further establish that assuming access to such nonlinear quantities without prior knowledge of the unraveling would enable superluminal signaling, violating relativistic causality.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Corrections

30 January, 2026

Correction: Minor errors in Eqs. (1), (A10), (A12), (B3), and in the last sentence of the text following Eq. (C38) have been fixed.

Article Text

References (58)

  1. H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, USA, New York, 2002).
  2. A. Rivas and S. F. Huelga, Open Quantum Systems: An Introduction (Springer, Berlin, 2012).
  3. V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, Completely positive dynamical semigroups of n‐level systems, J. Math. Phys. 17, 821 (1976).
  4. G. Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Commun. Math. Phys. 48, 119 (1976).
  5. H. Carmichael, An Open Systems Approach to Quantum Optics: Lectures Presented at the Université Libre de Bruxelles, 28 October to 4 November 1991 (Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 2009), Vol. 18.
  6. X. Cao, A. Tilloy, and A. D. Luca, Entanglement in a fermion chain under continuous monitoring, SciPost Phys. 7, 024 (2019).
  7. H. M. Wiseman and G. J. Milburn, Quantum Measurement and Control (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2009).
  8. H. M. Wiseman and G. J. Milburn, Quantum theory of field-quadrature measurements, Phys. Rev. A 47, 642 (1993).
  9. J. Dalibard, Y. Castin, and K. Mølmer, Wave-function approach to dissipative processes in quantum optics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 580 (1992).
  10. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2010).
  11. J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018).
  12. N. Gisin and I. C. Percival, The quantum-state diffusion model applied to open systems, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 25, 5677 (1992).
  13. K. Mølmer, Y. Castin, and J. Dalibard, Monte Carlo wave-function method in quantum optics, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 10, 524 (1993).
  14. A. J. Daley, Quantum trajectories and open many-body quantum systems, Adv. Phys. 63, 77 (2014).
  15. L. Diósi, A universal master equation for the gravitational violation of quantum mechanics, Phys. Lett. A 120, 377 (1987).
  16. G. Ghirardi, P. Pearle, and A. Rimini, Markov processes in Hilbert space and continuous spontaneous localization of systems of identical particles, Phys. Rev. A 42, 78 (1990).
  17. D. Kafri, J. M. Taylor, and G. J. Milburn, A classical channel model for gravitational decoherence, New J. Phys. 16, 065020 (2014).
  18. A. Tilloy and L. Diósi, Sourcing semiclassical gravity from spontaneously localized quantum matter, Phys. Rev. D 93, 024026 (2016).
  19. A. Tilloy and L. Diósi, Principle of least decoherence for Newtonian semiclassical gravity, Phys. Rev. D 96, 104045 (2017).
  20. U. Weiss, Quantum Dissipative Systems (World Scientific, Singapore, 2012).
  21. P. Hänggi, P. Talkner, and M. Borkovec, Reaction-rate theory: Fifty years after Kramers, Rev. Mod. Phys. 62, 251 (1990).
  22. G. Ghirardi, R. Grassi, and P. Pearle, Relativistic dynamical reduction models: General framework and examples, Found. Phys. 20, 1271 (1990).
  23. P. Pearle, True collapse and false collapse, in Quantum Classical Correspondence: Proceedings of the 4th Drexel Symposium on Quantum Nonintegrability, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, 8–11 September 1994, edited by D. H. Feng and B. L. Hu (Cambridge International Press, Cambridge, MA, 1997), p. 51.
  24. H. M. Wiseman and L. Diósi, Complete parameterization, and invariance, of diffusive quantum trajectories for Markovian open systems, Chem. Phys. 268, 91 (2001).
  25. S. L. Adler and A. Bassi, Collapse models with non-white noises, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 40, 15083 (2007).
  26. M. Caiaffa, A. Smirne, and A. Bassi, Stochastic unraveling of positive quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 95, 062101 (2017).
  27. K. Jacobs, Quantum Measurement Theory and its Applications (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014).
  28. H. M. Wiseman, Quantum trajectories and quantum measurement theory, Quantum Semiclass. Opt. 8, 205 (1996).
  29. H. Carmichael, Quantum jumps revisited: An overview of quantum trajectory theory, in Quantum Future from Volta and Como to the Present and Beyond: Proceedings of the Xth Max Born Symposium Held in Przesieka, Poland, 24–27 September 1997 (Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 2007), pp. 15–36.
  30. G. Piccitto, A. Russomanno, and D. Rossini, Entanglement transitions in the quantum ising chain: A comparison between different unravelings of the same Lindbladian, Phys. Rev. B 105, 064305 (2022).
  31. T. Vovk and H. Pichler, Quantum trajectory entanglement in various unravelings of Markovian dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 110, 012207 (2024).
  32. G. Piccitto, D. Rossini, and A. Russomanno, The impact of different unravelings in a monitored system of free fermions, Eur. Phys. J. B 97, 90 (2024).
  33. A. Bassi and E. Ippoliti, Geometric phase for open quantum systems and stochastic unravelings, Phys. Rev. A 73, 062104 (2006).
  34. M. G. Genoni, L. Lami, and A. Serafini, Conditional and unconditional Gaussian quantum dynamics, Contemp. Phys. 57, 331 (2016).
  35. Q. Wu, D. A. Chisholm, R. Muffato, T. Georgescu, J. Homans, H. Ulbricht, M. Carlesso, and M. Paternostro, Squeezing below the ground state of motion of a continuously monitored levitating nanoparticle, Quantum Sci. Technol. 9, 045038 (2024).
  36. E. Piñol, T. K. Mavrogordatos, D. Keys, R. Veyron, P. Sierant, M. A. García-March, S. Grandi, M. W. Mitchell, J. Wehr, and M. Lewenstein, Telling different unravelings apart via nonlinear quantum-trajectory averages, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, L032057 (2024).
  37. F. Albarelli, M. A. Rossi, M. G. Paris, and M. G. Genoni, Ultimate limits for quantum magnetometry via time-continuous measurements, New J. Phys. 19, 123011 (2017).
  38. L. Magrini, P. Rosenzweig, C. Bach, A. Deutschmann-Olek, S. G. Hofer, S. Hong, N. Kiesel, A. Kugi, and M. Aspelmeyer, Real-time optimal quantum control of mechanical motion at room temperature, Nature (London) 595, 373 (2021).
  39. J. Zhang and K. Mølmer, Prediction and retrodiction with continuously monitored Gaussian states, Phys. Rev. A 96, 062131 (2017).
  40. A. Belenchia, L. Mancino, G. T. Landi, and M. Paternostro, Entropy production in continuously measured Gaussian quantum systems, npj Quantum Inf. 6, 97 (2020).
  41. J. Zhang, Y.-x. Liu, R.-B. Wu, K. Jacobs, and F. Nori, Quantum feedback: Theory, experiments, and applications, Phys. Rep. 679, 1 (2017).
  42. L. Diósi, Is spontaneous wave function collapse testable at all? J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 626, 012008 (2015).
  43. L. Diósi, How to teach and think about spontaneous wave function collapse theories: Not like before, in Collapse of the Wave Function. Models, Ontology, Origin, and Implications, edited by Shan Gao (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2018), Chap. 1, pp. 3–11.
  44. C. Gardiner, A. S. Parkins, and P. Zoller, Wave-function quantum stochastic differential equations and quantum-jump simulation methods, Phys. Rev. A 46, 4363 (1992).
  45. I. Kondov, U. Kleinekathöfer, and M. Schreiber, Stochastic unraveling of Redfield master equations and its application to electron transfer problems, J. Chem. Phys. 119, 6635 (2003).
  46. M. Li, Simulation of quantum dynamics based on the quantum stochastic differential equation, Sci. World J. 2013, 424137 (2013).
  47. B. I. C. Donvil and P. Muratore-Ginanneschi, On the unraveling of open quantum dynamics, Open Syst. Inf. Dyn. 30, 2350015 (2023).
  48. K. Jacobs, Stochastic Processes for Physicists. Understanding Noisy Systems (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2010).
  49. A. Bassi, Collapse models: Analysis of the free particle dynamics, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 38, 3173 (2005).
  50. T. Vovk and H. Pichler, Entanglement-optimal trajectories of many-body quantum Markov processes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 243601 (2022).
  51. A. Setter, M. Toroš, J. F. Ralph, and H. Ulbricht, Real-time Kalman filter: Cooling of an optically levitated nanoparticle, Phys. Rev. A 97, 033822 (2018).
  52. F. Albarelli and M. G. Genoni, A pedagogical introduction to continuously monitored quantum systems and measurement-based feedback, Phys. Lett. A 494, 129260 (2024).
  53. H. M. Wiseman, Quantum trajectories and feedback, Ph.D. thesis, University of Queensland, 1994.
  54. C. W. Gardiner and P. Zoller, Quantum Noise. A Handbook of Markovian and Non-Markovian Quantum Stochastic Methods with Applications to Quantum Optics (Springer, Berlin, 2000).
  55. A. Bassi and G. Ghirardi, Dynamical reduction models, Phys. Rep. 379, 257 (2003).
  56. A. Bassi, K. Lochan, S. Satin, T. P. Singh, and H. Ulbricht, Models of wave-function collapse, underlying theories, and experimental tests, Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 471 (2013).
  57. In general, we have Eω[Var(Ôi,Ôj)]=12Eω〈{Ôi,Ôj}〉t−Eω[〈Ôi〉t]Eω[〈Ôj〉t].
  58. E. Joos, H. D. Zeh, C. Kiefer, D. J. Giulini, J. Kupsch, and I.-O. Stamatescu, Decoherence and the Appearance of a Classical World in Quantum Theory (Springer-Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 2013).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 7, 043295– Published 15 December, 2025
  • Received 21 March 2025
  • Accepted 6 November 2025
  • Corrected 30 January 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.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation