After years of not having an intuitive interpretation of the unital condition on CP maps, I recently learned a beautiful one: unitality means the dynamics never decreases the state’s mixedness, in the sense of the majorization partial order.
Consider the Lindblad dynamics generated by a set of Lindblad operators , corresponding to the Lindbladian
(1)
and the resulting quantum dynamical semigroup . Let
denote the majorization partial order on density matrices:
exactly when
exactly when
for all
, where
and
are the respective eigenvalues in decreasing order. (In words:
means
is more mixed than
.) Then the following conditions are equivalent:a
-
-
-
: “
is a unital map (for all
)”
-
for all
: “
is mixedness non-decreasing”
-
for all
,
, and concave functions
The last condition implies that all Renyi entropies, including the Shannon entropy, are non-decreasing: for all
,
, and
.
The non-trivial equivalences above are proved by Thm 8.8 in Sec. 8.3 of Wolf, “Quantum Channels and Operations Guided Tour“.b
Note that having all Hermitian Lindblad operators () implies, but is not implied by, the above conditions. [ADDED:] Indeed, one can see there exist unital Lindblad dynamics that cannot be written using Hermitian Lindblad operators. It relies on breaking detailed balance, and so the smallest counterexample is in 3 dimensions where non-trivial cycles exist. Let
be the Lindbladian with
and three non-Hermitian Lindblad operators
, and let
be a Lindbladian with any
and any Hermitian Lindblad operators
. Using
and
, it’s easy to check that
is a symmetric matrix but
is not, so no choice of Hermitian Lindblad operators can produce a Lindbladian
equal to
.
Footnotes
(↵ returns to text)
- None of this depends on the dynamics being Lindbladian. If you drop the first two conditions and drop the “
” subscript, so that
is just some arbitrary (potentially non-divisible) CP map, the remaining three conditions are all equivalent.↵
- See also “On the universal constraints for relaxation rates for quantum dynamical semigroup” by Chruscinski et al [2011.10159] for further interesting discussion.↵


Cool! I did not know this condition either. This seems to answer an old loophole in a famous paper on BH information loss by Banks, Peskin, and Susskind: https://inspirehep.net/literature/194105. After Eq. 9 they say (wrt a general Lindblad equation) “One might also insist that the entropy defined by \rho not decrease with time. We do not know what conditions are necessary to insure these properties, but we can state some simple sufficient conditions. “