Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Boosting Binomial Exotic Option Pricing with Tensor Networks

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that binomial pricing of Asian and multi-asset American basket options can be compressed with tensor networks so the cost scales linearly in the number of time steps or assets instead of exponentially.

desk verdict TTCross parts are believable; the variational lower bound rests on an incorrect MPS tensor formula that is fixable but must be repaired before the claim is accepted. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.17033 v1 pith:KYRWW6JB submitted 2025-05-07 q-fin.CP quant-ph

Maarten van Damme , Rishi Sreedhar , Martin Ganahl This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-fin.CPquant-ph MSC 91G2091G6015A69
keywords optionpricingexoticoptionsbinomialtreetensornetworksmatrixproductstatestraincrossapproximationAsianAmericanbasket
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that two classes of exotic options that overload standard binomial trees—Asian options, whose payoff depends on the entire price path, and American basket options, whose payoff depends on $m$ correlated assets—can be priced by compressing the relevant payoff functions into matrix product states (MPS), reducing the cost from exponential to linear in $N$ or $m$. The central move is to approximate the product of path probability and payoff as an MPS, so the option price becomes a single tensor contraction. The paper presents two Asian methods (a tensor-train cross approximation and a variational MPS method argued to give a rigorous lower bound) and one multi-asset method that combines decoupled binomial trees with tensor-train cross. The contribution is a practical route around the curse of dimensionality for these exotics, with the largest numerical gains at high volatility.

What carries the argument

The machinery has four pieces. First, the matrix product state (MPS) representation stores an $N$-variable tensor as a chain of local tensors with bond dimension $D$, so memory and contraction cost scale linearly in $N$. Second, the tensor-train cross (TTCross) interpolation builds an MPS from a small number of evaluations of the target function. Third, the variational Asian method uses a binary MPS ansatz whose left and right tensors are constrained so that contracting them yields binary unit vectors, leaving only the central tensor free and keeping the entire state binary. Fourth, the decoupled-trees transform converts $m$ correlated assets into $m$ independent binomial trees via a Cholesky decomposition, which factorizes the pricing recursion over assets. Together these convert exponential path or asset sums into linear-time contractions.

What would settle it

Contract the tensors in Eqs. (21)–(27) for $N=2$ and compare the result with the exact product of path probability and (average price minus strike) for each of the four binary price paths; any mismatch disproves the exact-representation premise, and then the variational price could be compared with brute force on small $N$ to see whether it ever exceeds the exact binomial price.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the exponential sums defining binomial prices for Asian and multi-asset American basket options admit low-rank tensor approximations that can be built and contracted in time linear in the problem size. For Asian options, the product $p(x)v_A(x)$ is approximated by an MPS via tensor-train cross, and the price follows from contracting that MPS with vectors of ones. The variational method instead maximizes a binary-filtered cost function over a binary MPS ansatz, and the paper argues that the optimum equals the exact binomial price while providing a lower bound. For American baskets, the terminal payoff is learned as an MPS, after which backward induction with early exercise is interleaved with repeated tensor-train cross recompressions so the value stays in MPS format at every step.

Load-bearing premise

The variational lower-bound claim rests on the assertion that the product of path probability and the average-minus-strike function has exactly the tensor form displayed in Eqs. (21)–(27); if that representation is not exact for every price path, the proof that the variational result is a rigorous lower bound does not go through.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For Asian options with smaller numbers of steps, the TTCross method reaches Monte Carlo accuracy at roughly 50–100 times less walltime in the reported tests.
  • At high volatility ($\sigma=2$) and $N=50$, both TTCross and variational MPS reduce the pricing error by more than an order of magnitude compared with Monte Carlo.
  • The variational Asian method is constructed to return a price at or below the exact binomial value, a guaranteed one-sided error that Monte Carlo estimates do not provide.
  • American basket options on $m=4$ and $m=8$ correlated assets converge rapidly and monotonically with bond dimension on an $N=40$ tree, with the $m=4$ case validated against brute force.
  • The speed advantage is regime-dependent: at low volatility and larger $N$, Monte Carlo remains competitive, while tensor networks win at high volatility and smaller $N$.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The constrained binary-MPS parametrization is a general device for restricting a tensor network to binary 0/1 values, so it could be transferred to discrete optimization problems with binary variables, such as portfolio selection or constraint satisfaction; the paper only demonstrates it on Asian payoffs.
  • The TTCross-plus-backward-induction loop is not specific to basket payoffs; it should extend to Bermudan swaptions or barrier options, with the open question being how the required bond dimension grows with the frequency of early-exercise decisions.
  • A direct check of the exact MPS representation for $N=2$ would settle whether the variational lower bound is rigorous as stated; if the check fails, the method might still converge from below numerically, but the proof would need to be amended.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper combines binomial-tree option pricing with matrix-product-state/tensor-train techniques. For arithmetic Asian options it proposes (i) a TTCross approximation of p(x)v_A(x) followed by a linear contraction, and (ii) a variational MPS method that maximizes an indicator-weighted sum over paths and claims to provide a rigorous lower bound. For multi-asset American basket options it combines decoupled trees with TTCross to approximate the early-exercise value at each backward step. Numerical experiments compare against Monte Carlo (up to 10^11 samples) and brute-force binomial prices for N up to 50 and baskets up to m=8, reporting faster convergence in low-N/high-volatility regimes. The central performance claims are linear scaling in N and m at fixed bond dimension and the 'stringent lower bound' property of the variational Asian method.

Significance. The TTCross results are a useful, if incremental, demonstration that low-rank tensor formats can reduce binomial exotic-pricing cost, and the numerical study is reasonably careful: prices are benchmarked against independent brute-force or large-sample Monte Carlo estimates, and each experiment is repeated multiple times. The paper is also honest about regime-dependent performance. If the variational lower-bound claim were established, it would be a distinctive selling point over Monte Carlo. As written, however, the claim rests on an unproven exact MPS representation that fails a two-step contraction check, so the main theoretical contribution is not yet supported. The paper would be publishable in revised form once the representation is corrected or the claim is appropriately weakened.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. IV.A.2, Eqs. (21)-(27)] The claimed exact MPS representation of p(x)tilde_v_A(x) is not exact as written. For N=2 and x=(0,0), Eqs. (13) and (18) give p(x)tilde_v_A(x) = (1-p_u)^2 [ S_0/2 (d+d^2) - K ]. Contracting the boundary tensors in Eqs. (24) and (26), with no interior tensors, gives B_1^0 B_2^0 = [S_0/2 d (1-p_u), S_0/2 d (1-p_u) - K] dot [d (1-p_u), 1-p_u]^T = S_0/2 d (1-p_u)^2 + S_0/2 d^2 (1-p_u)^2 - K(1-p_u). The strike term carries only one factor of (1-p_u) rather than the full path probability (1-p_u)^2. The same mis-weighting occurs for other binary strings. Because the cost K in Eq. (29) is evaluated by contracting the filter MPS with this tensor, the lower-bound statement in Eq. (30) and the finite-bond-dimension argument are unsupported. The authors should either provide a corrected exact MPS construction, with boundary tensors and a proof, or downgrade the claim to an approximation with controlled error.
  2. [Sec. IV.A.2, Eqs. (31)-(37) and Appendix B] The lower-bound interpretation also requires that every MPS produced by the greedy sweep is a feasible binary tensor satisfying Eq. (28). Appendix A shows that products of matrices whose rows (for L) or columns (for R) have at most one nonzero entry are binary, but the greedy row-merge and row-drop procedure in Appendix B is not proved to preserve that structural invariant at every iteration, and the 'logical OR' merge of filter entries is not defined in terms of the tensor elements constrained by Eqs. (33)-(34). Without a feasibility invariant, an optimized psi could take non-binary values and K could exceed the true option price, which would void the lower-bound claim even if Eq. (21) were corrected. Please add a formal feasibility proof for the greedy update, or restrict the claim to the feasible subset of the ansatz.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (24)] Equation (24) contains an unmatched square bracket in the second entry of the row vector; it should read [ S_0/N d(1-p_u), S_0/N d(1-p_u) - K ].
  2. [Appendix B, Eq. (B2)] The symbol A is overloaded: it denotes both the site tensor in Eq. (31) and the derivative matrix A = partial K / partial A in Eq. (B2). Please use distinct symbols.
  3. [Algorithm 1, line 9] The notation on line 9 is garbled: 'M[N],YN 1 M[N],Y1 N 2 ...' should be written consistently with Eq. (45), e.g. M_1^{[N],Y_N^1} M_2^{[N],Y_N^2} ... M_m^{[N],Y_N^m}.
  4. [Fig. 3 and surrounding text] The sentence 'Fig. 3 shows a higher convergence speed of the option price with the number of samples' lacks a comparison; it should say which method is being compared with which. Also, the y-axis is labeled 'Pricing Error' but the text says the standard deviation is used as a proxy for the error; the caption should state this explicitly.
  5. [Appendix D] The equation label (D5) is used twice, once for the outcome labeling and once for the transition-matrix definition; please renumber.
  6. [General] No code or data repository is provided, so the wall-clock comparisons in Figs. 3, 5, and 6 are not independently reproducible from the manuscript alone.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the pricing methods are validated against independent brute-force and Monte Carlo benchmarks, and the variational lower bound is a genuine subset-maximization bound.

full rationale

The paper's central derivations are self-contained. The TTcross Asian and basket methods approximate the payoff-weighted probability function or the payoff function with a tensor train cross approximation and benchmark against exact brute-force or Monte Carlo prices; no parameter is fitted to the target option price. The variational Asian method defines a binary filter psi, maximizes a cost K = e^{-rT} sum_x psi(x) p(x) tilde_v_A(x), and correctly observes that the unconstrained maximizer gives the exact price while an MPS-restricted binary ansatz can only reach a lower value, hence a rigorous lower bound. This is a standard variational argument, not a circular reduction. The exact MPS representation in Eq. (21) is asserted as a construction from the definitions of p(x) and tilde_v_A(x); if that representation is algebraically faulty, that is a technical correctness concern, not circularity, because the claim does not assume the target option price as an input. Self-citations to the authors' TensorNetwork package and prior tensor-network literature are tool citations and do not carry the load-bearing mathematical content. The numerical comparisons rely on independent Monte Carlo and brute-force references, so the reported benchmarks do not reduce to the paper's own fitted values.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central numerical methods rely on choosing bond dimension D and on standard domain assumptions. No new physical or financial entities are postulated. The variational method relies on an asserted exact MPS representation that is not correct as displayed.

free parameters (1)
  • MPS bond dimension D = 10 to 250 (chosen by hand)
    The accuracy of all tensor network methods depends on D; the paper varies D to demonstrate convergence. The linear-scaling claims assume D remains fixed at target accuracy, which is not established.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Assets follow geometric Brownian motion with constant volatility and risk-neutral drift (Eq.2).
    Standard model in option pricing; the paper does not justify its applicability beyond citing standard practice.
  • standard math Binomial tree parameters (CRR/RB) converge to Black-Scholes as N increases.
    Standard result used implicitly in all binomial pricing.
  • domain assumption The decoupled-trees transformation via Cholesky decomposition produces m independent binomial trees that correctly approximate the joint asset process (Eqs.38-42).
    Cites Korn and Mueller [71]; the paper inherits any limitations of decoupled trees.
  • ad hoc to paper The binary MPS parametrization in Eqs.(32)-(34) with the greedy compression in Appendix B produces feasible binary tensors and the sweep reaches a near-optimal objective.
    The paper calls the parametrization ad hoc and provides no convergence guarantee for the greedy algorithm.
  • ad hoc to paper The exact MPS representation in Eqs.(21)-(27) equals p(x)tilde_v_A(x).
    This is asserted without derivation and, as written, fails a direct N=2 contraction check for the constant strike term.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Boosting Binomial Exotic Option Pricing with Tensor Networks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KYRWW6JB

@misc{pith2026250517033,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Boosting Binomial Exotic Option Pricing with Tensor Networks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KYRWW6JB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.17033}
}
abstract

Pricing of exotic financial derivatives, such as Asian and multi-asset American basket options, poses significant challenges for standard numerical methods such as binomial trees or Monte Carlo methods. While the former often scales exponentially with the parameters of interest, the latter often requires expensive simulations to obtain sufficient statistical convergence. This work combines the binomial pricing method for options with tensor network techniques, specifically Matrix Product States (MPS), to overcome these challenges. Our proposed methods scale linearly with the parameters of interest and significantly reduce the computational complexity of pricing exotics compared to conventional methods. For Asian options, we present two methods: a tensor train cross approximation-based method for pricing, and a variational pricing method using MPS, which provides a stringent lower bound on option prices. For multi-asset American basket options, we combine the decoupled trees technique with the tensor train cross approximation to efficiently handle baskets of up to $m = 8$ correlated assets. All approaches scale linearly in the number of discretization steps $N$ for Asian options, and the number of assets $m$ for multi-asset options. Our numerical experiments underscore the high potential of tensor network methods as highly efficient simulation and optimization tools for financial engineering.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.17033 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A Three-period binomial model describing the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a): Tensor network notation of a matrix prod￾uct state (MPS) encoding the function p(x)vA(x). (b): The tensor network contraction that results in a scalar that is equal to P x p(x)vA(x). This value is equal to the price of the Asian option. The contraction is be￾tween the MPS represented by blocks labelled by tensors Ai , i ∈ {1, . . . , N}, and vectors of ones 1 = [1, 1]T . 10 1 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 Walltime (s) 0.… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of the Asian option price con [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Convergence of the Asian option price cal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Pricing error comparison of the Asian option [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The role of asset volatility in pricing error [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Convergence of American Min Put Basket op [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Conditional Deep Levy Models for Exotic Derivatives: History-Aware Path Generation and P-Q Payoff Diagnostics

    q-fin.PR 2025-09 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    The abstract presents a history-aware diffusion path generator and P-Q payoff diagnostic with reported CRPS improvements, but the body does not contain the corresponding method or results.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

80 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Asian option pricing with TTcross For anN-period binomial model, the asset trajectories Stk can be represented as an N-bit binary string x = x1x2...x N with xk∈{ 0, 1}, i.e. ST (x) =S0ΠN k=1d1−xkuxk, (12) The probability of a path x, the average asset price⟨ST⟩ and payoff v(x) are given by p(x) = NY k=1 pxk u (1−pu)1−xk, ⟨ST (x)⟩ = S0 N NX i=1 iY k=1 d1−x...

    work page

  2. [2]

    d(1−pu) d(1−pu) 0 1 −pu # for 1<i<N (22) B1 i =

    Variational approach for Asian option pricing The second method to price Asian options is based on a variational optimization approach. Consider the function ˜vA(x) obtained from dropping the max function in Eq.(5), ˜vA =⟨ST (x)⟩− K = S0 N NX i=1 iY k=1 d1−xkuxk−K (18) ˜vA(x)≤vA(x) ∀x. (19) From Eq.(19) it follows immediately that e−rTX x p(x)˜vA(x)≤e−rTX...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Additionally, this form also ensures that the correlation matrix is positive definite as required by the decoupling trees approach

    This formalism, although artificial, enables us to capture the correlation between assets using a single parameter. Additionally, this form also ensures that the correlation matrix is positive definite as required by the decoupling trees approach. A common risk-free interest rate of r = 0.1 was also used. 5 10 15 20 25 30 Bond Dimension 32 33 34 35 36Opti...

    work page

  4. [4]

    At any discrete time step k of the multi- dimensional tree, the original random variables Stk are given by Stk = exp(GYtk)

    ∀i. At any discrete time step k of the multi- dimensional tree, the original random variables Stk are given by Stk = exp(GYtk). (43) To reduce the burden on index notation, we will in the following use the abbreviation Yk≡ Ytk. The key quantity in the decoupling approach to multi- asset binomial option pricing is the payoff function at expiration tN =T of...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Buchen, An Introduction to Exotic Option Pricing (Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2012)

    P. Buchen, An Introduction to Exotic Option Pricing (Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2012)

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    Hull, Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives Global Edition (Pearson Deutschland, 2021) p

    J. Hull, Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives Global Edition (Pearson Deutschland, 2021) p. 880

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    Black and M

    F. Black and M. Scholes, The pricing of options and corporate liabilities, Journal of political economy 81, 637 (1973)

    work page 1973

  8. [8]

    J. C. Cox, S. A. Ross, and M. Rubinstein, Option pricing: A simplified approach, Journal of financial Economics 7, 229 (1979)

    work page 1979

Show all 80 references
  1. [9]

    R. J. Rendleman, Two-state option pricing, The Journal of Finance 34, 1093 (1979)

    1979

  2. [10]

    Patel, C.-W

    R. Patel, C.-W. Hsing, S. Sahin, S. S. Jahromi, S. Palmer, S. Sharma, C. Michel, V. Porte, M. Abid, S. Aubert, P. Castellani, C.-G. Lee, S. Mugel, and R. Orus, Quantum-inspired tensor neural networks for partial differential equations (2022)

    2022

  3. [11]

    Ruf and W

    J. Ruf and W. Wang, Neural networks for option pric- ing and hedging: A literature review, SSRN Electronic Journal 10.2139/ssrn.3486363 (2019)

    2019 doi

  4. [12]

    K. Glau, D. Kressner, and F. Statti, Low-rank tensor approximation for chebyshev interpolation in parametric option pricing, SIAM Journal on Financial Mathematics 11, 897 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1137/19M1244172

    2020 doi

  5. [13]

    Sakurai, H

    R. Sakurai, H. Takahashi, and K. Miyamoto, Learn- ing fourier-based parametric option pricing with tensor trains, JSAI Technical Report, Type 2 SIG 2024, 213 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    Kobayashi, Y

    N. Kobayashi, Y. Suimon, and K. Miyamoto, Time series generation for option pricing on quantum computers us- ing tensor network (2024), arXiv:2402.17148 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Mugel, E

    S. Mugel, E. Lizaso, and R. Orus, Use Cases of Quantum Optimization for Finance (2020), arXiv:2010.01312 [q- fin]

    2020 arXiv

  8. [16]

    M. J. Kastoryano and N. Pancotti, A highly efficient tensor network algorithm for multi-asset fourier options pricing (2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    Cassel, Fast high-dimensional integration using tensor networks, Papers (arXiv.org, 2022)

    S. Cassel, Fast high-dimensional integration using tensor networks, Papers (arXiv.org, 2022)

    2022

  10. [18]

    Antonov and V

    A. Antonov and V. Piterbarg, Alternatives to Deep Neu- ral Networks in Finance (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    Y. L. Xu, G. G. Calvi, and D. P. Mandic, Tensor-Train Recurrent Neural Networks for Interpretable Multi-Way Financial Forecasting (2021), arXiv:2105.04983 [cs]

    2021 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Verstraete, V

    F. Verstraete, V. Murg, and J. Cirac, Matrix product states, projected entangled pair states, and variational renormalization group methods for quantum spin systems, Advances in Physics 57, 143 (2008), publisher: Taylor & Francis eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/14789940801912366

    2008 doi

  13. [21]

    Mugel, C

    S. Mugel, C. Kuchkovsky, E. Sanchez, S. Fernandez- Lorenzo, J. Luis-Hita, E. Lizaso, and R. Orus, Dy- namic Portfolio Optimization with Real Datasets Us- ing Quantum Processors and Quantum-Inspired Tensor Networks, Physical Review Research 4, 013006 (2022), arXiv:2007.00017 [q...

    2022 arXiv

  14. [22]

    R. G. Patel, C.-W. Hsing, S. Sahin, S. Palmer, S. S. Jahromi, S. Sharma, T. Dominguez, K. Tziritas, 11 C. Michel, V. Porte, M. Abid, S. Aubert, P. Castellani, S. Mugel, and R. Orus, Quantum-Inspired Tensor Neural Networks for Option Pricing (2022), arXiv:2212.14076 [quant-ph, q-fin]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

    R. G. Patel, T. Dominguez, M. Dib, S. Palmer, A. Cadarso, F. D. L. Contreras, A. Ratnani, F. G. Casanova, S. Hern´ andez-Santana, ´Alvaro D´ ıaz- Fern´ andez, E. Andr´ es, J. Luis-Hita, E. S´ anchez- Mart´ ınez, S. Mugel, and R. Orus, Application of tensor neural networks to p...

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Perez-Garcia, F

    D. Perez-Garcia, F. Verstraete, M. M. Wolf, and J. I. Cirac, Matrix Product State Representations, quant- ph/0608197 (2006), quantum Inf. Comput. 7, 401 (2007)

    2006

  17. [25]

    R. Orus, A Practical Introduction to Tensor Net- works: Matrix Product States and Projected Entangled Pair States, arXiv:1306.2164 [cond-mat, physics:hep-lat, physics:hep-th, physics:quant-ph] (2013)

    2013 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Schollwoeck, The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Annals of Physics 326, 96 (2011), arXiv: 1008.3477

    U. Schollwoeck, The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Annals of Physics 326, 96 (2011), arXiv: 1008.3477

    2011 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Evenbly and G

    G. Evenbly and G. Vidal, Algorithms for entanglement renormalization, Physical Review B 79, 144108 (2009)

    2009

  20. [28]

    G. K.-L. Chan, A. Keselman, N. Nakatani, Z. Li, and S. R. White, Matrix product operators, matrix prod- uct states, and ab initio density matrix renormalization group algorithms, The Journal of Chemical Physics 145, 014102 (2016)

    2016

  21. [29]

    Evenbly, A Practical Guide to the Numerical Imple- mentation of Tensor Networks I: Contractions, Decom- positions and Gauge Freedom (2022), arXiv:2202.02138

    G. Evenbly, A Practical Guide to the Numerical Imple- mentation of Tensor Networks I: Contractions, Decom- positions and Gauge Freedom (2022), arXiv:2202.02138

    2022 arXiv

  22. [30]

    S. R. White, Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalization groups, Physical Review Letters 69, 2863 (1992)

    1992

  23. [31]

    J. I. Cirac, D. P´ erez-Garc´ ıa, N. Schuch, and F. Ver- straete, Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states: Concepts, symmetries, theorems, Reviews of Modern Physics 93, 045003 (2021), publisher: American Physical Society

    2021

  24. [32]

    K. G. Wilson, The renormalization group: Critical phe- nomena and the Kondo problem, Reviews of Modern Physics 47, 773 (1975)

    1975

  25. [33]

    Affleck, T

    I. Affleck, T. Kennedy, E. H. Lieb, and H. Tasaki, Rig- orous results on valence-bond ground states in antiferro- magnets, Physical Review Letters 59, 799 (1987)

    1987

  26. [34]

    Rommer and S

    S. Rommer and S. ¨Ostlund, Class of ansatz wave func- tions for one-dimensional spin systems and their rela- tion to the density matrix renormalization group, Phys- ical Review B 55, 2164 (1997), copyright (C) 2009 The American Physical Society; Please report any problems to p...

    1997

  27. [35]

    J. R. ¨O. LEGEZA and B. A. HESS, Qc-dmrg study of the ionic-neutral curve crossing of lif, Molecular Physics 101, 2019 (2003)

    2003

  28. [36]

    S. R. White, Density-matrix algorithms for quantum renormalization groups, Physical Review B 48, 10345 (1993), copyright (C) 2009 The American Physical Soci- ety; Please report any problems to prola@aps.org

    1993

  29. [37]

    Verstraete and J

    F. Verstraete and J. I. Cirac, Renormalization algo- rithms for Quantum-Many Body Systems in two and higher dimensions (2004), arXiv:cond-mat/0407066

    2004 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Vidal, Entanglement Renormalization, Physical Review Letters 99, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.220405 (2007)

    G. Vidal, Entanglement Renormalization, Physical Review Letters 99, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.220405 (2007)

    2007 doi

  31. [39]

    Vidal, Class of Quantum Many-Body States That Can Be Efficiently Simulated, Physical Review Letters 101, 110501 (2008)

    G. Vidal, Class of Quantum Many-Body States That Can Be Efficiently Simulated, Physical Review Letters 101, 110501 (2008)

    2008

  32. [40]

    Ganahl, M

    M. Ganahl, M. Aichhorn, H. G. Evertz, P. Thunstr¨ om, K. Held, and F. Verstraete, Efficient DMFT impurity solver using real-time dynamics with matrix product states, Physical Review B 92, 155132 (2015), publisher: American Physical Society

    2015

  33. [41]

    S. R. White and R. L. Martin, Ab initio quantum chem- istry using the density matrix renormalization group, The Journal of Chemical Physics 110, 4127 (1999), pub- lisher: American Institute of Physics

    1999

  34. [42]

    G. K.-L. Chan and S. Sharma, The Density Matrix Renormalization Group in Quantum Chemistry, Annual Review of Physical Chemistry 62, 465 (2011)

    2011

  35. [43]

    D. J. Garc´ ıa, K. Hallberg, and M. J. Rozenberg, Dynam- ical Mean Field Theory with the Density Matrix Renor- malization Group, Physical Review Letters 93, 246403 (2004), publisher: American Physical Society

    2004

  36. [44]

    Ganahl, P

    M. Ganahl, P. Thunstr¨ om, F. Verstraete, K. Held, and H. G. Evertz, Chebyshev expansion for impurity mod- els using matrix product states, Physical Review B 90, 045144 (2014), publisher: American Physical Society

    2014

  37. [45]

    Dolgov, K

    S. Dolgov, K. Anaya-Izquierdo, C. Fox, and R. Scheichl, Approximation and sampling of multivariate probability distributions in the tensor train decomposition (2019), arXiv:1810.01212 [cs, math, stat]

    2019 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Bauernfeind, M

    D. Bauernfeind, M. Zingl, R. Triebl, M. Aichhorn, and H. G. Evertz, Fork Tensor-Product States: Efficient Mul- tiorbital Real-Time DMFT Solver, Physical Review X 7, 031013 (2017), publisher: American Physical Society

    2017

  39. [47]

    Menczer, K

    A. Menczer, K. Kap´ as, M. A. Werner, and O. Legeza, Two-dimensional quantum lattice models via mode opti- mized hybrid CPU-GPU density matrix renormalization group method, Physical Review B 109, 195148 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    F. A. Wolf, I. P. McCulloch, O. Parcollet, and U. Schollw¨ ock, Chebyshev matrix product state impu- rity solver for dynamical mean-field theory, Physical Re- view B 90, 115124 (2014), publisher: American Physical Society

    2014

  41. [49]

    F. A. Wolf, I. P. McCulloch, and U. Schollw¨ ock, Solv- ing nonequilibrium dynamical mean-field theory using matrix product states, Physical Review B 90, 235131 (2014), publisher: American Physical Society

    2014

  42. [50]

    The Monte Carlo sampling was performed by drawing Ns length-N random bit strings x = x1x2...x N from (a) p(x)vA(x) =A1 x1 A2 x2

    The x-axis shows the elapsed walltime in seconds for both the TTcross and Monte Carlo methods, and they-axis shows the corresponding option pricing error. The Monte Carlo sampling was performed by drawing Ns length-N random bit strings x = x1x2...x N from (a) p(x)vA(x) =A1 x1 ...

  43. [51]

    Dolgov and D

    S. Dolgov and D. Savostyanov, Parallel cross interpola- tion for high-precision calculation of high-dimensional integrals, Computer Physics Communications 246, 106869 (2020)

    2020

  44. [52]

    Oseledets and E

    I. Oseledets and E. Tyrtyshnikov, Tt-cross approxima- tion for multidimensional arrays, Linear Algebra and its Applications 432, 70 (2010)

    2010

  45. [53]

    Glasser, R

    I. Glasser, R. Sweke, N. Pancotti, J. Eisert, and J. I. Cirac, Expressive power of tensor-network factorizations for probabilistic modeling, in Proceedings of the 33rd In- ternational Conference on Neural Information Process- ing Systems , 134 (Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook...

    2019

  46. [54]

    Glasser, N

    I. Glasser, N. Pancotti, and J. I. Cirac, From Probabilis- tic Graphical Models to Generalized Tensor Networks 12 for Supervised Learning, IEEE Access 8, 68169 (2020), conference Name: IEEE Access

    2020

  47. [55]

    Cichocki, N

    A. Cichocki, N. Lee, I. Oseledets, A.-H. Phan, Q. Zhao, and D. P. Mandic, Tensor networks for dimensional- ity reduction and large-scale optimization: Part 1 low- rank tensor decompositions, Foundations and Trends ® in Machine Learning 9, 249–429 (2016)

    2016

  48. [56]

    Cichocki, N

    A. Cichocki, N. Lee, I. Oseledets, A.-H. Phan, Q. Zhao, M. Sugiyama, and D. P. Mandic, Tensor networks for dimensionality reduction and large-scale optimization: Part 2 applications and future perspectives, Foundations and Trends® in Machine Learning 9, 249–429 (2017)

    2017

  49. [57]

    Goeßmann, M

    A. Goeßmann, M. G¨ otte, I. Roth, R. Sweke, G. Kutyniok, and J. Eisert, Tensor network ap- proaches for learning non-linear dynamical laws (2020), arXiv:2002.12388 [quant-ph, stat]

    2020 arXiv

  50. [58]

    A. M. Ali, A. M. F. d. Leceta, and J. L. Rubio, Anomaly Detection from a Tensor Train Perspective (2024), arXiv:2409.15030

    2024 arXiv

  51. [59]

    J. Wang, C. Roberts, G. Vidal, and S. Leichenauer, Anomaly Detection with Tensor Networks (2020), arXiv:2006.02516 [quant-ph, stat]

    2020 arXiv

  52. [60]

    E. M. Stoudenmire, Learning Relevant Features of Data with Multi-scale Tensor Networks, Quantum Science and Technology 3, 034003 (2018), arXiv:1801.00315 [cond- mat, stat]

    2018 arXiv

  53. [61]

    W. Wang, V. Aggarwal, and S. Aeron, Principal Com- ponent Analysis with Tensor Train Subspace (2018), arXiv:1803.05026 [cs, math]

    2018 arXiv

  54. [62]

    S. Lu, M. Kan´ asz-Nagy, I. Kukuljan, and J. I. Cirac, Ten- sor networks and efficient descriptions of classical data (2021), arXiv:2103.06872

    2021 arXiv

  55. [63]

    J. Liu, S. Li, J. Zhang, and P. Zhang, Tensor net- works for unsupervised machine learning, Physical Re- view E 107, L012103 (2023), arXiv:2106.12974 [cond- mat, physics:quant-ph, stat]

    2023 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Konstantinidis, Y

    K. Konstantinidis, Y. L. Xu, D. P. Mandic, Q. Zhao, and T. L. Team, Bayesian tensor networks with structured posteriors, in the Second Workshop on Quantum Ten- sor Networks in Machine Learning, 35th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS) (2021) p. 22

    2021

  57. [65]

    Kirstein, D

    M. Kirstein, D. Sommer, and M. Eigel, Tensor-train ker- nel learning for gaussian processes, in Proceedings of the Eleventh Symposium on Conformal and Probabilis- tic Prediction with Applications, Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 179, edited by U. Johansson, H. B...

    2022

  58. [66]

    Izmailov, A

    P. Izmailov, A. Novikov, and D. Kropotov, Scalable Gaussian Processes with Billions of Inducing Inputs via Tensor Train Decomposition (2018), arXiv:1710.07324 [cs, stat]

    2018 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Z.-Y. Han, J. Wang, H. Fan, L. Wang, and P. Zhang, Un- supervised Generative Modeling Using Matrix Product States, Physical Review X 8, 031012 (2018), publisher: American Physical Society

    2018

  60. [68]

    Y. Peng, Y. Chen, E. M. Stoudenmire, and Y. Khoo, Generative Modeling via Hierarchical Tensor Sketching (2023), arXiv:2304.05305

    2023

  61. [69]

    Strashko and E

    A. Strashko and E. M. Stoudenmire, Generalization and Overfitting in Matrix Product State Machine Learning Architectures (2022), arXiv:2208.04372

    2022 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Jasra and P

    A. Jasra and P. Del Moral, Sequential monte carlo meth- ods for option pricing, Stochastic Analysis and Applica- tions 29, 292–316 (2011)

    2011

  63. [71]

    D. J. Duffy, Finite Difference Methods in Financial Engi- neering: A Partial Differential Equation Approach (Wi- ley, 2006)

    2006

  64. [72]

    Bouchard and X

    B. Bouchard and X. Warin, Monte-carlo valuation of american options: Facts and new algorithms to im- prove existing methods, in Numerical Methods in Fi- nance (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2012) p. 215–255

    2012

  65. [73]

    J. C. Bridgeman and C. T. Chubb, Hand-waving and in- terpretive dance: an introductory course on tensor net- works, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theo- retical 50, 223001 (2017)

    2017

  66. [74]

    Steinlechner, Riemannian Optimization for High- Dimensional Tensor Completion, SIAM Journal on Sci- entific Computing 38, S461 (2016)

    M. Steinlechner, Riemannian Optimization for High- Dimensional Tensor Completion, SIAM Journal on Sci- entific Computing 38, S461 (2016)

    2016

  67. [75]

    Roberts, A

    C. Roberts, A. Milsted, M. Ganahl, A. Zalcman, B. Fontaine, Y. Zou, J. D. Hidary, G. Vidal, and S. Le- ichenauer, Tensornetwork: A library for physics and ma- chine learning, ArXiv abs/1905.01330 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  68. [76]

    M¨ uller, The binomial approach to option valuation: Getting binomial trees into shape (2009)

    S. M¨ uller, The binomial approach to option valuation: Getting binomial trees into shape (2009)

    2009

  69. [77]

    Korn and S

    R. Korn and S. M¨ uller, The decoupling approach to bino- mial pricing of multi-asset options, The Journal of Com- putational Finance 12, 1 (2009)

    2009

  70. [78]

    Korn and S

    R. Korn and S. M¨ uller, Getting multi-dimensional trees into a new shape, Wilmott Journal 1, 145 (2009), https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/wilj.12

    2009 doi

  71. [79]

    Ito, Stochastic integral (1944)

    K. Ito, Stochastic integral (1944)

    1944

  72. [80]

    Jacobs, Stochastic Processes for Physicists: Under- standing Noisy Systems (Cambridge University Press, 2010)

    K. Jacobs, Stochastic Processes for Physicists: Under- standing Noisy Systems (Cambridge University Press, 2010). 13 Appendix A: Explanation on the binary nature of L and R tensors As stated in Eq.(32), ψx1...xN =Lx1 1 ...L xc−1 c−1 Axc c Rxc+1 c+1 ...R xN N , the tensors Lxk ...

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.