Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 142 references

Bayesian perspectives for quantum states and application to ab initio quantum chemistry

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This review chapter argues that Gaussian Process States, an exponentiated kernel model of many-body wavefunctions, unify strongly correlated quantum chemistry with machine learning on classical data.

desk verdict A competent, honest review of the authors' own GPS framework; the MNIST result is modest and the 64-H 'state-of-the-art' claim overreaches, but the chapter is well written and worth refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.21729 v1 pith:YJ77JN5F submitted 2025-08-29 cond-mat.str-el physics.chem-phphysics.comp-phquant-ph

Yannic Rath , Massimo Bortone , George H. Booth This is my paper
classification cond-mat.str-elphysics.chem-phphysics.comp-phquant-ph
keywords GaussianProcessStatesquantumchemistrysecondquantizationvariationalMonteCarloBayesianinferencestrongcorrelationmachinelearningwavefunctionstensordecomposition
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 chapter makes the case that a single family of Bayesian wavefunction models—Gaussian Process States (GPS) and their 'quantum' generalization qGPS—can serve as a common tool for strongly correlated quantum chemistry and for machine learning on classical data. The models represent the logarithm of a many-electron wavefunction amplitude as a weighted sum of kernel comparisons, or equivalently as the exponential of a low-rank tensor decomposition, so accuracy improves systematically as a support dimension grows. In second-quantized ab initio problems this representation captures strong correlation in hydrogen chains and lattices, and a Slater-Jastrow GPS yields a variational energy for 64 hydrogen atoms that the authors argue is a new state-of-the-art result. The same model, trained with Bayesian sweeping, classifies MNIST digits with roughly 1.6–1.7% test error, illustrating the reverse transfer from quantum states to classical pattern extraction. The reason this matters is that it offers a route to chemical accuracy in regimes where standard methods such as density functional theory fail, without requiring a hand-designed neural-network architecture.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Gaussian Process State, Psi(n)=exp(Σ w_{n'} k(n,n')), with the exponential kernel k(n,n')=exp(-h(n,n')) where h is a weighted Hamming distance. Expanding the kernel generates correlation features over all possible plaquettes—single-site, two-site, many-site—so the ansatz is product-separable and can be systematically improved by adding support configurations. The 'quantum' variant qGPS replaces discrete support configurations with continuous product states and writes the log-amplitude as a sum over M products of local tensors, i.e. the exponential of a CP decomposition; the tensor's 4×L×M parameters are optimized either by Bayesian regression (relevance vector machi

What would settle it

Optimize a qGPS with support dimensions M = 8, 16, 32, 64, and 96 for the 4×4 hydrogen lattice in a localized orbital basis and record the variational energy per atom at each M; if the energy does not monotonically decrease toward the full configuration interaction value, the claimed systematic improvability fails. A complementary test: if increasing M in a canonical molecular-orbital basis eventually matches the local-basis accuracy, the basis-dependence claim is wrong, whereas if it plateaus orders of magnitude higher, the optimization-bottleneck premise is confirmed.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The Gaussian Process State is presented as a unified representation for quantum many-body states: wavefunction amplitudes are written as the exponential of a kernel regression over configurations, which expands into correlation features over all possible plaquettes, so the ansatz is product-separable and systematically improvable in the number of support configurations. Promoting the discrete support configurations to continuous product states gives the quantum GPS, whose log-amplitude is a sum of products of local tensors—the exponential of a CP decomposition—and can be trained either by Bayesian sweeping with a marginal-likelihood regularizer or variationally in Monte Carlo. In ab initio c

Load-bearing premise

The framework's promise rests on the premise that the numerical optimization bottleneck—not the model's expressiveness—limits GPS/qGPS in signed, higher-dimensional wavefunctions; the chapter's own results show this is not yet solved.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Second-quantized machine-learned wavefunctions become a practical alternative to first-quantized neural-network ansatze in strongly correlated chemistry, especially when combined with explicit anti-symmetrization via a Slater determinant or backflow.
  • Localized orbital representations should be preferred over canonical molecular-orbital bases for this class of ansatze, because they avoid intricate sign structures and reduce the local-energy evaluation cost to O(N^2).
  • A single hyperparameter—the support dimension M—controls expressivity, giving a clean knob for systematically improvable, regularized wavefunction fits.
  • The same qGPS functional form can be trained by Bayesian sweeping for classical classification tasks, placing tensor-product-style models in the machine-learning toolbox without neural-network architecture search.
  • The variational energies on hydrogen systems provide references at geometries where standard coupled-cluster or density-matrix-renormalization-group methods struggle, useful for benchmarking other methods.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The authors leave implicit that the Bayesian sweeping regularizer could be lifted out of quantum chemistry and applied to other multilinear models such as matrix product states or tensor trains used for generative modeling, transferring the overfitting resistance shown here.
  • If the optimization bottleneck is indeed the crux, improved optimizers for GPS—better stochastic estimators, curvature information, or annealing of the support dimension—would likely benefit the whole neural-quantum-state family, not just this ansatz.
  • A natural extension the paper does not pursue is learning the grayscale embedding used for MNIST inputs rather than fixing it to a linear function; the framework's own multilinear structure suggests this could substantially improve classification accuracy.
  • The basis-dependence result suggests that orbital choice should be treated as a core hyperparameter for any second-quantized machine-learned wavefunction, a conclusion that reaches beyond GPS to fermionic neural-network states generally.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a review-style chapter presenting the Gaussian Process State (GPS) family of second-quantized many-body wavefunction ansatzes. It derives the original kernel-based GPS (Eq. 7), the qGPS continuous-support generalization (Eq. 17), and connects these forms to Bayesian regression, relevance vector machines, correlator product states, tensor-network decompositions, and neural-network architectures. The authors then describe variational Monte Carlo applications to ab initio hydrogen chains and lattices, including autoregressive, Slater-Jastrow, and backflow variants, and report an MNIST digit-classification demonstration using qGPS in a one-vs-rest scheme. The chapter claims that GPS/qGPS unifies multiple paradigms and can serve as a novel tool for ab initio chemistry while also informing quantum-inspired machine learning.

Significance. The chapter provides a useful and generally clear synthesis of the GPS framework. The derivations in Sec. 2 are internally consistent, and the connection between exponential kernels, CP decompositions, and restricted matrix product states is pedagogically valuable. A concrete positive result is the Bayesian sweeping advantage over Adam in the supervised-learning setting (Fig. 5). However, the manuscript contains no new ab initio benchmark data; the flagship numerical results are imported from the authors' earlier papers. The paper's central ambition is constrained by its own admission that optimization of signed, higher-dimensional states remains an open problem, and several claims in the abstract and in Sec. 3.3.2 are stronger than the evidence presented. The chapter is best read as a perspective and review rather than as an established general solution for quantum chemistry.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 5; Sec. 3.3.2, Fig. 8] The abstract's claim that these models 'can be used as novel tools to compute ab initio chemical properties' goes beyond what the variational results in this chapter demonstrate. In Fig. 8(left), the autoregressive GPS (Eq. 23) has relative energy errors orders of magnitude larger in a canonical Hartree-Fock basis than in a Boys-localized basis for the same 1D H16 chain, and the 2D 4x4 lattice is orders of magnitude worse than the 1D chain in both bases. Since the same functional form with complex parameters can formally represent signed states, this discrepancy points to optimization/learning failure rather than to a fundamental representational limit of Eq. (17). Sec. 5 explicitly concedes that the core optimization challenges 'have not yet seen general success in quantum chemistry.' Thus 'systematically improvable' is currently an expressivity statement, not a demonstrated practical p
  2. [Sec. 3.3.2, Fig. 9] The statement that the 64-hydrogen Slater-Jastrow GPS result 'represents a new state-of-the-art result' is not supported by evidence within this manuscript. The data shown in Fig. 9 are imported from the authors' Ref. [74]; no independent calculation or new validation is provided. The comparison consists of a single converged CCSD(T) point at a compressed geometry plus lower-bound variational-2RDM data at stretched geometries. Lower-bound data can rule out energies below the bound but cannot by itself confirm the quality of a variational energy. Please either present this as a review of prior work with the original reference's supporting analysis, or temper the 'new state-of-the-art' language accordingly.
  3. [Sec. 4, Eq. (27), Fig. 10] The quantum-inspired ML claim rests on a single MNIST demonstration whose benchmark comparison is not as meaningful as presented. The test errors of about 1.6-1.7% at M=200 are quoted as being 'within the range of other state-of-the-art results' because the shaded band in Fig. 10 spans from 0.09% to 7.53%. This range is two orders of magnitude wide and includes the best and worst results from a website list; merely falling inside it does not indicate competitiveness. In addition, the linear greyscale embedding in Eq. (27) is an ad hoc modelling choice, and no study of alternative embeddings is reported. Please label this as a proof-of-principle demonstration and soften the interpretation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 2.6] 'achronym' should be 'acronym'.
  2. [Sec. 2.3, Eq. (9)] The Taylor expansion in Eq. (9) uses sums running to L-1, while the Hamming distance in Eq. (8) runs to L. Please clarify whether the upper limit is intentional or a typo.
  3. [Sec. 2.4, Eq. (14)] The likelihood noise variance in Eq. (14) involves division by |e^{phi(n)}|^2; if any training amplitude is exactly zero, the formula is singular. Please specify how zero amplitudes are handled in practice.
  4. [Fig. 8 caption] Unlike Figs. 7 and 9, the Fig. 8 caption does not indicate whether the data are 'adjusted' or directly reproduced from Ref. [68]. Please add a provenance note for consistency.
  5. [References] Reference [101] ('Block') is incomplete: no author names, journal, or year are given. Please complete the citation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: GPS/qGPS is a constructive ansatz (kernel feature resummation / exponentiated CP), and the claimed results are benchmarked against external references; self-citations are review content rather than load-bearing reductions.

full rationale

The core GPS construction is not circular. Equation (7) defines the GPS as exp(sum_i w_i k(n,n'_i)), with the exponential kernel of Eq. (8) obtained by Taylor-resumming all plaquette correlation features. The qGPS form in Eq. (17) is obtained by promoting classical support configurations to product states, and the paper explicitly identifies it as an exponentiated CP tensor decomposition. These are mathematical definitions and identities, not fitted quantities relabeled as predictions. The ab initio claims are tested against external references: autoregressive GPS energies are compared with FCI in Fig. 8; the Slater-Jastrow GPS and backflow CPD energies are compared with DMRG; and the 64-hydrogen-atom result is compared with CCSD(T) and lower-bound variational-2RDM data from Ref. [89]. The MNIST experiment is a fresh train/test transfer benchmark with external state-of-the-art error ranges. The paper does rely heavily on the authors' own prior work (Refs. [43,44,49,68,74,75]), but those works are externally falsifiable, and no argument in this chapter reduces to a self-citation for its mathematical content. The chapter also candidly flags its own limitation in Sec. 5 — optimization challenges "have not yet seen general success in quantum chemistry" — and in Sec. 3.3.2 notes that systematic improvability "can not always be guaranteed" in VMC. These are correctness and evidence caveats, not circularity. No equation was found in which an output is identical to an input by construction, no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no author-imported uniqueness theorem is used to force the ansatz.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced; the GPS and qGPS ansatzes are adopted from the authors' prior work (Refs [43,49]). The load-bearing choices are hyperparameters (support dimension, kernel weighting, noise level, linear embedding) and modeling assumptions about kernel validity, Hamiltonian sparsity, low-rank structure, and embedding sufficiency.

free parameters (4)
  • Support dimension M for GPS/qGPS = M = 1, 50, 100, 200 (MNIST); M = 5, 16 (J1-J2); M = 96 (64 H atoms)
    Hyperparameter controlling model expressivity, chosen by hand; directly controls the MNIST error curves in Fig 10 and the qGPS benchmarks.
  • Kernel weighting function f(i) = not specified numerically in this chapter
    Defines the exponential kernel in Eq 8; controls the emphasis of correlation features of different order and range; a hyperparameter from Refs [43,44].
  • Likelihood noise hyperparameter sigma-tilde^2 = updated by marginal likelihood maximization
    Appears in Eq 14; sets the target accuracy for fitting wavefunction amplitudes and is a free hyperparameter in the Bayesian regression.
  • Linear embedding coefficients epsilon^(0) and epsilon^(1) = optimized during training
    Variational parameters for the MNIST greyscale embedding (Eq 27); the paper states that alternative embeddings require further investigation, so this is an ad hoc modeling choice.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Gaussian process regression assumptions: multivariate Gaussian prior and likelihood lead to closed-form posterior (Eqs 11-13).
    Invoked in Sec 2.4 for the Bayesian optimization of GPS weights; standard Gaussian conjugate analysis.
  • domain assumption The exponential kernel (Eq 8) is a valid positive semi-definite kernel and its Taylor expansion (Eq 9) resums all plaquette-based features.
    The kernel construction in Sec 2.3 underpins the GPS expressibility; the resummation over all plaquettes is asserted analytically.
  • domain assumption The two-electron integral tensor becomes sparse enough in a local orbital basis that screening with thresholds of 1e-5 to 1e-9 Eh preserves accuracy.
    Used in Sec 3.3.1 and Fig 7 to justify O(N^2) local energy evaluation; the variational error from screening is not quantified in this chapter.
  • ad hoc to paper The log-wavefunction amplitudes admit a low-rank CP decomposition with compact support dimension M for the target chemical states.
    Eqs 17-18 assume that M is sufficient; exact representation may require rank up to exponential in system size, so compactness is an empirical assumption.
  • ad hoc to paper A linear embedding of MNIST greyscale values is sufficient for the qGPS classifier.
    Eq 27 uses f(n_i) = eps^(0) + eps^(1) n_i; the paper explicitly calls for further investigation of alternative embeddings.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bayesian perspectives for quantum states and application to ab initio quantum chemistry." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YJ77JN5F

@misc{pith2026250821729,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bayesian perspectives for quantum states and application to ab initio quantum chemistry},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YJ77JN5F}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.21729}
}
read the original abstract

The quantum many-electron problem is not just at the heart of condensed matter phenomena, but also essential for first-principles simulation of chemical phenomena. Strong correlation in chemical systems are prevalent and present a formidable challenge in the simulation of these systems, while predictive phenomena in this domain often also requires a demanding level of accuracy to inform chemical behavior. Efficient representations of the many-electron states of chemical systems are therefore also being inspired by machine learning principles to provide an alternative to established approaches. In this chapter, we review recent progress in this endeavor for quantum chemical problems represented in second quantization, and the particular challenges present in this field. In particular, we focus on the application of Gaussian Process States emerging from efficient representations of the many-body wavefunction with rigorous Bayesian modeling frameworks, allowing for the unification of multiple paradigms under a common umbrella. We show how such models (and other representations derived from machine learning) can be used as novel tools to compute ab initio chemical properties, while in turn also informing the design of machine learning models to extract correlation patterns in classical data.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

142 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [74]

    Framework for efficient ab initio elec- tronic structure with Gaussian Process States

    Yannic Rath and George H. Booth. “Framework for efficient ab initio elec- tronic structure with Gaussian Process States”. In: Phys. Rev. B 107 (May 2023), p. 205119. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.107.205119

    doi:10.1103/physrevb.107.205119 2023

  2. [49]

    Quantum Gaussian process state: A kernel-inspired state with quantum support data

    Yannic Rath and George H. Booth. “Quantum Gaussian process state: A kernel-inspired state with quantum support data”. In: Phys. Rev. Research 4.2 (May 2022), p. 023126. doi: 10.1103/physrevresearch.4.023126

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.4.023126 2022

  3. [1]

    Challenges for Density Functional Theory

    Aron J. Cohen, Paula Mori-S ´anchez, and Weitao Yang. “Challenges for Density Functional Theory”. In:Chem. Rev.112.1 (Jan. 2012), pp. 289–320. issn: 0009-2665. doi: 10.1021/cr200107z. (Visited on 10/07/2024)

    doi:10.1021/cr200107z 2012

  4. [2]

    Why Is Quantum Chemistry So Complicated?

    Jack Simons. “Why Is Quantum Chemistry So Complicated?” In: JACS 145.8 (2023), pp. 4343–4354. doi: 10.1021/jacs.2c13042

    work page doi:10.1021/jacs.2c13042 2023

  5. [3]

    Spiers Memorial Lecture: Quantum chemistry, clas- sical heuristics, and quantum advantage

    Garnet Kin-Lic Chan. “Spiers Memorial Lecture: Quantum chemistry, clas- sical heuristics, and quantum advantage”. In:Faraday Discuss.254 (0 2024), pp. 11–52. doi: 10.1039/D4FD00141A

    doi:10.1039/d4fd00141a 2024

  6. [4]

    Elec- tronic Landscape of the P-cluster of Nitrogenase as Revealed through Many- Electron Quantum Wavefunction Simulations

    Zhendong Li, Sheng Guo, Qiming Sun, and Garnet Kin-Lic Chan. “Elec- tronic Landscape of the P-cluster of Nitrogenase as Revealed through Many- Electron Quantum Wavefunction Simulations”. In: Nat. Chem. 11.11 (Nov. 2019), pp. 1026–1033. issn: 1755-4349. doi: 10 . 1038 / s41557 - 019 - 0337-3. (Visited on 03/15/2025)

    2019

  7. [5]

    Low-Energy Spectrum of Iron–Sulfur Clusters Directly from Many-Particle Quantum Mechanics

    Sandeep Sharma, Kantharuban Sivalingam, Frank Neese, and Garnet Kin- Lic Chan. “Low-Energy Spectrum of Iron–Sulfur Clusters Directly from Many-Particle Quantum Mechanics”. In: Nat. Chem. 6.10 (Oct. 2014), pp. 927–933. issn: 1755-4349. doi: 10.1038/nchem.2041 . (Visited on 03/15/2025)

    doi:10.1038/nchem.2041 2014

  8. [6]

    Entangled Quan- tum Electronic Wavefunctions of the Mn4CaO5 Cluster in Photosystem II

    Yuki Kurashige, Garnet Kin-Lic Chan, and Takeshi Yanai. “Entangled Quan- tum Electronic Wavefunctions of the Mn4CaO5 Cluster in Photosystem II”. In: Nat. Chem. 5.8 (Aug. 2013), pp. 660–666. issn: 1755-4349. doi: 10.1038/nchem.1677. (Visited on 03/15/2025)

    doi:10.1038/nchem.1677 2013

Show all 142 references
  1. [7]

    Attila Szabo and Neil S. Ostlund. Modern Quantum Chemistry Introduc- tion to Advanced Electronic Structure Theory. Introduction to Advanced Electronic Structure Theory. Dover Publications, Incorporated, 2012. isbn: 9780486134598

    2012

  2. [8]

    Flexibilities of wavelets as a computational basis set for large-scale electronic structure calculations

    Laura E. Ratcliff et al. “Flexibilities of wavelets as a computational basis set for large-scale electronic structure calculations”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 152.19 (May 2020), p. 194110. issn: 0021-9606. doi: 10.1063/5.0004792

    2020 doi

  3. [9]

    MADNESS: A Multiresolution, Adaptive Numer- ical Environment for Scientific Simulation

    Robert J. Harrison et al. “MADNESS: A Multiresolution, Adaptive Numer- ical Environment for Scientific Simulation”. In: SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 38.5 (2016), S123–S142. doi: 10.1137/15M1026171

    2016 doi

  4. [10]

    Sliced Basis Density Matrix Renormalization Group for Electronic Structure

    E. Miles Stoudenmire and Steven R. White. “Sliced Basis Density Matrix Renormalization Group for Electronic Structure”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.119 (4 July 2017), p. 046401. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.046401

    2017 doi

  5. [11]

    From plane waves to local Gaussians for the simulation of corre- lated periodic systems

    George H. Booth, Theodoros Tsatsoulis, Garnet Kin-Lic Chan, and Andreas Gr¨ uneis. “From plane waves to local Gaussians for the simulation of corre- lated periodic systems”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 145.8 (Aug. 2016), p. 084111. issn: 0021-9606. doi: 10.1063/1.4961301

    2016 doi

  6. [12]

    Gaussian basis sets for molecular applications

    J. Grant Hill. “Gaussian basis sets for molecular applications”. In: Int. J. Quantum Chem. 113.1 (2013), pp. 21–34. doi: 10.1002/qua.24355. 36 Yannic Rath, Massimo Bortone, George H. Booth

    2013 doi

  7. [13]

    The updates in Libcint 6: More integrals, API refinements, and SIMD optimization techniques

    Qiming Sun. “The updates in Libcint 6: More integrals, API refinements, and SIMD optimization techniques”. In:J. Chem. Phys.160.17 (May 2024), p. 174116. issn: 0021-9606. doi: 10.1063/5.0200293

    2024 doi

  8. [14]

    A priori identification of con- figurational deadwood

    Laimutis Bytautas and Klaus Ruedenberg. “A priori identification of con- figurational deadwood”. In: Chem. Phys. 356.1 (2009). Moving Frontiers in Quantum Chemistry: pp. 64–75. issn: 0301-0104. doi: 10 . 1016 / j . chemphys.2008.11.021 . url: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ sci...

    2009

  9. [15]

    Ab-Initio Solution of the Many-Electron Schr ¨odinger Equation with Deep Neural Networks

    David Pfau, James S. Spencer, Alexander G. D. G. Matthews, and W. M. C. Foulkes. “Ab-Initio Solution of the Many-Electron Schr ¨odinger Equation with Deep Neural Networks”. In: Phys. Rev. Research 2.3 (Sept. 2020), p. 033429. doi: 10.1103/physrevresearch.2.033429

    2020 doi

  10. [16]

    Deep-neural-network solution of the electronic Schr¨odinger equation

    Jan Hermann, Zeno Sch ¨atzle, and Frank No´e. “Deep-neural-network solution of the electronic Schr¨odinger equation”. In: Nat. Chem. 12.10 (Sept. 2020), pp. 891–897. doi: 10.1038/s41557-020-0544-y

    2020 doi

  11. [17]

    Variance extrapolation method for neural-network variational Monte Carlo

    Weizhong Fu, Weiluo Ren, and Ji Chen. “Variance extrapolation method for neural-network variational Monte Carlo”. In: Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 5.1 (Jan. 2024), p. 015016. doi: 10.1088/2632-2153/ad1f75

    2024 doi

  12. [18]

    Role of Backflow Correlations for the Nonmagnetic Phase of the T-t’ Hubbard Model

    Luca F. Tocchio, Federico Becca, Alberto Parola, and Sandro Sorella. “Role of Backflow Correlations for the Nonmagnetic Phase of the T-t’ Hubbard Model”. In: Phys. Rev. B 78.4 (July 2008), p. 041101. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevB.78.041101. (Visited on 08/07/2023)

    2008

  13. [19]

    Backflow Correlations in the Hubbard Model: An Efficient Tool for the Study of the Metal-Insulator Transition and the Large-$U$ Limit

    Luca F. Tocchio, Federico Becca, and Claudius Gros. “Backflow Correlations in the Hubbard Model: An Efficient Tool for the Study of the Metal-Insulator Transition and the Large-$U$ Limit”. In: Phys. Rev. B 83.19 (May 2011), p. 195138. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.83.195138. (Visited ...

    2011 doi

  14. [20]

    Quantum Monte Carlo Approaches for Correlated Systems

    Federico Becca and Sandro Sorella. Quantum Monte Carlo Approaches for Correlated Systems. Cambridge University Press, Nov. 2017.doi: 10.1017/ 9781316417041

    2017

  15. [21]

    Explicitly Cor- related R12/F12 Methods for Electronic Structure

    Liguo Kong, Florian A. Bischoff, and Edward F. Valeev. “Explicitly Cor- related R12/F12 Methods for Electronic Structure”. In: Chem. Rev. 112.1 (2012), pp. 75–107. doi: 10.1021/cr200204r

    2012 doi

  16. [22]

    Fermionic neural- network states for ab-initio electronic structure

    Kenny Choo, Antonio Mezzacapo, and Giuseppe Carleo. “Fermionic neural- network states for ab-initio electronic structure”. In: Nat. Commun. 11.1 (May 2020). doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-15724-9

    2020 doi

  17. [23]

    Matrix product operators, matrix product states, and ab initio density matrix renormalization group algorithms

    Garnet Kin-Lic Chan, Anna Keselman, Naoki Nakatani, Zhendong Li, and Steven R. White. “Matrix product operators, matrix product states, and ab initio density matrix renormalization group algorithms”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 145.1 (July 2016), p. 014102. issn: 0021-9606. doi: 10.106...

    2016 doi

  18. [24]

    Unifying neural-network quantum states and correlator product states via tensor networks

    Stephen R Clark. “Unifying neural-network quantum states and correlator product states via tensor networks”. In:J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.51.13 (Feb. 2018), p. 135301. doi: 10.1088/1751-8121/aaaaf2

    2018 doi

  19. [25]

    Solving the quantum many-body problem with artificial neural networks

    Giuseppe Carleo and Matthias Troyer. “Solving the quantum many-body problem with artificial neural networks”. In: Science 355.6325 (Feb. 2017), pp. 602–606. doi: 10.1126/science.aag2302. Bayesian states for quantum chemistry 37

    2017 doi

  20. [26]

    Chapter 25 - Multiconfigurational quantum chemistry

    Bj ¨orn O. Roos. “Chapter 25 - Multiconfigurational quantum chemistry”. In: Theory and Applications of Computational Chemistry. Ed. by Clifford E. Dykstra, Gernot Frenking, Kwang S. Kim, and Gustavo E. Scuseria. Amster- dam: Elsevier, 2005, pp. 725–764.isbn: 978-0-444-51719-7....

    2005

  21. [27]

    Quantum Embedding Theories

    Qiming Sun and Garnet Kin-Lic Chan. “Quantum Embedding Theories”. In: Accounts Chem. Res.49.12 (2016), pp. 2705–2712. doi: 10.1021/acs. accounts.6b00356

    2016 doi

  22. [28]

    Quantum Embedding Theory for Strongly Correlated States in Materials

    He Ma, Nan Sheng, Marco Govoni, and Giulia Galli. “Quantum Embedding Theory for Strongly Correlated States in Materials”. In: J. Chem. Theory Comput. 17.4 (2021), pp. 2116–2125. doi: 10.1021/acs.jctc.0c01258

    2021 doi

  23. [29]

    Systematic Improvability in Quan- tum Embedding for Real Materials

    Max Nusspickel and George H. Booth. “Systematic Improvability in Quan- tum Embedding for Real Materials”. In: Phys. Rev. X 12 (1 Mar. 2022), p. 011046. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.12.011046

    2022 doi

  24. [30]

    Ab initio effective core potentials for molecular calculations. Potentials for K to Au including the outermost core orbitals

    P. Jeffrey Hay and Willard R. Wadt. “Ab initio effective core potentials for molecular calculations. Potentials for K to Au including the outermost core orbitals”. In:J. Chem. Phys.82.1 (Jan. 1985), pp. 299–310.issn: 0021-9606. doi: 10.1063/1.448975 . eprint: https://pubs.aip....

    1985 doi

  25. [31]

    Canonical transcorrelated theory with projected Slater-type geminals

    Takeshi Yanai and Toru Shiozaki. “Canonical transcorrelated theory with projected Slater-type geminals”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 136.8 (Feb. 2012), p. 084107. issn: 0021-9606. doi: 10.1063/1.3688225

    2012 doi

  26. [32]

    A first solution, for LiH, of a molecular transcorrelated wave equation by means of restricted numerical integration

    Samuel Francis Boys, Nicholas Charles Handy, and John Wilfrid Linnett. “A first solution, for LiH, of a molecular transcorrelated wave equation by means of restricted numerical integration”. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences ...

    1969

  27. [33]

    Perspec- tive: Explicitly correlated electronic structure theory for complex systems

    Andreas Gr¨ uneis, So Hirata, Yu-ya Ohnishi, and Seiichiro Ten-no. “Perspec- tive: Explicitly correlated electronic structure theory for complex systems”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 146.8 (Feb. 2017), p. 080901. issn: 0021-9606. doi: 10.1063/1.4976974

    2017 doi

  28. [34]

    Assessment of mul- tireference approaches to explicitly correlated full configuration interaction quantum Monte Carlo

    J. A. F. Kersten, George H. Booth, and Ali Alavi. “Assessment of mul- tireference approaches to explicitly correlated full configuration interaction quantum Monte Carlo”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 145.5 (Aug. 2016), p. 054117. issn: 0021-9606. doi: 10.1063/1.4959245

    2016 doi

  29. [35]

    An ex- plicitly correlated approach to basis set incompleteness in full configuration interaction quantum Monte Carlo

    George H. Booth, Deidre Cleland, Ali Alavi, and David P. Tew. “An ex- plicitly correlated approach to basis set incompleteness in full configuration interaction quantum Monte Carlo”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 137.16 (Oct. 2012), p. 164112. issn: 0021-9606. doi: 10.1063/1.4762445

    2012 doi

  30. [36]

    Reduced scaling Hilbert space vari- ational Monte Carlo

    Haochuan Wei and Eric Neuscamman. “Reduced scaling Hilbert space vari- ational Monte Carlo”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 149.18 (Nov. 2018), p. 184106. doi: 10.1063/1.5047207. 38 Yannic Rath, Massimo Bortone, George H. Booth

    2018 doi

  31. [37]

    Bayesian Modelling Approaches for Quantum States - The Ultimate Gaussian Process States Handbook

    Yannic Rath. “Bayesian Modelling Approaches for Quantum States - The Ultimate Gaussian Process States Handbook”. PhD thesis. King’s College London, 2023

    2023

  32. [38]

    Many-Body Perturbation Theory and Coupled Cluster Theory for Electron Correlation in Molecules

    R J Bartlett. “Many-Body Perturbation Theory and Coupled Cluster Theory for Electron Correlation in Molecules”. In:Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem.32.1 (Oct. 1981), pp. 359–401. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pc.32.100181.002043

    1981

  33. [39]

    State-specific multireference coupled-cluster the- ory

    Andreas K ¨ohn, Matthias Hanauer, Leonie Anna M¨ uck, Thomas-Christian Jagau, and J¨ urgen Gauss. “State-specific multireference coupled-cluster the- ory”. In: WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 3.2 (2013), pp. 176–197. doi: 10.1002/ wcms.1120

    2013

  34. [40]

    Approximating strongly correlated wave functions with correlator product states

    Hitesh J. Changlani, Jesse M. Kinder, C. J. Umrigar, and Garnet Kin-Lic Chan. “Approximating strongly correlated wave functions with correlator product states”. In: Phys. Rev. B 80.24 (Dec. 2009), p. 245116. doi: 10. 1103/physrevb.80.245116

    2009

  35. [41]

    Ground-state prop- erties of quantum many-body systems: entangled-plaquette states and vari- ational Monte Carlo

    F Mezzacapo, N Schuch, M Boninsegni, and J I Cirac. “Ground-state prop- erties of quantum many-body systems: entangled-plaquette states and vari- ational Monte Carlo”. In: New J. Phys. 11.8 (Aug. 2009), p. 083026. doi: 10.1088/1367-2630/11/8/083026

    2009 doi

  36. [42]

    Gaussian processes for machine learning

    Carl Edward Rasmussen. Gaussian processes for machine learning . MIT Press, 2006. isbn: 026218253X. doi: 10.7551/mitpress/3206.001. 0001

    2006 doi

  37. [43]

    Gaussian Process States: A Data-Driven Representation of Quan- tum Many-Body Physics

    Aldo Glielmo, Yannic Rath, G ´abor Cs´anyi, Alessandro De Vita, and George H. Booth. “Gaussian Process States: A Data-Driven Representation of Quan- tum Many-Body Physics”. In:Phys. Rev. X10.4 (Nov. 2020), p. 041026.doi: 10.1103/physrevx.10.041026

    2020 doi

  38. [44]

    A Bayesian inference framework for compression and prediction of quantum states

    Yannic Rath, Aldo Glielmo, and George H. Booth. “A Bayesian inference framework for compression and prediction of quantum states”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 153.12 (Sept. 2020), p. 124108. doi: 10.1063/5.0024570

    2020 doi

  39. [45]

    Learning ground states of gapped quantum Hamiltonians with Kernel Methods

    Clemens Giuliani, Filippo Vicentini, Riccardo Rossi, and Giuseppe Car- leo. “Learning ground states of gapped quantum Hamiltonians with Kernel Methods”. In: Quantum 7 (Aug. 2023), p. 1096. issn: 2521-327X. doi: 10.22331/q-2023-08-29-1096

    2023 doi

  40. [46]

    Many-Body Problem with Strong Forces

    Robert Jastrow. “Many-Body Problem with Strong Forces”. In: Phys. Rev. 98.5 (June 1955), pp. 1479–1484. doi: 10.1103/physrev.98.1479

    1955 doi

  41. [47]

    Error Detecting and Error Correcting Codes

    R. W. Hamming. “Error Detecting and Error Correcting Codes”. In: Bell Syst. Tech. J. 29.2 (Apr. 1950), pp. 147–160. doi: 10 . 1002 / j . 1538 - 7305.1950.tb00463.x

    1950

  42. [48]

    Additive Gaus- sian Processes

    David K Duvenaud, Hannes Nickisch, and Carl Rasmussen. “Additive Gaus- sian Processes”. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems . Ed. by J. Shawe-Taylor, R. Zemel, P. Bartlett, F. Pereira, and K.Q. Wein- berger. Vol. 24. Curran Associates, Inc., 2011, pp. 226–234...

    2011

  43. [50]

    Bayesian Inference: An Introduction to Principles and Practice in Machine Learning

    Michael E. Tipping. “Bayesian Inference: An Introduction to Principles and Practice in Machine Learning”. In:Advanced Lectures on Machine Learning. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2004, pp. 41–62. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540- 28650-9_3

    2004 doi

  44. [51]

    The Relevance Vector Machine

    Michael E. Tipping. “The Relevance Vector Machine”. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 2000, pp. 652–658

    2000

  45. [52]

    Fast Marginal Likelihood Maximi- sation for Sparse Bayesian Models

    Michael E Tipping, Anita C Faul, et al. “Fast Marginal Likelihood Maximi- sation for Sparse Bayesian Models.” In: AISTATS. 2003

    2003

  46. [53]

    Neural-network quantum state tomography

    Giacomo Torlai et al. “Neural-network quantum state tomography”. In: Nat. Phys. 14.5 (Feb. 2018), pp. 447–450.doi: 10.1038/s41567-018-0048-5

    2018 doi

  47. [54]

    Experimental Online Quantum Dots Charge Autotuning Using Neural Networks

    Victor Yon et al. “Experimental Online Quantum Dots Charge Autotuning Using Neural Networks”. In: Nano Lett. 25.10 (2025), pp. 3717–3725. doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.4c04889

    2025 doi

  48. [55]

    Neural-network quantum state tomography in a two-qubit experiment

    Marcel Neugebauer et al. “Neural-network quantum state tomography in a two-qubit experiment”. In: Phys. Rev. A 102.4 (Oct. 2020). doi: 10.1103/ physreva.102.042604

    2020

  49. [56]

    The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states

    Ulrich Schollw ¨ock. “The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states”. In: Ann. Phys. 326.1 (Jan. 2011), pp. 96–192. doi: 10.1016/j.aop.2010.09.012

    2011 doi

  50. [57]

    Time-evolution methods for matrix-product states

    Sebastian Paeckel et al. “Time-evolution methods for matrix-product states”. In: Ann. Phys. 411 (Dec. 2019), p. 167998. doi: 10.1016/j.aop.2019. 167998

    2019 doi

  51. [58]

    Recent developments in CANDECOMP/PARAFAC algorithms: a critical review

    Nicolaas (Klaas) M. Faber, Rasmus Bro, and Philip K. Hopke. “Recent developments in CANDECOMP/PARAFAC algorithms: a critical review”. In: Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst.65.1 (Jan. 2003), pp. 119–137.doi: 10.1016/ s0169-7439(02)00089-8

    2003

  52. [59]

    Tensor Decompositions and Appli- cations

    Tamara G. Kolda and Brett W. Bader. “Tensor Decompositions and Appli- cations”. In: SIAM Rev. 51.3 (Aug. 2009), pp. 455–500. doi: 10 . 1137 / 07070111x

    2009

  53. [60]

    CP decom- position for tensors via alternating least squares with QR decomposition

    Rachel Minster, Irina Viviano, Xiaotian Liu, and Grey Ballard. “CP decom- position for tensors via alternating least squares with QR decomposition”. In: Numer. Linear Algebra Appl.30.6 (2023), e2511. doi: 10.1002/nla.2511

    2023 doi

  54. [61]

    Generalization properties of neural net- work approximations to frustrated magnet ground states

    Tom Westerhout, Nikita Astrakhantsev, Konstantin S. Tikhonov, Mikhail I. Katsnelson, and Andrey A. Bagrov. “Generalization properties of neural net- work approximations to frustrated magnet ground states”. In:Nat. Commun. 11.1 (Mar. 2020). doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-15402-w

    2020 doi

  55. [62]

    Dirac-Type Nodal Spin Liquid Re- vealed by Refined Quantum Many-Body Solver Using Neural-Network Wave Function, Correlation Ratio, and Level Spectroscopy

    Yusuke Nomura and Masatoshi Imada. “Dirac-Type Nodal Spin Liquid Re- vealed by Refined Quantum Many-Body Solver Using Neural-Network Wave Function, Correlation Ratio, and Level Spectroscopy”. In:Phys. Rev. X 11.3 (Aug. 2021), p. 031034. doi: 10.1103/physrevx.11.031034

    2021 doi

  56. [63]

    Adam: A Method for Stochastic Op- timization

    Diederik P. Kingma and Jimmy Ba. “Adam: A Method for Stochastic Op- timization”. In: 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations, 40 Yannic Rath, Massimo Bortone, George H. Booth ICLR 2015, San Diego, CA, USA, May 7-9, 2015, Conference Track Pro- ceedings. Ed. by ...

    2015 doi arXiv

  57. [64]

    Neural-network quantum state tomography

    Dominik Koutn´ y, Libor Motka, Zden ˇek Hradil, Jaroslav ˇReh´aˇcek, and Luis L. S ´anchez-Soto. “Neural-network quantum state tomography”. In: Phys. Rev. A 106.1 (July 2022). doi: 10.1103/physreva.106.012409

    2022 doi

  58. [65]

    Efficient quantum state tomography with convolutional neural networks

    Tobias Schmale, Moritz Reh, and Martin G ¨arttner. “Efficient quantum state tomography with convolutional neural networks”. In: npj Quantum Inf. 8.1 (Sept. 2022). doi: 10.1038/s41534-022-00621-4

    2022 doi

  59. [66]

    Attention-Based Transformer Networks for Quantum State Tomogra- phy

    Hailan Ma, Zhenhong Sun, Daoyi Dong, Chunlin Chen, and Herschel Ra- bitz. Attention-Based Transformer Networks for Quantum State Tomogra- phy. 2023. doi: 10 . 48550 / arxiv . 2305 . 05433. arXiv: 2305 . 05433 [quant-ph]

    2023

  60. [67]

    Towards a standardized notation and terminology in multiway analysis

    Henk A. L. Kiers. “Towards a standardized notation and terminology in multiway analysis”. In: J. Chemom. 14.3 (2000), pp. 105–122. doi: 10 . 1002/1099-128x(200005/06)14:3<105::aid-cem582>3.0.co;2-i

    2000

  61. [68]

    Impact of condi- tional modelling for a universal autoregressive quantum state

    Massimo Bortone, Yannic Rath, and George H. Booth. “Impact of condi- tional modelling for a universal autoregressive quantum state”. In:Quantum 8 (Feb. 2024), p. 1245.issn: 2521-327X. doi: 10.22331/q-2024-02-08- 1245

    2024 doi

  62. [69]

    Helping restricted Boltzmann machines with quantum- state representation by restoring symmetry

    Yusuke Nomura. “Helping restricted Boltzmann machines with quantum- state representation by restoring symmetry”. In: J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 33.17 (Apr. 2021), p. 174003. doi: 10.1088/1361-648x/abe268

    2021 doi

  63. [70]

    Deep Autoregressive Models for the Efficient Variational Simulation of Many-Body Quantum Systems

    Or Sharir, Yoav Levine, Noam Wies, Giuseppe Carleo, and Amnon Shashua. “Deep Autoregressive Models for the Efficient Variational Simulation of Many-Body Quantum Systems”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 124.2 (Jan. 2020), p. 020503. doi: 10.1103/physrevlett.124.020503

    2020 doi

  64. [71]

    Recurrent neural network wave functions

    Mohamed Hibat-Allah, Martin Ganahl, Lauren E. Hayward, Roger G. Melko, and Juan Carrasquilla. “Recurrent neural network wave functions”. In:Phys. Rev. Research 2.2 (June 2020). doi: 10 . 1103 / physrevresearch . 2 . 023358

    2020

  65. [72]

    Convolutional trans- former wave functions

    Ao Chen, Vighnesh Dattatraya Naik, and Markus Heyl. Convolutional trans- former wave functions. 2025. doi: 10.48550/arxiv.2503.10462. arXiv: 2503.10462 [cond-mat.dis-nn]

    2025 doi arXiv

  66. [73]

    Pfaf- fian Pairing Wave Functions in Electronic-Structure Quantum Monte Carlo Simulations

    M. Bajdich, L. Mitas, G. Drobn´ y, L. K. Wagner, and K. E. Schmidt. “Pfaf- fian Pairing Wave Functions in Electronic-Structure Quantum Monte Carlo Simulations”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 96.13 (Apr. 2006), p. 130201. doi: 10. 1103/physrevlett.96.130201

    2006

  67. [75]

    Simple Fermionic backflow states via a systematically improvable tensor decomposition

    Massimo Bortone, Yannic Rath, and George H Booth. “Simple Fermionic backflow states via a systematically improvable tensor decomposition”. In: Commun. Phys. 8.1 (2025), p. 169. Bayesian states for quantum chemistry 41

    2025

  68. [76]

    Gold-standard solutions to the Schr ¨odinger equation using deep learning: How much physics do we need?

    Leon Gerard, Michael Scherbela, Philipp Marquetand, and Philipp Grohs. “Gold-standard solutions to the Schr ¨odinger equation using deep learning: How much physics do we need?” In: Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems. Ed. by Alice H. Oh, Alekh Agarwal, Danielle...

    2022

  69. [77]

    Solving many-electron Schr¨odinger equation using deep neural networks

    Jiequn Han, Linfeng Zhang, and Weinan E. “Solving many-electron Schr¨odinger equation using deep neural networks”. In:J. Comput. Phys.399 (Dec. 2019), p. 108929. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2019.108929

    2019

  70. [78]

    Ab initio quantum chemistry with neural-network wave- functions

    Jan Hermann et al. “Ab initio quantum chemistry with neural-network wave- functions”. In: Nat. Rev. Chem. 7.10 (Aug. 2023), pp. 692–709. issn: 2397-

    2023

  71. [79]

    Ab initio calculation of real solids via neural network ansatz

    Xiang Li, Zhe Li, and Ji Chen. “Ab initio calculation of real solids via neural network ansatz”. In:Nat. Commun. 13.1 (Dec. 2022). doi: 10.1038/ s41467-022-35627-1

    2022

  72. [80]

    Backflow Transformations via Neural Networks for Quantum Many-Body Wave Functions

    Di Luo and Bryan K. Clark. “Backflow Transformations via Neural Networks for Quantum Many-Body Wave Functions”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.122.22 (June 2019), p. 226401. doi: 10.1103/physrevlett.122.226401

    2019 doi

  73. [81]

    Neural network backflow for ab initio quantum chemistry

    An-Jun Liu and Bryan K. Clark. “Neural network backflow for ab initio quantum chemistry”. In: Phys. Rev. B 110 (11 Sept. 2024), p. 115137. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.110.115137

    2024 doi

  74. [82]

    An-Jun Liu and Bryan K. Clark. Efficient optimization of neural network backflow for ab-initio quantum chemistry . 2025. doi: 10.48550/arxiv. 2502.18843. arXiv: 2502.18843 [physics.chem-ph]

    2025 doi arXiv

  75. [83]

    Autoregressive neural-network wavefunctions for ab initio quantum chemistry

    Thomas D Barrett, Aleksei Malyshev, and AI Lvovsky. “Autoregressive neural-network wavefunctions for ab initio quantum chemistry”. In: Nature Machine Intelligence 4.4 (2022), pp. 351–358. doi: 10 . 1038 / s42256 - 022-00461-z

    2022

  76. [84]

    Scalable neural quantum states architecture for quantum chemistry

    Tianchen Zhao, James Stokes, and Shravan Veerapaneni. “Scalable neural quantum states architecture for quantum chemistry”. In: Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 4.2 (2023), p. 025034

    2023

  77. [85]

    A Real Neural Network State for Quantum Chem- istry

    Yangjun Wu et al. “A Real Neural Network State for Quantum Chem- istry”. In: Mathematics 11.6 (2023). issn: 2227-7390. doi: 10 . 3390 / math11061417. url: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/6/1417

    2023

  78. [86]

    Artifi- cial Neural Networks Applied as Molecular Wave Function Solvers

    Peng-Jian Yang, Mahito Sugiyama, Koji Tsuda, and Takeshi Yanai. “Artifi- cial Neural Networks Applied as Molecular Wave Function Solvers”. In: J. Chem. Theory Comput. 16.6 (June 2020), pp. 3513–3529. issn: 1549-9618. doi: 10.1021/acs.jctc.9b01132. (Visited on 02/01/2023)

    2020 doi

  79. [87]

    Enhanc- ing the Expressivity of Variational Neural, and Hardware-Efficient Quantum States Through Orbital Rotations

    Javier Robledo Moreno, Jeffrey Cohn, Dries Sels, and Mario Motta. Enhanc- ing the Expressivity of Variational Neural, and Hardware-Efficient Quantum States Through Orbital Rotations . 2023. doi: 10 . 48550 / ARXIV . 2302 . 11588

    2023

  80. [88]

    Strong electronic correlation in the hydrogen chain: A variational Monte 42 Yannic Rath, Massimo Bortone, George H. Booth Carlo study

    Lorenzo Stella, Claudio Attaccalite, Sandro Sorella, and Angel Rubio. “Strong electronic correlation in the hydrogen chain: A variational Monte 42 Yannic Rath, Massimo Bortone, George H. Booth Carlo study”. In:Phys. Rev. B84.24 (Dec. 2011), p. 245117.doi: 10.1103/ physrevb.84.245117

    2011

  81. [89]

    Strong cor- relation in hydrogen chains and lattices using the variational two-electron reduced density matrix method

    Anton V. Sinitskiy, Loren Greenman, and David A. Mazziotti. “Strong cor- relation in hydrogen chains and lattices using the variational two-electron reduced density matrix method”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 133.1 (July 2010), p. 014104. doi: 10.1063/1.3459059

    2010 doi

  82. [90]

    Towards the Solution of the Many-Electron Problem in Real Materials: Equation of State of the Hydrogen Chain with State-of-the- Art Many-Body Methods

    Mario Motta et al. “Towards the Solution of the Many-Electron Problem in Real Materials: Equation of State of the Hydrogen Chain with State-of-the- Art Many-Body Methods”. In:Phys. Rev. X7.3 (Sept. 2017), p. 031059.doi: 10.1103/physrevx.7.031059

    2017 doi

  83. [91]

    On the Non-Orthogonality Problem Connected with the Use of Atomic Wave Functions in the Theory of Molecules and Crystals

    Per-Olov L ¨owdin. “On the Non-Orthogonality Problem Connected with the Use of Atomic Wave Functions in the Theory of Molecules and Crystals”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 18.3 (Mar. 1950), pp. 365–375. doi: 10.1063/1.1747632

    1950 doi

  84. [92]

    Natural pop- ulation analysis

    Alan E. Reed, Robert B. Weinstock, and Frank Weinhold. “Natural pop- ulation analysis”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 83.2 (July 1985), pp. 735–746. doi: 10.1063/1.449486

    1985 doi

  85. [93]

    Fast noniterative orbital localization for large molecules

    Francesco Aquilante, Thomas Bondo Pedersen, Alfredo S ´anchez de Mer´as, and Henrik Koch. “Fast noniterative orbital localization for large molecules”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 125.17 (Nov. 2006), p. 174101. doi: 10 . 1063 / 1 . 2360264

    2006

  86. [94]

    Canonical Configurational Interaction Proce- dure

    J. M. Foster and S. F. Boys. “Canonical Configurational Interaction Proce- dure”. In: Rev. Mod. Phys. 32.2 (Apr. 1960), pp. 300–302. doi: 10.1103/ revmodphys.32.300

    1960

  87. [95]

    Localized Atomic and Molecular Orbitals

    Clyde Edmiston and Klaus Ruedenberg. “Localized Atomic and Molecular Orbitals”. In:Rev. Mod. Phys.35.3 (July 1963), pp. 457–464.doi: 10.1103/ revmodphys.35.457

    1963

  88. [96]

    A fast intrinsic localization procedure applicable for ab initio and semiempirical linear combination of atomic orbital wave functions

    J ´anos Pipek and Paul G. Mezey. “A fast intrinsic localization procedure applicable for ab initio and semiempirical linear combination of atomic orbital wave functions”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 90.9 (May 1989), pp. 4916–

    1989

  89. [97]

    Localized molecular orbitals for polyatomic molecules. I. A com- parison of the Edmiston-Ruedenberg and Boys localization methods

    Daniel A. Kleier, Thomas A. Halgren, John H. Hall, and William N. Lip- scomb. “Localized molecular orbitals for polyatomic molecules. I. A com- parison of the Edmiston-Ruedenberg and Boys localization methods”. In:J. Chem. Phys.61.10 (Nov. 1974), pp. 3905–3919.doi: 10.1063/1.1681683

    1974 doi

  90. [98]

    Quantum Monte Carlo simulations of solids

    W. M. C. Foulkes, L. Mitas, R. J. Needs, and G. Rajagopal. “Quantum Monte Carlo simulations of solids”. In:Rev. Mod. Phys.73.1 (Jan. 2001), pp. 33–83. doi: 10.1103/revmodphys.73.33

    2001 doi

  91. [99]

    Mocking quantum mechanics: Semiclassical and machine- learning approaches to frustrated magnetism

    Attila Szab ´o. “Mocking quantum mechanics: Semiclassical and machine- learning approaches to frustrated magnetism”. PhD thesis. 2021. doi: 10. 17863 / CAM . 72810. url: https : / / www . repository . cam . ac . uk / handle/1810/325353

    2021

  92. [100]

    Katsnelson, and Andrey A

    Tom Westerhout, Mikhail I. Katsnelson, and Andrey A. Bagrov. Unveiling ground state sign structures of frustrated quantum systems via non-glassy Ising models. 2022. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2207.10675. Bayesian states for quantum chemistry 43

    2022 doi arXiv

  93. [101]

    doi: 10.1515/iupac.68.4070

    Block. doi: 10.1515/iupac.68.4070. url: https://sanshar.github. io/Block/index.html (visited on 10/18/2022)

    2022 doi

  94. [102]

    Supervised Learning with Tensor Networks

    Edwin Stoudenmire and David J Schwab. “Supervised Learning with Tensor Networks”. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. Ed. by D. Lee, M. Sugiyama, U. Luxburg, I. Guyon, and R. Garnett. Vol. 29. Cur- ran Associates, Inc., 2016. url: https://proceedings.neurips...

    2016

  95. [103]

    Tensor networks and efficient descriptions of classical data

    Sirui Lu, M ´arton Kan´asz-Nagy, Ivan Kukuljan, and J. Ignacio Cirac. “Tensor networks and efficient descriptions of classical data”. In:Phys. Rev. A111.3 (Mar. 2025). issn: 2469-9934. doi: 10.1103/physreva.111.032409

    2025 doi

  96. [104]

    Tensor Network for Supervised Learning at Finite Temperature

    Haoxiang Lin, Shuqian Ye, and Xi Zhu. Tensor Network for Supervised Learning at Finite Temperature . 2021. doi: 10 . 48550 / ARXIV . 2104 . 05439

    2021

  97. [105]

    Improvements to Gradient Descent Methods for Quantum Tensor Network Machine Learning

    Fergus Barratt, James Dborin, and Lewis Wright. Improvements to Gradient Descent Methods for Quantum Tensor Network Machine Learning . 2022. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2203.03366

    2022 doi arXiv

  98. [106]

    Unsupervised Recog- nition of Informative Features via Tensor Network Machine Learning and Quantum Entanglement Variations

    Sheng-Chen Bai, Yi-Cheng Tang, and Shi-Ju Ran. “Unsupervised Recog- nition of Informative Features via Tensor Network Machine Learning and Quantum Entanglement Variations”. In:Chin. Phys. Lett.39.10 (Sept. 2022), p. 100701. doi: 10.1088/0256-307x/39/10/100701

    2022 doi

  99. [107]

    Tensor networks in machine learning

    Richik Sengupta, Soumik Adhikary, Ivan Oseledets, and Jacob Biamonte. “Tensor networks in machine learning”. In:Eur. Math. Soc. Mag.126 (2022), pp. 4–12. doi: 10.4171/mag/101

    2022 doi

  100. [108]

    Generative mod- eling with projected entangled-pair states

    Tom Vieijra, Laurens Vanderstraeten, and Frank Verstraete. Generative mod- eling with projected entangled-pair states . 2022. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV. 2202.08177

    2022 doi arXiv

  101. [109]

    Miles Stoudenmire

    Artem Strashko and E. Miles Stoudenmire. Generalization and Overfitting in Matrix Product State Machine Learning Architectures . 2022. doi: 10. 48550/ARXIV.2208.04372

    2022 doi arXiv

  102. [110]

    Sommer and Scott T

    David E. Sommer and Scott T. Dunham. Entangling Solid Solutions: Machine Learning of Tensor Networks for Materials Property Prediction. 2022. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2203.09613

    2022 doi arXiv

  103. [111]

    Deep tensor networks with matrix product operators

    Bojan ˇZunkoviˇc. “Deep tensor networks with matrix product operators”. In: Quantum Machine Intelligence 4.2 (Aug. 2022). doi: 10.1007/s42484- 022-00081-1

    2022 doi

  104. [112]

    Dynamical phase behavior of the single- and multi-lane asymmetric simple exclusion process via matrix product states

    Phillip Helms, Ushnish Ray, and Garnet Kin-Lic Chan. “Dynamical phase behavior of the single- and multi-lane asymmetric simple exclusion process via matrix product states”. In: Phys. Rev. E 100.2 (Aug. 2019), p. 022101. doi: 10.1103/physreve.100.022101

    2019 doi

  105. [113]

    Unsuper- vised Generative Modeling Using Matrix Product States

    Zhao-Yu Han, Jun Wang, Heng Fan, Lei Wang, and Pan Zhang. “Unsuper- vised Generative Modeling Using Matrix Product States”. In: Phys. Rev. X 8.3 (July 2018), p. 031012. doi: 10.1103/physrevx.8.031012

    2018 doi

  106. [114]

    Using Matrix Product States to Study the Dynamical Large Deviations of Kinetically Constrained Mod- 44 Yannic Rath, Massimo Bortone, George H. Booth els

    Mari Carmen Ba ˜nuls and Juan P. Garrahan. “Using Matrix Product States to Study the Dynamical Large Deviations of Kinetically Constrained Mod- 44 Yannic Rath, Massimo Bortone, George H. Booth els”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 123.20 (Nov. 2019), p. 200601. doi: 10.1103/ physrevlett....

    2019

  107. [115]

    Optimal sampling of dynamical large deviations in two dimensions via tensor networks

    Luke Causer, Mari Carmen Ba ˜nuls, and Juan P Garrahan. “Optimal sampling of dynamical large deviations in two dimensions via tensor networks”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 130.14 (2023), p. 147401. doi: 10.1103/physrevlett. 130.147401

    2023 doi

  108. [116]

    Variational tensor neural networks for deep learning

    Saeed S. Jahromi and Rom ´an Or´ us. “Variational tensor neural networks for deep learning”. In: Sci. Rep. 14.1 (Aug. 2024). issn: 2045-2322. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-69366-8

    2024 doi

  109. [117]

    Probabilistic Modeling with Matrix Product States

    James Stokes and John Terilla. “Probabilistic Modeling with Matrix Product States”. In: Entropy-switz. 21.12 (Dec. 2019), p. 1236. doi: 10 . 3390 / e21121236

    2019

  110. [118]

    Machine learning by unitary tensor network of hierarchical tree structure

    Ding Liu et al. “Machine learning by unitary tensor network of hierarchical tree structure”. In: New J. Phys.21.7 (July 2019), p. 073059.doi: 10.1088/ 1367-2630/ab31ef

    2019

  111. [119]

    Patel et al

    Raj G. Patel et al. Quantum-Inspired Tensor Neural Networks for Option Pricing. 2022. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2212.14076

    2022 doi arXiv

  112. [120]

    Probabilistic Graph- ical Models and Tensor Networks: A Hybrid Framework

    Jacob Miller, Geoffrey Roeder, and Tai-Danae Bradley. Probabilistic Graph- ical Models and Tensor Networks: A Hybrid Framework . 2021. doi: 10 . 48550/ARXIV.2106.15666

    2021 doi arXiv

  113. [121]

    Quantum-inspired tensor network for earth science

    Soronzonbold Otgonbaatar and Dieter Kranzlm¨ uller. “Quantum-inspired tensor network for earth science”. In: IGARSS 2023-2023 IEEE Interna- tional Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium . IEEE. 2023, pp. 788– 791

    2023

  114. [122]

    Tangent-space gradient opti- mization of tensor network for machine learning

    Zheng-Zhi Sun, Shi-Ju Ran, and Gang Su. “Tangent-space gradient opti- mization of tensor network for machine learning”. In: Phys. Rev. E 102.1 (July 2020). doi: 10.1103/physreve.102.012152

    2020 doi

  115. [123]

    Machine Learning With Tree Tensor Net- works, CP Rank Constraints, and Tensor Dropout

    Hao Chen and Thomas Barthel. “Machine Learning With Tree Tensor Net- works, CP Rank Constraints, and Tensor Dropout”. In:IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell.46.12 (Dec. 2024), pp. 7825–7832.issn: 1939-3539. doi: 10.1109/tpami.2024.3396386

    2024

  116. [124]

    Modeling se- quences with quantum states: a look under the hood

    Tai-Danae Bradley, E M Stoudenmire, and John Terilla. “Modeling se- quences with quantum states: a look under the hood”. In:Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 1.3 (July 2020), p. 035008. doi: 10.1088/2632-2153/ab8731

    2020 doi

  117. [125]

    Expressive power of tensor-network factorizations for probabilis- tic modeling, with applications from hidden Markov models to quantum machine learning

    Ivan Glasser, Ryan Sweke, Nicola Pancotti, Jens Eisert, and Juan Ignacio Cirac. “Expressive power of tensor-network factorizations for probabilis- tic modeling, with applications from hidden Markov models to quantum machine learning”. In: Neural Information Processing Systems. 2019

    2019

  118. [126]

    Matrix product state–based quantum classifier

    Amandeep Singh Bhatia, Mandeep Kaur Saggi, Ajay Kumar, and Sushma Jain. “Matrix product state–based quantum classifier”. In: Neural computa- tion 31.7 (2019), pp. 1499–1517. doi: 10.1162/neco_a_01202

    2019 doi

  119. [127]

    Supervised learning with projected entangled pair states

    Song Cheng, Lei Wang, and Pan Zhang. “Supervised learning with projected entangled pair states”. In: Phys. Rev. B 103.12 (Mar. 2021), p. 125117. doi: 10.1103/physrevb.103.125117. Bayesian states for quantum chemistry 45

    2021 doi

  120. [128]

    Tensor network to learn the wave function of data

    Anatoly Dymarsky and Kirill Pavlenko. “Tensor network to learn the wave function of data”. In: Phys. Rev. Research 4.4 (2022), p. 043111. doi: 10. 1103/physrevresearch.4.043111

    2022

  121. [129]

    Mutual information scaling for tensor network machine learning

    Ian Convy, William Huggins, Haoran Liao, and K Birgitta Whaley. “Mutual information scaling for tensor network machine learning”. In:Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 3.1 (Jan. 2022), p. 015017. doi: 10 . 1088 / 2632 - 2153 / ac44a9

    2022

  122. [130]

    Tensor networks for un- supervised machine learning

    Jing Liu, Sujie Li, Jiang Zhang, and Pan Zhang. “Tensor networks for un- supervised machine learning”. In: Phys. Rev. E 107.1 (Jan. 2023). doi: 10.1103/physreve.107.l012103

    2023 doi

  123. [131]

    Speeding-up Convolutional Neural Networks Using Fine- tuned CP-Decomposition

    Vadim Lebedev, Yaroslav Ganin, Maksim Rakhuba, Ivan Oseledets, and Victor Lempitsky. Speeding-up Convolutional Neural Networks Using Fine- tuned CP-Decomposition. 2014. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.1412.6553

    2014 doi arXiv

  124. [132]

    Tensor Regression Networks with various Low-Rank Tensor Approximations

    Xingwei Cao and Guillaume Rabusseau. Tensor Regression Networks with various Low-Rank Tensor Approximations. 2017. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV. 1712.09520

    2017 doi arXiv

  125. [133]

    Fast CP-compression layer: Tensor CP- decomposition to compress layers in deep learning

    Yuwang Ji and Qiang Wang. “Fast CP-compression layer: Tensor CP- decomposition to compress layers in deep learning”. In: IET Image Proc. 16.9 (Apr. 2022), pp. 2535–2543. doi: 10.1049/ipr2.12507

    2022 doi

  126. [134]

    Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition

    Y. Lecun, L. Bottou, Y. Bengio, and P. Haffner. “Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition”. In: Proc. IEEE 86.11 (1998), pp. 2278–

    1998

  127. [135]

    Smola.Learning with Kernels Support Vector Machines, Regularization, Optimization, and Beyond

    Bernhard Sch ¨olkopf and Alexander J. Smola.Learning with Kernels Support Vector Machines, Regularization, Optimization, and Beyond. Support Vector Machines, Regularization, Optimization, and Beyond. The MIT Press, p. 648. isbn: 9780262256933. doi: 10.1109/tnn.2005.848998

    2005

  128. [136]

    No routing needed between capsules

    Adam Byerly, Tatiana Kalganova, and Ian Dear. “No routing needed between capsules”. In: Neurocomputing 463 (2021), pp. 545–553. doi: 10.1016/j. neucom.2021.08.064

    2021 doi

  129. [137]

    An Ensemble of Simple Convolutional Neural Network Models for MNIST Digit Recognition

    Sanghyeon An, Minjun Lee, Sanglee Park, Heerin Yang, and Jungmin So. An Ensemble of Simple Convolutional Neural Network Models for MNIST Digit Recognition. 2020. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2008.10400

    2020 doi arXiv

  130. [138]

    Personalized Feder- ated Learning with Hidden Information on Personalized Prior

    Mingjia Shi, Yuhao Zhou, Qing Ye, and Jiancheng Lv. Personalized Feder- ated Learning with Hidden Information on Personalized Prior . 2022. doi: 10.48550/arxiv.2211.10684. arXiv: 2211.10684 [cs.LG]

    2022 doi arXiv

  131. [329]

    doi: 10.1098/rspa.1969.0120

    1969

  132. [2324]

    doi: 10.1109/5.726791

    doi

  133. [3358]

    doi: 10.1038/s41570-023-00516-8

    doi

  134. [4926]

    doi: 10.1063/1.456588

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.