Exploiting matrix symmetries and physical symmetries in matrix product states and tensor trains

Linear and Multilinear Algebra

Volumn 61, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 91-122

  Huckle, Thomas K ^a   Waldherr, Konrad ^a   Schulte Herbrüggen, Thomas ^a  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Matrix Product States; quantum many body systems; spin Hamiltonian; symmetric persymmetric matrices; Tensor Chains; Tensor Trains

Indexed keywords

EID: 84871007212     PISSN: 03081087     EISSN: 15635139     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03081087.2012.663371     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Affleck, I, Kennedy, T, Lieb, EH and Tasaki, H. 1987. Rigorous results on valence-bond ground states in antiferromagnets. Phys. Rev. Lett., 59: 799-802.
2. Auckenthaler, T, Bader, M, Huckle, T, Spörl, A and Waldherr, K. 2010. Matrix exponentials and parallel prefix computation in a quantum control problem. Parallel Comput., 36: 359-369.
3. Cantoni, A and Butler, P. 1976. Properties of the eigenvectors of persymmetric matrices with applications to communication theory. IEEE Trans. Commun., 24: 804-809.
4. Capizzano, SS and Tyrtyshnikov, E. 2000. Any circulant-like preconditioner for multilevel matrices is not superlinear. SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 21: 431-439.
5. Carroll, J and Chang, JJ. 1970. Analysis of individual differences in multidimensional scaling via an n-way generalization of Eckart-Young decomposition. Psychometrika, 35: 283-319.
6. Davis, PJ. 1994. Circulant Matrices, 2, New York: AMS Chelsea Publishing Company.
7. Eckholt-Perotti, MG. 2005. Matrix product formalism, Master's thesis, Technische Universität München and Max-Planck-Institut für Quantenoptik.
8. Faddeev, LD and Yakubovskii, OA. 2009. Lectures on Quantum Mechanics for Mathematics Students, Providence: American Mathematical Society.
9. Golub, G and Van Loan, Ch. 1989. Matrix Computations, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
10. Harshman, RA. 1970. Foundations of the PARAFAC Procedure: Models and Conditions for an Explanatory Multimodal Factor Analysis, UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics.
11. Huckle, T, Waldherr, K and Schulte-Herbrüggen, T. 2012. Computations in quantum tensor networks. Linear Algebra Appl., in press.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2011.12.019
12. Khoromskij, B. 2011. O(d log N)-quantics approximation of N - d tensors in high-dimensional numerical modeling. Constr. Approx., 34: 1-24.
13. Lieb, E, Schultz, T and Mattis, D. 1961. Two soluble models of an antiferromagnetic chain. Ann. Phys., 16: 407-466.
14. Oseledets, IV. 2011. Tensor-train decomposition. SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 33: 2295-2317.
15. Pérez-García, D, Verstraete, F, Wolf, M and Cirac, J. 2007. Matrix-product state representations. Quant. Inf. Comput., 7: 401-403.
16. Perez-Garcia, D, Wolf, MM, Sanz, M, Verstraete, F and Cirac, JI. 2008. String order and symmetries in quantum spin lattices. Phys. Rev. Lett., 100: 167202
17. Pfeuty, P. 1970. The one-dimensional ising model with a transverse field. Ann. Phys., 57: 79-90.
18. Pirvu, B, Verstraete, F and Vidal, G. 2011. Exploiting translational invariance in matrix product state simulations of spin chains with periodic boundary conditions. Phys. Rev. B, 83: 125104
19. Sandvik, A and Vidal, G. 2007. Variational quantum monte carlo simulations with tensor-network states. Phys. Rev. Lett., 99: 220602
20. Sanz, M, Wolf, MM, Perez-Garcia, D and Cirac, JI. 2009. Matrix product states: symmetries and two-body hamiltonians. Phys. Rev. A, 79
21. Schollwöck, U. 2011. The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states. Ann. Phys., 326: 96-192.
22. Tucker, LR. 1966. Some mathematical notes on three-mode factor analysis. Psychometrika, 31: 279-311.
23. Verstraete, F and Cirac, JI. 2006. Matrix product states represent ground states faithfully. Phys. Rev. B, 73: 094423
24. Vidal, G. 2003. Efficient classical simulation of slightly entangled quantum computations. Phys. Rev. Lett., 91: 147902