The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 26 are not checked yet; none of the 35 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states
Open accessAbstract
We show that the time-dependent variational principle provides a unifying framework for time-evolution methods and optimization methods in the context of matrix product states. In particular, we introduce a new integration scheme for studying time evolution, which can cope with arbitrary Hamiltonians, including those with long-range interactions. Rather than a Suzuki-Trotter splitting of the Hamiltonian, which is the idea behind the adaptive time-dependent density matrix renormalization group method or time-evolving block decimation, our method is based on splitting the projector onto the matrix product state tangent space as it appears in the Dirac-Frenkel time-dependent variational principle. We discuss how the resulting algorithm resembles the density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) algorithm for finding ground states so closely that it can be implemented by changing just a few lines of code and it inherits the same stability and efficiency. In particular, our method is compatible with any Hamiltonian for which ground-state DMRG can be implemented efficiently. In fact, DMRG is obtained as a special case of our scheme for imaginary time evolution with infinite time step.
Checked 2026-10-05 · 26 references not checked yet
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
56 Own interpretation · 26 Not checked yet · 24 No basis given · 3 Own result
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Without truncation (ε = 0), one can easily verify that, after applying the complete sweep (left-to-right and back) with a time step t to an MPS | [A] , the original physical state | [A] is obtained by reapplying the scheme with a time stept, although | [A] will now be encoded as an MPS with a larger bond dimension (and matrices l(n) or r(n), which do not have full rank).”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF THE TWO-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That the adjoint method for the finite MPS integrator can be evaluated explicitly can be traced back to the fact that the individual terms obtained from splitting the tangent space projector are exactly integrable.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX B: FULL ALGORITHM FOR THE SYMMETRIC ONE-SITE INTEGRATOR
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That these two gauge fixing conditions are related to a principal bundle connection implies that they transform covariantly under gauge transformations on the original MPS.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VII. CONCLUSIONS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This ensures that the overlap of two tangent vectors only contains diagonal contributions, as in [B 1 ]| [B 2 ] = N n=1 s n tr B s n 1 (n) † B s n 2 (n) .(A8) This corresponds to the standard Euclidean inner product and thus to the choice of an orthonormal basis.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VII. CONCLUSIONS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If the original MPS was already in the right canonical form, the singular values of C(n) correspond to the Schmidt coefficients of | for a bipartition of the lattice in [1 : n] and [n + 1 : N ].”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF THE TWO-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As for the tangent space, the linear map from the representation {B s,t (n : n + 1); n = 1, . . .,N -1} to the physical states in T [2] | [A] M MPS has a nontrivial kernel corresponding to choices B s,t (n : n + 1) = A s L (n)X t (n + 1) -X s (n)A t R (n + 1) for any {X(n) ∈ C D n ×d×D n+1 ,n = 2, . . .,N -1}.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF THE TWO-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That the adjoint method for the finite MPS integrator can be evaluated explicitly can be traced back to the fact that the individual terms obtained from splitting the tangent space projector are exactly integrable.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX B: FULL ALGORITHM FOR THE SYMMETRIC ONE-SITE INTEGRATOR
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This freedom allows to impose a gauge-fixing condition of the form s A s L (n) † B s,t (n : n + 1) = 0, ∀n = 1, . . .,N -2.(C2)”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF THE TWO-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Inserting this solution into | [B] gives immediate rise to | [B] = P T | [A] M MPS | = N n=1 P [1:n-1] L ⊗ 1n ⊗ P [n+1:N] R - N-1 n=1 P [1:n] L ⊗ P [n+1:N] R | ,(A12) where we can recognize the contents of the brackets as the decomposition of the tangent space projector into a sum of orthogonal projectors”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VII. CONCLUSIONS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the case of a nearest-neighbor Hamiltonian, the projector error is absent as the action of Ĥ on | [A] is exactly contained in T [2] | [A L ] M MPS .”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF THE TWO-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 29
- Probably not a substantial claim. 12
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The solution to this constrained optimization problem is given by B s (n) = t (δ s,t -A s L (n)A t L (n) † )F t (n) for all n = 1, . . .,N -1, where first factor is a projector that imposes the left-gauge fixing condition.Tensor B(N ) is not subject to any constraint and is given by B s (N ) = F s (N ).”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VII. CONCLUSIONS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In particular, by directly applying a nearest-neighbor Hamiltonian Ĥ = N-1 n=1 ĥ(n : n + 1) to | [A] , one obtains a state of the form of Eq. (C1), which is represented by B s 1 ,s 2 (n : n + 1) = t 1 ,t 2 s 1 ,s 2 | ĥ(n : n + 1)|t 1 ,t 2 A s 1 (n)A s 2 (n).This is different from the representation in Eq. (C4), even though both describe the same physical state Ĥ | [A] .”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF THE TWO-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For α > 1, we observe a light cone and the leakage outside is in perfect agreement with the theoretical predictions of Ref. [38].”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VI. EXAMPLE
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [38] source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The resulting virtual dimensions of the MPO are 28, 28, 24, and 12 for the cases α = 0.75, 1.5, 3.0 and 6.0, respectively.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VI. EXAMPLE
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The light cone itself seems to be linear for α = 3.0 and α = 6.0, but the shape is less clear for α = 1.5.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VI. EXAMPLE
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Absolute value of 0 |U † σ x r (t)U | 0 -0 |σ x r (t)| 0 with H the XY Hamiltonian in Eq. (9), | 0 the ground state of H and U = exp(iσ y 51 π/4) on a chain of N = 101 spins, as function of r and t for various values of α.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF THE TWO-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plainn = 101- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For α = 0.75, there is no sharp wave front but it still seems to take a finite amount of time to signal over a finite distance, up to power law corrections.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VI. EXAMPLE
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The underlying reason for this is that the effective Hamiltonian H (n) [or C(n)] for the one-site [or zero-site] center degrees of freedom A C (n) [or C(n)] does not depend on these degrees of freedom, but only on the tensors on the neighboring sites, so that the differential equations corresponding to the individual terms are first-order linear differential equations.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX B: FULL ALGORITHM FOR THE SYMMETRIC ONE-SITE INTEGRATOR
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We furthermore relate this two-site approach to the more conventional time-dependent DMRG or TEBD methods, which are restricted to local (typically nearestneighbor) interactions.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > I. INTRODUCTION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By construction, the resulting evolution will never leave the MPS manifold and can therefore be described by time-evolving parameters as | (A(t)) .”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > III. TANGENT SPACE PROJECTOR AND TIME-DEPENDENT VARIATIONAL PRINCIPLE
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By construction, the TDVP projects the evolution onto the manifold of MPS with fixed bond dimension and avoids the need for a truncation step.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > I. INTRODUCTION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We discuss how the resulting algorithm resembles the density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) algorithm for finding ground states so closely that it can be implemented by changing just a few lines of code and it inherits the same stability and efficiency.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, the TDVP can be recast into a complicated set of coupled nonlinear equations for all parameters in the MPS.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > III. TANGENT SPACE PROJECTOR AND TIME-DEPENDENT VARIATIONAL PRINCIPLE
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For this type of differential equation consisting of a sum of integrable parts, it is very natural to use a Lie-Trotter splitting approach [16,29,30], where one evolves according to each integrable part for a small time t.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > ONE-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“The algorithm presented in Ref. [18] used the explicit Euler integration scheme to simultaneously update all parameters, which was only possible by using explicit inverses of matrices containing very small singular values.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > III. TANGENT SPACE PROJECTOR AND TIME-DEPENDENT VARIATIONAL PRINCIPLE
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As explained in Ref. [29], this source of error can be bound in terms of ( 1 -PT | [A] M MPS ) Ĥ | [A] , a quantity that can easily be evaluated [33] and monitored throughout the evolution.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > ONE-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Having a Lanczos routine for computing the matrix exponential acting on a vector (e.g., Ref. [31]), this algorithm differs from one-site DMRG by replacing the optimization step for A C (n) (eigenvalue solver) with the evolution step, and by adding an extra evolution step for C(n) before absorbing it at the next site.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > ONE-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [31] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The individual optimization steps are homogeneous problems and give rise to a generalized eigenvalue equation.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > II. MATRIX PRODUCT STATES AND CANONICAL FORMS
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, using the single projector P [1:n-1] L ⊗ 1n ⊗ P [n+1:N] R and writing | [A] as in Eq. ( 1) with center site n, the exact solution can be obtained by only making A C (n) timedependent and letting it satisfy ȦC (n,t) = -iH (n) A C (n,t) where a bold notation is used for the vector representation of A C (n).”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > ONE-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Analogous to the eigenvalue problem in DMRG, both Eqs. ( 7) and ( 8) can be integrated using a Lanczos scheme [28] in order to keep the computational cost at O(D 3 ).”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > ONE-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [28] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The resulting algorithm resembles DMRG so closely that it can be obtained by merely modifying two lines of code, and the one-site DMRG method is obtained as special case of imaginary time evolution with an infinite time step.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > I. INTRODUCTION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This approach is independent of the Hamiltonian and can be implemented efficiently for long-range Hamiltonians.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > I. INTRODUCTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“There is a natural order similar to the DRMG sweep, which optimizes the computational overhead (and results in robustness in the case of overapproximation [27]).”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > ONE-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [27] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Completing the right-to-left sweep is equivalent to composing this integrator with its adjoint, resulting in a second-order symmetric method [32] so that the state at time t + 2 t has a more favourable error of order O( t 3 ).”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > ONE-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [32] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The evolution of C in Eq. ( 8) can be interpreted as an evolution backwards in time.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > ONE-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These operators are independent of the unitary gauge freedom (basis rotation) that exists in the definition of | [1:n] L,α and | [n:N] R,β and correspond to orthogonal projectors onto the support of the reduced density matrix ρ of the state | [A] in the corresponding regions.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > III. TANGENT SPACE PROJECTOR AND TIME-DEPENDENT VARIATIONAL PRINCIPLE
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While K(n) serves no purpose in ground-state DMRG, it will appear in our time evolution algorithm below.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > FIG. 2. (a)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“An alternative idea for time evolution, the Dirac-Frenkel time-dependent variational principle (TDVP), was formulated only recently for the variational class of MPS [18,19].”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > I. INTRODUCTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This allows to dynamically adapt the bond dimension to the a predefined precision or error criterion, and also allows to dynamically introduce new charge sectors (irreducible representations) when symmetries of the quantum state are explicitly encoded in the MPS representation.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > V. TWO-SITE ALGORITHM
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In Ref. [38], the time-dependent expectation value σ x r (t) = exp(-iH t)σ x r exp(iH t) was compared between a fully polarized product state | 0 = ⊗ n |↑ n and the perturbed state U | 0 with U = exp(iπσ y 0 /4) as function of r and t for various values α > 1.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VI. EXAMPLE
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [38] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The representation B s n ,s n+1 (n : n + 1) is, however, nonunique, and our algorithm based on splitting the projector (even when it acts trivially) gives rise to a slightly different scheme.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > V. TWO-SITE ALGORITHM
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“As two MPS with different bond dimensions do not belong to the same manifold [35], this idea cannot easily be captured in a smooth evolution described using a differential equation.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > V. TWO-SITE ALGORITHM
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [35] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This result justifies the two-site integration scheme that was proposed in the main text.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF THE TWO-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“In accordance with the general result of that paper, there is a light cone and the leakage outside the light cone contains a contribution with exponential decay that is determined by the nearest-neighbor interactions and is thus independent of α, as well as a contribution with power-law decay that dominates at larger distances.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VI. EXAMPLE
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [38] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This Hamiltonian was recently realized in an experiment with trapped 171 Yb + ions [39].”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VI. EXAMPLE
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [39] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finding a unique parametrization for every tangent vector is equivalent to specifying a complement of the vertical subspace (the so-called horizontal subspace), for which there is no unique prescription.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VII. CONCLUSIONS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This approach generalizes neatly to tree tensor network states and will be equally relevant for continuous MPS [24,25], where algorithms based on a Trotter decomposition of the Hamiltonian terms are not applicable.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VII. CONCLUSIONS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, without the truncation, the integrator is still symmetric and one expects a finite time step error that scales as O( t 3 ).”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF THE TWO-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One can easily verify that the C(n) that results from then factorizing A C (n) = A L (n)C(n) is then also an exact eigenstate of K(n), so that its backwards evolution has no further effect and can thus be omitted.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > ONE-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For this choice of | 0 , the quantum many-body problem can be reduced to a single-particle problem.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > VI. EXAMPLE
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [38] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The tangent space projector is a generic concept that is independent of the TDVP and can be applied to arbitrary states | in the Hilbert space H.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF THE TWO-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
The TEBD idea cannot be applied to long-range interactions.
“Unfortunately, the TEBD idea is not applicable to long-range interactions, which appear when using MPS for quasi-2D systems or quantum chemistry applications.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The truncation scheme discards singular values smaller than a tolerance level ε.
“For the remainder, we assume that the truncation scheme is based on discarding singular values smaller than some tolerance level ε.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The set of MPS with all possible bond dimensions constitutes a stratification.
“The set of MPS with all possible bond dimensions constitutes a stratification .”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“In Ref. [20] a slightly different error was proposed that avoids this numerical inaccuracy.”
From Tangent-space methods for uniform matrix product states (2019) · cites this paper as [20]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF THE TWO-SITE INTEGRATION SCHEME
“B s,t (n : n + 1) = A s L (n)X t (n + 1) -X s (n)A t R (n + 1) for any {X(n) ∈ C D n ×d×D n+1 ,n = 2, . . .,N -1}.”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > II. MATRIX PRODUCT STATES AND CANONICAL FORMS
“A s (n) having site-dependent dimensions D n-1 × D n .”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX B: FULL ALGORITHM FOR THE SYMMETRIC ONE-SITE INTEGRATOR
“(c) Absorb C(n,t + t/2) into A L (n,t + t/2) to obtain A C (n + 1,t + t/2).”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX B: FULL ALGORITHM FOR THE SYMMETRIC ONE-SITE INTEGRATOR
“(d) Evolve A C (n,t + t/2) forward in time according to A C (n,t + t) = exp[-iH (n) t/2] A C (n,t + t/2)”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX B: FULL ALGORITHM FOR THE SYMMETRIC ONE-SITE INTEGRATOR
“(a) Perform an orthogonal decomposition of A C (n + 1,t + t) into C(n,t + t) and A R (n,t + t).”
§ Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states > APPENDIX B: FULL ALGORITHM FOR THE SYMMETRIC ONE-SITE INTEGRATOR
“where K(n) is computed using A L (1,t + t/2),...,A L (n,t + t/2), A R (n + 1,t + t), ..., A R (N,t + t).”
Citations
Cites
Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalization groups
White, S. R. (1992) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.69.2863 · Cited by 7,702
The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states
Schollwöck, U. (2011) · Annals of Physics · doi:10.1016/j.aop.2010.09.012 · Cited by 4,818
Solving Ordinary Differential Equations II
Hairer, E., & Wanner, G. (1996) · Springer Series in Computational Mathematics · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-05221-7 · Cited by 4,342
Density-matrix algorithms for quantum renormalization groups
White, S. R. (1993) · Physical Review B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.48.10345 · Cited by 3,244
Oseledets, I. V. (2011) · SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing · doi:10.1137/090752286 · Cited by 2,860
Self-citationCompletely positive linear maps on complex matrices
Choi, M.-D. (1975) · Linear Algebra and its Applications · doi:10.1016/0024-3795(75)90075-0 · Cited by 2,659
On the product of semi-groups of operators
Trotter, H. F. (1959) · Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society · doi:10.1090/s0002-9939-1959-0108732-6 · Cited by 2,282
Verstraete, F., Murg, V., & Cirac, J. I. (2008) · Advances In Physics · doi:10.1080/14789940801912366 · Cited by 1,841
Self-citationEfficient Simulation of One-Dimensional Quantum Many-Body Systems
Vidal, G. (2004) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.93.040502 · Cited by 1,779
Linear transformations which preserve trace and positive semidefiniteness of operators
Jamiołkowski, A. (1972) · Reports on Mathematical Physics · doi:10.1016/0034-4877(72)90011-0 · Cited by 1,512
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 701–800 of 803
(2017) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.102
(2019) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.1245
(2019) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.1332
(2019) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.1360
Report on scipost_202009_00002v1
(2020) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.2309
Report on scipost_202008_00013v1
(2020) · SciPost Physics Core · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.2145
(2019) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.1197
Report on scipost_202011_00015v1
(2020) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.2317
(2020) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.1728
(2017) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.201
(2017) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.103
Report on scipost_202011_00015v1
(2021) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.2450
Report on scipost_202009_00002v1
(2020) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.2315
(2020) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.1505
Time-dependent density matrix renormalization group
Ma, H., Schollwöck, U., & Shuai, Z. (2022) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-85694-2.00006-1
(2021) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.3695
(2021) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.3370
(2022) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.5254
Report on scipost_202205_00016v1
(2022) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.5505
Report on scipost_202205_00016v1
(2022) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.5452
Minimal one-dimensional model of bad metal behavior from fast particle-hole scattering
Wang, Y., Rausch, R., Karrasch, C., & Moore, J. E. (2023) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.107.l100301
Report on scipost_202206_00022v1
(2022) · SciPost Physics Core · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.5587
Report on scipost_202206_00022v1
(2022) · SciPost Physics Core · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.5401
Report on scipost_202206_00022v1
(2022) · SciPost Physics Core · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.5369
(2023) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.6855
(2023) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.6852
Protecting Hilbert space fragmentation through quantum Zeno dynamics
Patil, P., Singhania, A., & Halimeh, J. C. (2023) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.108.195109
Report on scipost_202308_00004v1
(2023) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.7802
Report on scipost_202308_00004v1
(2023) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.7803
Tindall, J., & Fishman, M. (2023) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.7931
Tindall, J., & Fishman, M. (2023) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.7878
Gyawali, G., Ahmed, M., Aspling, E. W., Ellert-Beck, L., & Lawler, M. J. (2023) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.108.235141
Solving Intractable Chemical Problems by Tensor Decomposition
Glaser, N., & Reiher, M. (2024) · CHIMIA International Journal for Chemistry · doi:10.2533/chimia.2024.215 · Cited by 1
(2023) · SciPost Physics Core · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.8332
(2023) · SciPost Physics Core · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.6834
(2023) · SciPost Physics Core · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.6881
Matrix Product States and First Quantization
Li, J.-W., & Waintal, X. (2026) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/5fx2-rsf8
(2024) · SciPost Physics Core · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.9069
Energy-Filtered Excited States and Real-Time Dynamics Served in a Contour Integral
Liao, K. (2025) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.4c01220
Two-dimensional many-body localized systems coupled to a heat bath
Li, J., Chan, A., & Wahl, T. B. (2025) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/7wld-nzbn
Report on scipost_202303_00020v1
(2023) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.7183
(2024) · SciPost Physics Codebases · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.9924
(2024) · SciPost Physics Codebases · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.9852
Saiphet, J., & Braun, D. (2025) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.111.022604
Relaxation dynamics of a quantum spin coupled to a topological edge state
Liu, Q., Karrasch, C., Kennes, D. M., & Rausch, R. (2025) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/5qpv-b7l3
Report on scipost_202406_00058v1
(2024) · SciPost Physics Codebases · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.9632
Lacroix, T. (2025) · Springer theses · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-83143-0_3
Variational Methods for Solving High-Dimensional Quantum Systems
Li, D. (2025) · Journal of Modern Physics · doi:10.4236/jmp.2025.165038
Wang, Y., Luo, M., Reumann, M., & Mendl, C. B. (2025) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.5c00525
Zhang, Z., Ren, J., & Fang, W. (2025) · Chinese Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1674-0068/cjcp2506080
Photodynamic melting of phase-reversed charge stripes and enhanced condensation
Sun, J., Scalettar, R. T., & Mondaini, R. (2026) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/qb8n-n2np
Yang, M., Anand, S., & Nielsen, K. K. (2025) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/clhr-4h26
Current fluctuations in one-dimensional diffusion-reaction systems via tensor networks
Gu, J. (2025) · Physical review. E · doi:10.1103/7l5s-fzsb
Improved energies and local energies with weighted variational Monte Carlo
Zhang, H., Webber, R. J., Lindsey, M., Berkelbach, T. C., & Weare, J. (2025) · Physical Review Research · doi:10.1103/6b3v-38jp
Egenlauf, P., Březinová, I., Andergassen, S., & Klopotek, M. (2026) · Machine Learning Science and Technology · doi:10.1088/2632-2153/ae57f8
Mondal, S., Dutta, S., & Bandyopadhyay, A. (2026) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/8y3g-jdjx
Majorana string simulation of nonequilibrium dynamics in two-dimensional lattice fermion systems
D'Anna, M., Nys, J., & Carrasquilla, J. (2026) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/f6mn-jc3r
Statistics-encoded tensor network approach in disordered quantum many-body spin chains
Zhu, H., Wang, D.-Z., Ran, S.-J., & Zhang, G. (2026) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/vb4b-m5h6
PIQS: an efficient quantum subspace method for dynamical property estimation
Wang, Y., Yu, W., Fan, Y., & Zhang, L. (2026) · Quantum Science and Technology · doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ae3f4d
A method of an on-demand beamsplitter for trapped-ion quantum computers
Nishi, T. (2026) · Journal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6455/ae407d
Temporal Entanglement Transitions in the Periodically Driven Ising Chain
Gadge, K., Prem, A., & Jha, R. (2026) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/cxq7-q9pd
Discrete time quasi-crystals in Rydberg atomic chain
Luo, X., Zhou, Y., Xu, Z. S., & Jiang, W. (2026) · Communications Physics · doi:10.1038/s42005-026-02572-0 · Cited by 2
Liu, Q., Herre, J.-N., Kennes, D. M., & Karrasch, C. (2026) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/q4n3-r8n5
Dynamical tensor train approximation for kinetic equations
Wang, G., & Hu, J. (2026) · Journal of Computational Physics · doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2026.114884
OMEinsumContractionOrders: A Julia package for tensor network contraction order optimization
Liu, J.-G., Gao, X., & Samuelson, R. (2026) · The Journal of Open Source Software · doi:10.21105/joss.09886
Multiorbital dynamical mean-field theory with a complex-time solver
Yu, Y., Zhang, L., Gull, E., Cao, X., & Dong, X. (2026) · Physical Review Research · doi:10.1103/yqv4-4vjx
Out-of-equilibrium dynamics and quench spectroscopy of ultracold many-body quantum systems
Villa, L. (2021) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/a34e166azf662z47b3z9372z2c0f861b719a
Far-from-equilibrium dynamics and entanglement in long-range quantum systems
Schneider, J. (2022) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/19a4dfcdz202bz4e3aza76fz49b15523ccca
Quantum coherence in neuromorphic computing
Wang, Y., Li, K. M., & Scholes, G. D. (2026) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/5.0320577
Dorfner, M. F. X., Kumar, A., Thyrhaug, E., Matsidik, R., Sommer, M. G., Hauer, J., & Ortmann, F. (2026) · Advanced Optical Materials · doi:10.1002/adom.202503727
Measurement-dependent nonlocality in tree tensor networks
Cui, M., Hou, J., Yang, L., & Qi, X. (2026) · The European Physical Journal Plus · doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-026-07532-9
Zhang, X., Xie, D., & Li, Y. (2026) · Entropy · doi:10.3390/e28050495
Environment-matrix-product operator for boundary-free large-scale quantum many-body simulations
Shimozono, S., & Hotta, C. (2026) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/bbnt-brjz
Larsson, H. R., Dé, B. L., & Gamboni, G. E. (2026) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters · doi:10.1021/acs.jpclett.6c01138
Pavan, F., Bello, G. D., Filippis, G. D., & Perroni, C. A. (2026) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/2ljn-5lnf
Population transfer in quantum β -Fermi–Pasta–Ulam–Tsingou chains with fixed ends
Cai, J., Xu, X., Vasquez, L., Sun, K., Borrelli, R., & Gelin, M. F. (2026) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/5.0330620
Zhang, H., Liu, X., Dan, X., & Shi, Q. (2026) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/5.0333529
Zeng, H., & Sun, X. (2026) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/5.0325277
Felser, T., & Montangero, S. (2026) · Graduate texts in physics · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-17635-6_7
Yang, X., Liu, L., Zhao, W., Ren, J., & Fang, W. (2026) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/5.0328369
Limits of Clifford disentangling in tensor network states
Masot-Llima, S., Sierant, P., Stornati, P., & García-Sáez, A. (2026) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/5g5b-5rrz
Resource Assessment of Classical and Quantum Hardware for Post-Quench Dynamics
Vovrosh, J., Mendes-Santos, T., Mamann, H., Bidzhiev, K., Hayes, F. J., Alves, B. X. R., Béguin, L., Dalyac, C., & Dauphin, A. (2026) · PRX Energy · doi:10.1103/kfy5-q531 · Cited by 5
Chiral graviton modes in fermionic fractional Chern insulators
Long, M., Bacciconi, Z., Lu, H., Xavier, H. B., Meng, Z. Y., & Dalmonte, M. (2026) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6633/ae8369
Allan, L., Lambertson, E., & Zuehlsdorff, T. J. (2026) · Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics · doi:10.1039/d6cp02458k
Scaling and Lüscher term in a non-Abelian (2+1)d SU(2) quantum link model
Ludwig, P., Jakobs, T., & Urbach, C. (2026) · The European Physical Journal C · doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-026-15945-0
Anomalous Dynamical Scaling at Topological Quantum Criticality
Anonymous, Yang, S., Sun, C., Li, F., & Yu, X.-J. (2026) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/mqr4-wnny
Dissipative generation of currents by nonreciprocal local and global environments
Anonymous (2026) · Physical Review Research · doi:10.1103/v948-zwcd
Kessing, R. K. (2026) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/5.0325590
Geng, X., Xie, X., & Ma, H. (2026) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/5.0336492
Anonymous, & Richter, M. (2026) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/mmwh-bjpn
Design Rules for Open-Shell Molecular Wires: Insights from Correlated Many-Body Transport
Shiri, M., Mejía, L., Franco, I., Hansen, T., & Wang, K. (2026) · Nano Letters · doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.6c02096
Work extraction via local gates and phase transitions in open quantum systems
Bello, G. D. (2026) · Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics · doi:10.1515/jnet-2026-0025
Neural network impurity solver for real-frequency dynamical mean-field theory
Deng, F., Lu, Y., Cao, X., & Zhong, Z. (2026) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/3jm2-nqvn
Ge, G., Song, Y., Cheng, Y., & Ma, H. (2026) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.6c01483
Trion liquid and its photoemission signatures
Anonymous, & Keselman, A. (2026) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/p1xn-kvgc
Spin dynamics from the Niu-Kleinman adiabatic approach and slave-boson mean-field theory
Anonymous, Xie, T., Shi, S., Jiang, K., & Hu, J. (2026) · Physical review. B./Physical review. B · doi:10.1103/3hcv-nckk
Vibrationally inelastic scattering of NO from metal surfaces: A partial mean-field approach
Liu, Z., Zhang, H., & Shi, Q. (2026) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/5.0351898
Metadata
- Authors
- Haegeman, J., Lubich, C., Oseledets, I., Vandereycken, B., & Verstraete, F.
- Affiliations
- Ghent University (BE)
- University of Tübingen (DE)
- Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology (RU)
- Princeton University (US)
- University of Vienna (AT)
- Venue
- Physical Review B
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2016-10-10
- Volume
- 94
- Issue
- 16
- ISSN
- 2469-9950 (ISSN-L)
- 2469-9969
- OpenAlex
- W1580989833
- Cited by
- 804
- References
- 46
- Citations by year
- 2026: 88 · 2025: 148 · 2024: 106 · 2023: 73 · 2022: 79 · 2021: 91 · 2020: 89 · 2019: 56 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 7
- FWCI
- 20.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Physical review. B./Physical review. B (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Russian Science Foundation (14-11-00659)
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SPP 1324, GRK 1838)
- Austrian Science Fund (FoQuS, ViCoM)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum many-body systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Numerical Analysis › Numerical Solvers for Ordinary Differential Equations
- Keywords
- matrix product states, time-dependent variational principle, Dirac-Frenkel variational principle, time evolution, optimization, density matrix renormalization group, time-evolving block decimation, long-range interactions, imaginary time evolution, tangent space projection
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-05, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-05 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
