Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Comb Tensor Networks vs. Matrix Product States: Enhanced Efficiency in High-Dimensional Spaces
arXiv
Authors: Danylo Kolesnyk, Yelyzaveta Vodovozova
Year
2024
Paper ID
6248
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
88
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Modern approaches to generative modeling of continuous data using tensor networks incorporate compression layers to capture the most meaningful features of high-dimensional inputs. These methods, however, rely on traditional Matrix Product States (MPS) architectures. Here, we demonstrate that beyond a certain threshold in data and bond dimensions, a comb-shaped tensor network architecture can yield more efficient contractions than a standard MPS. This finding suggests that for continuous and high-dimensional data distributions, transitioning from MPS to a comb tensor network representation can substantially reduce computational overhead while maintaining accuracy.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2024 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Modern approaches to generative modeling of continuous data using tensor networks incorporate compression layers to capture the most meaningful features of high-dimensional inputs.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.