4.5 Article

Learning a compass spin model with neural network quantum states

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHYSICS-CONDENSED MATTER
Volume 34, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1361-648X/ac43ff

Keywords

frustrated quantum spin models; neural network quantum states; machine learning; numerical many-body algorithms

Funding

  1. NSF [PHY-2011386]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The capacity of restricted Boltzmann machines (RBMs) in learning the ground states of frustrated quantum spin Hamiltonians is demonstrated in this study. The research focuses on the ground states of a compass spin model on the honeycomb lattice, which unifies multiple spin models. The calculated results show that RBMs can effectively describe the complex magnetic orders with large unit cells.
Neural network quantum states provide a novel representation of the many-body states of interacting quantum systems and open up a promising route to solve frustrated quantum spin models that evade other numerical approaches. Yet its capacity to describe complex magnetic orders with large unit cells has not been demonstrated, and its performance in a rugged energy landscape has been questioned. Here we apply restricted Boltzmann machines (RBMs) and stochastic gradient descent to seek the ground states of a compass spin model on the honeycomb lattice, which unifies the Kitaev model, Ising model and the quantum 120 degrees model with a single tuning parameter. We report calculation results on the variational energy, order parameters and correlation functions. The phase diagram obtained is in good agreement with the predictions of tensor network ansatz, demonstrating the capacity of RBMs in learning the ground states of frustrated quantum spin Hamiltonians. The limitations of the calculation are discussed. A few strategies are outlined to address some of the challenges in machine learning frustrated quantum magnets.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available