Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This research establishes a fundamental no-go theorem for implementing standard neural network architectures as quantum or effective field theories on computers, revealing inherent inconsistencies in finite-width ensembles regarding reflection positivity. The study delineates the computational boundaries between these theoretical frameworks, showing that while infinite-width limits offer partial simulation capabilities, they remain indistinguishable from their quantum counterparts at the level of controlled numerical computation. Ultimately, the work identifies specific mathematical relaxations—such as abandoning exact rotation invariance or finite variance—as necessary conditions to bypass these obstructions.
Sources coveringarXiv, Quantum Zeitgeist
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

What Neural Network Field Theory Can and Cannot Realise on a Computer

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2608.21523v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: One aim of neural network field theory is to put a quantum or effective field theory on a computer, with the network ensemble itself as the theory. We ask how far that aim can be pushed for a function class regular enough to be computed with. Our main result is a no-go theorem with assumptions that hold for standard network architectures. We use it to separate four versions of neural network field theory, according to whether the defining object is the finite width ensemble or its infinite width limit, and whether the target we want to compute is a quantum or an effective field theory. Neither finite width interpretation is straightforwardly consistent. For finite width ensembles with finite variance at each point, the QFT interpretation fails reflection positivity, while the EFT interpretation establishes no scale separation by which the positivity violation can be placed outside its domain of validity. Of the two limit versions, one can be simulated in full and the other only in part, as only its smeared correlators are computable with a controlled error. As such, at the level of a controlled numerical computation, the QFT and EFT versions cannot be distinguished. One dimension escapes the obstruction, yet reflection positivity is shown to still fail there at every finite width for the cosine network. Two escapes from the theorem remain, giving up either finite variance at a point or exact rotation invariance, and we discuss both of these possibilities.

Abstract:One aim of neural network field theory is to put a quantum or effective field theory on a computer, with the network ensemble itself as the theory. We ask how far that aim can be pushed for a function class regular enough to be computed with. Our main result is a no-go theorem with assumptions that hold for standard network architectures. We use it to separate four versions of neural network field theory, according to whether the defining object is the finite width ensemble or its infinite width limit, and whether the target we want to compute is a quantum or an effective field theory. Neither finite width interpretation is straightforwardly consistent. For finite width ensembles with finite variance at each point, the QFT interpretation fails reflection positivity, while the EFT interpretation establishes no scale separation by which the positivity violation can be placed outside its domain of validity. Of the two limit versions, one can be simulated in full and the other only in part, as only its smeared correlators are computable with a controlled error. As such, at the level of a controlled numerical computation, the QFT and EFT versions cannot be distinguished. One dimension escapes the obstruction, yet reflection positivity is shown to still fail there at every finite width for the cosine network. Two escapes from the theorem remain, giving up either finite variance at a point or exact rotation invariance, and we discuss both of these possibilities.

High Energy Physics - Theory (hep-th); Machine Learning (cs.LG); High Energy Physics - Lattice (hep-lat); High Energy Physics - Phenomenology (hep-ph); Mathematical Physics (math-ph)

arXiv:2608.21523 [hep-th]

(or arXiv:2608.21523v1 [hep-th] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.21523 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 281 words

Related coverage