pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.12833 · v1 · pith:XHVWOAP2new · submitted 2026-05-13 · ⚛️ physics.comp-ph

A practical investigation on time integration in the quantized tensor train format

Erika Ye This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 21:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.comp-ph
keywords quantized tensor trainstime integrationnumerical dissipationadvection-dominated problemselectromagnetic plasmaslow-rank approximationpartial differential equationscomputational electromagnetics
0
0 comments X

The pith

Time integrator choice, dissipation, and problem representation control rank growth and noise in long-time QTT simulations of advection problems.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Quantized tensor trains provide low-rank approximations that can lower the cost of solving partial differential equations. In extended dynamical runs, discretization errors and approximation errors tend to drive rank growth and noisy results. This work tests advection-dominated cases drawn from electromagnetic plasmas and fields to determine how the choice of time integrator, the presence of numerical dissipation, and the form of the problem representation change the efficiency and reliability of the calculations.

Core claim

For advection-dominated test problems relevant to electromagnetic plasmas and electromagnetic fields, the choice of time integrator, the addition of numerical dissipation, and the choice in problem representation affect the efficiency and success of quantized tensor train calculations by altering the accumulation of numerical errors that otherwise increase rank and produce noise-dominated results over long times.

What carries the argument

Quantized tensor train (QTT) low-rank format applied to time-dependent PDE solutions, modulated by explicit or implicit integrators, added dissipation terms, and alternative problem representations.

If this is right

  • An implicit time integrator can slow the growth of tensor rank compared with an explicit integrator on the same advection problem.
  • Numerical dissipation can suppress noise accumulation and keep the QTT representation compact over longer simulation intervals.
  • Reformulating the initial-value problem in a different variable or coordinate system can change how readily the solution stays low-rank under QTT truncation.
  • These parameter adjustments can extend the practical duration of QTT-based plasma or field simulations before the approximation breaks down.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Guidelines derived from these advection tests could be checked on diffusion-dominated or nonlinear plasma models to see whether the same integrator and dissipation choices remain effective.
  • The observed sensitivity to representation suggests that automatic reformulation tools might further improve QTT performance without manual tuning.
  • If the error-accumulation mechanism is general, similar tuning may apply to QTT treatments of other hyperbolic or transport-dominated equations outside electromagnetics.

Load-bearing premise

That the observed accumulation of numerical errors from discretization and low-rank approximation is the primary driver of increased rank and noise in long-time QTT simulations, and that the selected advection-dominated test problems adequately represent the behavior of electromagnetic plasmas and fields.

What would settle it

Perform identical long-time QTT runs of one advection test problem using two different time integrators (or with and without added dissipation) and measure whether rank growth and solution noise differ measurably after a fixed number of steps.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.12833 by Erika Ye.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Ranks of 𝑔𝑒 for select Whistler wave simulations using MacCormack time integration with rank truncation threshold 𝜀 = 2.47 × 10−5. (left) The current density 𝐽𝑧 measured at 𝑥 = 0 over time. (right) The maximum ranks of the electron probability amplitude 𝑔𝑒 over time. The 𝐿 = 8 calculation uses a time step of Δ𝑡 = 0.027, which is larger than the CFL constraint. The 𝐿 = 5 calculation shows an error in phase … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Same as Fig. 1 but for qDLR-PS + RK4 calculations. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Compressibility of a radial wave Re [ exp(−𝑖𝑘√ 𝑥 2 + 𝑦 2) ] for 𝑘 = 20 with 2 𝐿 grid points along each dimen￾sion spanning the domain 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ [−𝜋, 𝜋). (left) Ranks as a function of 𝐿2 error of the truncated result obtained by performing compression with a specified cutoff tolerance. The seq(BF) mapping yields the lowest ranks, while the interleaved ordering yields the highest ranks. Increasing grid resoluti… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Plots depicting the accuracy of fixed rank QTT calculations for the 2-D radiating dipole. These results [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Maximum rank of the field components at the final time step as a function of dissipation strength [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Results for the 2-D radiating dipole with the seq(BF) mapping with artificial dissipation with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Same as Fig. 6 but for a grid resolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Results for 3-D dipole radiation solved via Maxwell’s equations. (a) Ranks of electric and magnetic fields as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Results for 3-D dipole radiation computed via the vector-potential formulation. Calculations contain [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Error of 2-D dipole radiation calculation with fixed rank. Same as Fig. 4 in the main text but with interleaved [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: QTT rank of FDTD calculation with artificial dissipation. Same as Fig. 6 in the main text but performed with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Cross-section of electric and magnetic fields along [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Cross-section of electric and magnetic fields along [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Cross-section of electric and magnetic fields along [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantized tensor trains (QTTs) are a multiscale computational framework that can potentially reduce the computational cost of solving partial differential equations and initial value problems by making low-rank approximations. However, its use is somewhat limited in practice, in part due to the challenges that arise when making low-rank approximations of the quantized data. For example, when performing long-time dynamical numerical simulations, it has been observed that the accumulation of numerical errors arising from both the discretization of the partial differential equation itself and the low-rank approximation can lead to increased rank and noise-dominated results. Focusing on a set of advection-dominated test problems relevant to electromagnetic plasmas and electromagnetic fields, this work investigates how the choice in time integrator, the addition of numerical dissipation, and the choice in problem representation can affect the efficiency and success of the QTT calculations.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a numerical investigation of how time-integrator choice, numerical dissipation, and problem representation affect the efficiency and success of quantized tensor train (QTT) calculations. The focus is a set of advection-dominated test problems stated to be relevant to electromagnetic plasmas and fields, with the goal of mitigating rank growth and noise accumulation arising from discretization and low-rank approximation errors during long-time simulations.

Significance. If the reported experiments establish clear, reproducible guidelines for integrator and dissipation choices that demonstrably control rank growth on these problems, the work would supply practical guidance for deploying QTT methods in plasma and electromagnetic simulations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the scope is stated but no error metrics, baseline comparisons, data-exclusion criteria, or quantitative outcomes are supplied, preventing evaluation of whether the chosen integrators or representations actually improve long-time QTT performance.
  2. [Abstract (paragraph describing the focus)] The implicit claim that the selected advection-dominated tests adequately represent electromagnetic-plasma and field behavior (field-particle coupling, wave dispersion, source terms) is not supported by any explicit justification or sensitivity test; without this, conclusions about which integrators improve QTT success may not transfer to the target applications.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and indicate where revisions will be made.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the scope is stated but no error metrics, baseline comparisons, data-exclusion criteria, or quantitative outcomes are supplied, preventing evaluation of whether the chosen integrators or representations actually improve long-time QTT performance.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would be strengthened by including key quantitative elements. The body of the manuscript reports relative L2 error norms, rank evolution, and comparisons against explicit and implicit integrators with and without dissipation. In revision we will condense these into the abstract, adding a brief statement of the primary error metric used, the baseline integrator, and the criterion (rank growth and noise dominance) for declaring a simulation unsuccessful. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract (paragraph describing the focus)] The implicit claim that the selected advection-dominated tests adequately represent electromagnetic-plasma and field behavior (field-particle coupling, wave dispersion, source terms) is not supported by any explicit justification or sensitivity test; without this, conclusions about which integrators improve QTT success may not transfer to the target applications.

    Authors: The manuscript states only that the tests are advection-dominated and relevant to electromagnetic plasmas and fields; it does not assert that they capture field-particle coupling, wave dispersion, or source terms. The focus is deliberately restricted to pure advection to isolate the effects of integrator choice and dissipation on rank growth. To remove any ambiguity we will insert a clarifying sentence in the abstract and introduction that explicitly limits the scope to advection-dominated regimes and notes that extension to full plasma models remains future work. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical numerical investigation with no derivations or self-referential predictions

full rationale

The paper is framed as a practical numerical investigation of time integrators, dissipation, and representations on advection-dominated test problems for QTT methods. No derivation chain, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes are present. The central content consists of empirical tests and observations of rank growth and noise, with the relevance to EM plasmas stated as a focus rather than a derived claim. This matches the default expectation of no significant circularity (score 0-2) for non-derivational work; the skeptic concern about test-problem representativeness is an external-validity issue, not a reduction of any claimed result to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identifiable from the abstract; the work relies on standard numerical time-integration and tensor-train techniques whose details are not specified here.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5657 in / 1190 out tokens · 35072 ms · 2026-06-30T21:53:14.432499+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Density matrix algorithms for quantum renormalization groups

    S. R. White. “Density matrix algorithms for quantum renormalization groups”. In:Phys. Rev. B48 (1993), p. 10345

    1993

  2. [2]

    Density matrix renormalization group algorithms with a single center site

    S. R. White. “Density matrix renormalization group algorithms with a single center site”. In:Phys. Rev. B72 (2005), 180403(R)

    2005

  3. [3]

    Highly correlated calculations with polynomial cost algorithm: A study of the density matrix renormalization group

    G. K.-L. Chan and M. Head-Gordon. “Highly correlated calculations with polynomial cost algorithm: A study of the density matrix renormalization group”. In:J. Chem. Phys.116 (2002), p. 4462

    2002

  4. [4]

    Matrix product operators, matrix product states, and ab initio density matrix renormalization group algorithms

    G. K. Chan et al. “Matrix product operators, matrix product states, and ab initio density matrix renormalization group algorithms”. In:The Journal of chemical physics145.1 (2016)

    2016

  5. [5]

    Computationofextremeeigenvaluesinhigherdimensionsusingblocktensortrainformat

    S.V.Dolgovetal.“Computationofextremeeigenvaluesinhigherdimensionsusingblocktensortrainformat”. In:Comput. Phys. Commun.185 (Apr. 2014), pp. 1207–1216.DOI:10.1016/j.cpc.2013.12.017

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2013.12.017 2014

  6. [6]

    Solution of linear systems and matrix inversion in the TT-format

    I. V. Oseledets and S. V. Dolgov. “Solution of linear systems and matrix inversion in the TT-format”. In:SIAM J. Sci. Comput.34.5 (2012), A2718–A2739

    2012

  7. [7]

    Alternating minimal energy method for linear systems in higher dimen- sions

    S. V. Dolgov and D. V. Savostyanov. “Alternating minimal energy method for linear systems in higher dimen- sions”. In:SIAM J. Sci. Comput36.5 (2014), A2248–A2271

    2014

  8. [8]

    Einkemmer et al.A review of low-rank methods for time-dependent kinetic simulations

    L. Einkemmer et al.A review of low-rank methods for time-dependent kinetic simulations. Dec. 2024.DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.05912. arXiv:2412.05912 [math.NA]

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.05912 2024

  9. [9]

    A Low-Rank Projector-Splitting Integrator for the Vlasov–Poisson Equation

    L. Einkemmer and C. Lubich. “A Low-Rank Projector-Splitting Integrator for the Vlasov–Poisson Equation”. en. In:SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing40.5 (Jan. 2018), B1330–B1360.ISSN: 1064-8275, 1095-7197. DOI:10.1137/18M116383X

    work page doi:10.1137/18m116383x 2018

  10. [10]

    Christlieb et al.A Sampling-Based Adaptive Rank Approach to the Wigner-Poisson System

    A. Christlieb et al.A Sampling-Based Adaptive Rank Approach to the Wigner-Poisson System. June 2025.DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.21314. arXiv:2506.21314 [math.NA]

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.21314 2025

  11. [11]

    Zheng et al.A Semi-Lagrangian adaptive-rank (SLAR) method for high-dimensional Vlasov dynamics

    N. Zheng et al.A Semi-Lagrangian adaptive-rank (SLAR) method for high-dimensional Vlasov dynamics. Nov. 2024.DOI:10.48550/arXiv.2510.24861. arXiv:2411.17963 [math.NA]

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.24861 2024

  12. [12]

    The tensor-train mimetic finite difference method for three-dimensional Maxwell’s wave propagation equations

    G. Manzini et al. “The tensor-train mimetic finite difference method for three-dimensional Maxwell’s wave propagation equations”. In:Mathematics and Computers in Simulation210 (2023), pp. 615–639.ISSN: 0378- 4754.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2023.03.026

    work page doi:10.1016/j.matcom.2023.03.026 2023

  13. [13]

    Tensor Train Accelerated Method of Moment Solution of Volume Integral Equations for Arbitrary Objects With Logarithmic Complexity

    C. Nguyen, A. I. Boyko, and V. I. Okhmatovski. “Tensor Train Accelerated Method of Moment Solution of Volume Integral Equations for Arbitrary Objects With Logarithmic Complexity”. In:IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques(2026)

    2026

  14. [14]

    Direct solution of the chemical master equation using quantized tensor trains

    V. Kazeev et al. “Direct solution of the chemical master equation using quantized tensor trains”. In:PLOS Comput. Biol.10.3 (2014), e1003359. 16

    2014

  15. [15]

    Tensornetworkreducedordermodelsforwall-boundedflows

    M.KiffnerandD.Jaksch.“Tensornetworkreducedordermodelsforwall-boundedflows”.In:Phys.Rev.Fluids 8 (12 2023), p. 124101.DOI:10.1103/PhysRevFluids.8.124101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevfluids.8.124101 2023

  16. [16]

    Kornev et al.Numerical solution of the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations for chemical mixers via quantum-inspired Tensor Train Finite Element Method

    E. Kornev et al.Numerical solution of the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations for chemical mixers via quantum-inspired Tensor Train Finite Element Method. May 2023.DOI:10 . 48550 / arXiv . 2305 . 10784. arXiv:2305.10784 [physics.flu-dyn]

    work page arXiv 2023

  17. [17]

    R.D.Peddintietal.Quantum-inspiredframeworkforcomputationalfluiddynamics.Aug.2024.DOI:10.1038/ s42005-024-01623-8

    2024

  18. [18]

    A quantum inspired approach to exploit turbulence structures

    N. Gourianov, M. Lubasch, S. Dolgov, et al. “A quantum inspired approach to exploit turbulence structures”. In:Nature Comput. Sci.2 (2022), pp. 30–37

    2022

  19. [19]

    Exploiting the structure of turbulence with tensor networks

    N. Gourianov. “Exploiting the structure of turbulence with tensor networks”. PhD thesis. University of Oxford, 2022

    2022

  20. [20]

    Quantum-Inspired Simulation of 2D Turbulent Rayleigh-B\'enard Convection

    N.-L.v.Hülstetal.Quantum-InspiredSimulationof2DTurbulentRayleigh-BénardConvection.Apr.17,2026. DOI:10.48550/arXiv.2604.16179. arXiv:2604.16179[physics]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.16179 2026

  21. [21]

    Quantum-inspiredmethodforsolvingtheVlasov-Poissonequations

    E.YeandN.F.G.Loureiro.“Quantum-inspiredmethodforsolvingtheVlasov-Poissonequations”.In:Physical Review E106.3 (Sept. 2022). Publisher: American Physical Society, p. 035208.DOI:10.1103/PhysRevE. 106.035208

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve 2022

  22. [22]

    QuantizedtensornetworksforsolvingtheVlasov–Maxwellequations

    E.YeandN.F.Loureiro.“QuantizedtensornetworksforsolvingtheVlasov–Maxwellequations”.In:Journalof PlasmaPhysics90.3(June2024),p.805900301.ISSN:0022-3778,1469-7807.DOI:10.1017/S0022377824000503

    work page doi:10.1017/s0022377824000503

  23. [23]

    (𝑑log𝑁)-quantics approximation of𝑁−𝑑tensors in high-dimensional numerical mod- eling

    B. N. Khoromskij. “(𝑑log𝑁)-quantics approximation of𝑁−𝑑tensors in high-dimensional numerical mod- eling”. In:Constr. Approx.34 (2011), pp. 257–280

    2011

  24. [24]

    M.Lindsey.Multiscaleinterpolativeconstructionofquantizedtensortrains.2023.arXiv:2311.12554 [math.NA]

    work page arXiv 2023

  25. [25]

    Quantum-inspiredalgorithmsformultivariateanalysis:frominterpolationtopartialdifferential equation

    J.J.G.Ripoll.“Quantum-inspiredalgorithmsformultivariateanalysis:frominterpolationtopartialdifferential equation”. In:Quantum5 (2021), p. 431

    2021

  26. [26]

    Tensor-train decomposition

    I. V. Oseledets. “Tensor-train decomposition”. In:SIAM J. Sci. Comput.33.5 (2011), pp. 2295–2317

    2011

  27. [27]

    Multilevel Toeplitz matrices generated by tensor- structuredvectorsandconvolutionwithlogarithmiccomplexity

    V. A. Kazeev, B. N. Khoromskij, and E. E. Tyrtyshnikov. “Multilevel Toeplitz matrices generated by tensor- structuredvectorsandconvolutionwithlogarithmiccomplexity”.In:SIAMJ.Sci.Comput.35.3(2013),A1511– A1536

    2013

  28. [28]

    The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states

    U. Schollwöck. “The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states”. In:Annals of Physics.January2011SpecialIssue326.1(Jan.1,2011),pp.96–192.ISSN:0003-4916.DOI:10.1016/j.aop. 2010.09.012

    work page doi:10.1016/j.aop 2011

  29. [29]

    Minimallyentangledtypicalthermalstatealgorithms

    E.M.StoudenmireandS.R.White.“Minimallyentangledtypicalthermalstatealgorithms”.en.In:NewJournal of Physics12.5 (May 2010), p. 055026.ISSN: 1367-2630.DOI:10.1088/1367-2630/12/5/055026

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/12/5/055026 2010

  30. [30]

    Bezhanishvili, B

    C.Camaño,E.N.Epperly,andJ.A.Tropp.Successiverandomizedcompression:Arandomizedalgorithmforthe compressed MPO-MPS product. arXiv:2504.06475 [quant-ph] version: 1. Apr. 2025.DOI:10.48550/arXiv. 2504.06475

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv 2025

  31. [31]

    Two-Level QTT-Tucker Format for Optimized Tensor Calculus

    S. Dolgov and B. Khoromskij. “Two-Level QTT-Tucker Format for Optimized Tensor Calculus”. In:SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications34.2 (Jan. 2013), pp. 593–623.ISSN: 0895-4798.DOI:10.1137/ 120882597

    2013

  32. [32]

    Fraschini, V

    S. Fraschini, V. Kazeev, and I. Perugia.Symplectic QTT-FEM solution of the one-dimensional acoustic wave equationinthetimedomain.Nov.18,2024.DOI:10.48550/arXiv.2411.11321.arXiv:2411.11321[math]

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.11321.arxiv:2411.11321 2024

  33. [33]

    TT-crossapproximationformultidimensionalarrays

    I.V.OseledetsandE.Tyrtyshnikov.“TT-crossapproximationformultidimensionalarrays”.In:LinearAlgebra Appl.432 (2010), pp. 70–88

    2010

  34. [34]

    Cross interpolation for solving high-dimensional dynamical systems on low- rank Tucker and tensor train manifolds

    B. Ghahremani and H. Babaee. “Cross interpolation for solving high-dimensional dynamical systems on low- rank Tucker and tensor train manifolds”. In:Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering432 (2024), p. 117385.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2024.117385

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2024.117385 2024

  35. [35]

    Dynamical Low-Rank Approximation

    O. Koch and C. Lubich. “Dynamical Low-Rank Approximation”. In:SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications29.2 (Jan. 2007). Publisher: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, pp. 434–454.ISSN: 0895-4798.DOI:10.1137/050639703. 17

    work page doi:10.1137/050639703 2007

  36. [36]

    A projector-splitting integrator for dynamical low-rank approximation

    C. Lubich and I. V. Oseledets. “A projector-splitting integrator for dynamical low-rank approximation”. en. In: BIT Numerical Mathematics54.1 (Mar. 2014), pp. 171–188.ISSN: 1572-9125.DOI:10.1007/s10543-013- 0454-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s10543-013- 2014

  37. [37]

    Rank-adaptivedynamicallow-rankintegratorsforfirst-orderand second-order matrix differential equations

    M.Hochbruck,M.Neher,andS.Schrammer.“Rank-adaptivedynamicallow-rankintegratorsforfirst-orderand second-order matrix differential equations”. en. In:BIT Numerical Mathematics63.1 (Jan. 2023), p. 9.ISSN: 1572-9125.DOI:10.1007/s10543-023-00942-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s10543-023-00942-6 2023

  38. [38]

    Ceruti et al.A robust second-order low-rank BUG integrator based on the midpoint rule

    G. Ceruti et al.A robust second-order low-rank BUG integrator based on the midpoint rule. arXiv:2402.08607 [cs, math]. Feb. 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    G.Ceruti,N.Crouseilles,andL.Einkemmer.AGalerkinAlternatingProjectionMethodforKineticEquationsin theDiffusiveLimit.May2025.DOI:10.48550/arXiv2505.19929.arXiv:2505.19929 [physics.math.NA]

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv2505.19929.arxiv:2505.19929

  40. [40]

    Ye and C

    E. Ye and C. Yang.Time integration of quantized tensor trains using the interpolative dynamical low-rank approximation. Dec. 17, 2025.DOI:10.48550/arXiv.2512.15703. arXiv:2512.15703[math]

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.15703 2025

  41. [41]

    Time-step targeting methods for real-time dynamics using the density matrix renormalization group

    A. E. Feiguin and S. R. White. “Time-step targeting methods for real-time dynamics using the density matrix renormalization group”. In:Physical Review B72.2 (2005), p. 020404

    2005

  42. [42]

    Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states

    J. Haegeman et al. “Unifying time evolution and optimization with matrix product states”. In:Phys. Rev. B94 (2016), p. 165116

    2016

  43. [43]

    Time-evolution methods for matrix-product states

    S. Paeckel et al. “Time-evolution methods for matrix-product states”. In:Ann. Phys.411 (2019), p. 167998. ISSN: 0003-4916.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2019.167998

    work page doi:10.1016/j.aop.2019.167998 2019

  44. [44]

    Time-dependentvariationalprinciplewithancillaryKrylovsubspace

    M.YangandS.R.White.“Time-dependentvariationalprinciplewithancillaryKrylovsubspace”.In:Phys.Rev. B102.9 (2020), p. 094315

    2020

  45. [45]

    S. R. Fabio Nobile.Robust high-order low-rank BUG integrators based on explicit Runge-Kutta methods. Apr. 2025.DOI:10.48550/arXiv.2502.07040. arXiv:2502.07040 [math.NA]

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.07040 2025

  46. [46]

    Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics: With Applications to Geophysics

    D. R. Durran. “Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics: With Applications to Geophysics”. In: 2nd ed. New York: Springer New York, 2010. Chap. 3.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6412-0. 18 Supplementary Information: A practical investigation on time integration in the quantized tensor train format 1 Step-and-truncate Time Integrators 1.1 MacCormack met...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-6412-0 2010