Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Interpretable representation learning of quantum data enabled by probabilistic variational autoencoders

Paulin de Schoulepnikoff, Gorka Muñoz-Gil*, Hendrik Poulsen Nautrup, and Hans J. Briegel

  • *Contact author: gorka.munoz-gil@uibk.ac.at

Phys. Rev. A 112, 062423 – Published 10 December, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/cwb8-y25k

Abstract

Interpretable machine learning is rapidly becoming a crucial tool for scientific discovery. Among existing approaches, variational autoencoders (VAEs) have shown promise in extracting the hidden physical features of some input data, with no supervision nor prior knowledge of the system at study. Yet the ability of VAEs to create meaningful, interpretable representations relies on their accurate approximation of the underlying probability distribution of their input. When dealing with quantum data, VAEs must hence account for its intrinsic randomness and complex correlations. While VAEs have been previously applied to quantum data, they have often neglected its probabilistic nature, hindering the extraction of meaningful physical descriptors. Here we demonstrate that two key modifications enable VAEs to learn physically meaningful latent representations: a decoder capable of faithfully reproducing the probability distributions of quantum states and a probabilistic loss tailored to this task. Using benchmark quantum spin models, we identify regimes where standard methods fail while the representations learned by our approach remain meaningful and interpretable. Applied to experimental data from Rydberg atom arrays, the model autonomously uncovers the phase structure without access to prior labels, Hamiltonian details, or knowledge of relevant order parameters, highlighting its potential as an unsupervised and interpretable tool for the study of quantum systems.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (54)

  1. R. Iten, T. Metger, H. Wilming, L. del Rio, and R. Renner, Discovering physical concepts with neural networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 010508 (2020).
  2. J. Carrasquilla and R. G. Melko, Machine learning phases of matter, Nat. Phys. 13, 431 (2017).
  3. K. Cybiński, J. Enouen, A. Georges, and A. Dawid, Speak so a physicist can understand you! TetrisCNN for detecting phase transitions and order parameters, arXiv:2411.02237.
  4. C. Miles, R. Samajdar, S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, H. Pichler, S. Sachdev, M. D. Lukin, M. Greiner, K. Q. Weinberger, and E.-A. Kim, Machine learning discovery of new phases in programmable quantum simulator snapshots, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 013026 (2023).
  5. P. Huembeli, A. Dauphin, and P. Wittek, Identifying quantum phase transitions with adversarial neural networks, Phys. Rev. B 97, 134109 (2018).
  6. L. Mauron, Z. Denis, J. Nys, and G. Carleo, Predicting topological entanglement entropy in a Rydberg analog simulator, Nat. Phys. 21, 1332 (2025).
  7. G. Torlai, G. Mazzola, J. Carrasquilla, M. Troyer, R. Melko, and G. Carleo, Neural-network quantum state tomography, Nat. Phys. 14, 447 (2018).
  8. L. Kim, S. Lloyd, and M. Marvian, Hamiltonian quantum generative adversarial networks, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 033019 (2024).
  9. F. Fürrutter, G. Muñoz-Gil, and H. J. Briegel, Quantum circuit synthesis with diffusion models, Nat. Mach. Intell. 6, 515 (2024).
  10. S. J. Wetzel, S. Ha, R. Iten, M. Klopotek, and Z. Liu, Interpretable machine learning in physics: A review, arXiv:2503.23616.
  11. P. Ponte and R. G. Melko, Kernel methods for interpretable machine learning of order parameters, Phys. Rev. B 96, 205146 (2017).
  12. Y. Kharkov, O. Shtanko, A. Seif, P. Bienias, M. Van Regemortel, M. Hafezi, and A. V. Gorshkov, Discovering hydrodynamic equations of many-body quantum systems, arXiv:2111.02385.
  13. C. Miles, A. Bohrdt, R. Wu, C. Chiu, M. Xu, G. Ji, M. Greiner, K. Q. Weinberger, E. Demler, and E.-A. Kim, Correlator convolutional neural networks as an interpretable architecture for image-like quantum matter data, Nat. Commun. 12, 3905 (2021).
  14. D. P. Kingma and M. Welling, Auto-encoding variational bayes, arXiv:1312.6114.
  15. I. Higgins, L. Matthey, A. Pal, C. Burgess, X. Glorot, M. Botvinick, S. Mohamed, and A. Lerchner, Beta-VAE: Learning basic visual concepts with a constrained variational framework, in International Conference on Learning Representations (2017).
  16. N. Walker, K.-M. Tam, and M. Jarrell, Deep learning on the 2-dimensional Ising model to extract the crossover region with a variational autoencoder, Sci. Rep. 10, 13047 (2020).
  17. A. Naravane and N. Mathur, Semi-supervised learning of order parameter in 2D Ising and XY models using conditional variational autoencoders, arXiv:2306.16822.
  18. S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Semeghini, A. Omran, D. Bluvstein, R. Samajdar, H. Pichler, W. W. Ho et al., Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simulator, Nature (London) 595, 227 (2021).
  19. B.-W. Li, Y.-K. Wu, Q.-X. Mei, R. Yao, W.-Q. Lian, M.-L. Cai, Y. Wang, B.-X. Qi, L. Yao, L. He et al., Probing critical behavior of long-range transverse-field Ising model through quantum Kibble-Zurek mechanism, PRX Quantum 4, 010302 (2023).
  20. Z. Patel, E. Merali, and S. J. Wetzel, Unsupervised learning of Rydberg atom array phase diagram with Siamese neural networks, New J. Phys. 24, 113021 (2022).
  21. A. Suresh, H. Schlömer, B. Hashemi, and A. Bohrdt, Interpretable correlator transformer for image-like quantum matter data, Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 6, 025006 (2025).
  22. S. J. Wetzel, Unsupervised learning of phase transitions: From principal component analysis to variational autoencoders, Phys. Rev. E 96, 022140 (2017).
  23. I. Jang and A. Yethiraj, Unsupervised machine learning method for the phase behavior of the constant magnetization Ising model in two and three dimensions, J. Phys. Chem. B 129, 532 (2025).
  24. F. Frohnert and E. van Nieuwenburg, Explainable representation learning of small quantum states, Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 5, 015001 (2024).
  25. G. Carleo and M. Troyer, Solving the quantum many-body problem with artificial neural networks, Science 355, 602 (2017).
  26. H. Lange, A. Van de Walle, A. Abedinnia, and A. Bohrdt, From architectures to applications: A review of neural quantum states, Quantum Sci. Technol. 9, 040501 (2024).
  27. H. P. Nautrup, T. Metger, R. Iten, S. Jerbi, L. M. Trenkwalder, H. Wilming, H. J. Briegel, and R. Renner, Operationally meaningful representations of physical systems in neural networks, Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 3, 045025 (2022).
  28. G. Fernández-Fernández, C. Manzo, M. Lewenstein, A. Dauphin, and G. Muñoz Gil, Learning minimal representations of stochastic processes with variational autoencoders, Phys. Rev. E 110, L012102 (2024).
  29. J. Arnold, F. Schäfer, A. Edelman, and C. Bruder, Mapping out phase diagrams with generative classifiers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 207301 (2024).
  30. A. Chen, V. D. Naik, and M. Heyl, Convolutional transformer wave functions, arXiv:2503.10462.
  31. R. T. Q. Chen, X. Li, R. Grosse, and D. Duvenaud, Isolating sources of disentanglement in VAEs, in Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, USA, 2018), pp. 2615–2625.
  32. P. de Schoulepnikoff, G. Muñoz-Gil, H. P. Nautrup and H. J. Briegel, Code release for “Interpretable representation learning of quantum data enabled by probabilistic variational autoencoders” Zenodo (2025), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15689252.
  33. F. A. Kassan-ogly, One-dimensional Ising model with next-nearest-neighbour interaction in magnetic field, Phase Trans. 74, 353 (2001).
  34. P. Hauke and L. Tagliacozzo, Spread of correlations in long-range interacting quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 207202 (2013).
  35. P. Jurcevic, B. P. Lanyon, P. Hauke, C. Hempel, P. Zoller, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Quasiparticle engineering and entanglement propagation in a quantum many-body system, Nature (London) 511, 202 (2014).
  36. M. Cranmer, Interpretable machine learning for science with PySR and SymbolicRegression.Jl, arXiv:2305.01582.
  37. M. L. Baez, M. Goihl, J. Haferkamp, J. Bermejo-Vega, M. Gluza, and J. Eisert, Dynamical structure factors of dynamical quantum simulators, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 117, 26123 (2020).
  38. D. Vodola, L. Lepori, E. Ercolessi, and G. Pupillo, Long-range Ising and Kitaev models: Phases, correlations and edge modes, New J. Phys. 18, 015001 (2015).
  39. M. D. Lukin, M. Fleischhauer, R. Cote, L. M. Duan, D. Jaksch, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Dipole blockade and quantum information processing in mesoscopic atomic ensembles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 037901 (2001).
  40. E. Urban, T. A. Johnson, T. Henage, L. Isenhower, D. Yavuz, T. Walker, and M. Saffman, Observation of Rydberg blockade between two atoms, Nat. Phys. 5, 110 (2009).
  41. F. Vicentini, D. Hofmann, A. Szabó, D. Wu, C. Roth, C. Giuliani, G. Pescia, J. Nys, V. Vargas-Calderón, N. Astrakhantsev, and G. Carleo, NetKet 3: Machine learning toolbox for many-body quantum systems, SciPost Phys. Codebases, 7 (2022).
  42. F. Vicentini, D. Hofmann, A. Szabó, D. Wu, C. Roth, C. Giuliani, G. Pescia, J. Nys, V. Vargas-Calderón, N. Astrakhantsev, and G. Carleo, Codebase release 3.4 for NetKet, SciPost Phys. Codebases, 7 (2022).
  43. J. Bradbury, R. Frostig, P. Hawkins, M. J. Johnson, C. Leary, D. Maclaurin, G. Necula, A. Paszke, J. VanderPlas, S. Wanderman-Milne, and Q. Zhang, JAX: Composable transformations of python+numpy programs (2018), http://github.com/jax-ml/jax.
  44. H. Dion and V. Filippo, Mpi4jax: Zero-copy MPI communication of JAX arrays, J. Open Source Softw. 6, 3419 (2021).
  45. Y. Dubois, A. Kastanos, D. Lines, and B. Melman, Disentangling VAE (2019), http://github.com/YannDubs/disentangling-vae/.
  46. J. Heek, A. Levskaya, A. Oliver, M. Ritter, B. Rondepierre, A. Steiner, and M. van Zee, Flax: A neural network library and ecosystem for JAX (2024), http://github.com/google/flax.
  47. A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer, N. Parmar, J. Uszkoreit, L. Jones, A. N. Gomez, Ł. Kaiser, and I. Polosukhin, Attention is all you need, in Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS'17 (Curran Associates Inc. Red Hook, NY, USA, 2017), pp. 6000–6010.
  48. G. Klambauer, T. Unterthiner, A. Mayr, and S. Hochreiter, Self-normalizing neural networks, in Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (Curran Associates Inc. Red Hook, NY, USA, 2017), pp. 972–981.
  49. D. Fitzek, Y. H. Teoh, H. P. Fung, G. A. Dagnew, E. Merali, M. S. Moss, B. MacLellan, and R. G. Melko, RydbergGPT, Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 6, 045057 (2024).
  50. J. Zhuang, T. Tang, Y. Ding, S. C. Tatikonda, N. Dvornek, X. Papademetris, and J. Duncan, AdaBelief optimizer: Adapting stepsizes by the belief in observed gradients, in Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, USA, 2020), pp. 18795–18806.
  51. L. N. Smith, A disciplined approach to neural network hyper-parameters: Part 1–Learning rate, batch size, momentum, and weight decay, arXiv:1803.09820.
  52. Y. Li, T. Kind, J. Folz, A. Vaniya, S. S. Mehta, and O. Fiehn, Spectral entropy outperforms MS/MS dot product similarity for small-molecule compound identification, Nat. Methods 18, 1524 (2021).
  53. P.-Y. Xiong, H. Jahanshahi, R. Alcaraz, Y.-M. Chu, J. F. Gómez-Aguilar, and F. E. Alsaadi, Spectral entropy analysis and synchronization of a multi-stable fractional-order chaotic system using a novel neural network-based chattering-free sliding mode technique, Chaos Solitons Fractals 144, 110576 (2021).
  54. A. Swetapadma, T. Shuvam, and N. Behera, A novel fault identification technique for transmission lines based on spectral entropy and one-dimensional CNN, in 2023 Fifth International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Communication Technologies (ICECCT) (IEEE, Erode, India, 2023), pp. 01–05.

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation