- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

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

Hypernuclei with neural network quantum states

Andrea Di Donna1,2, Lorenzo Contessi3, Alessandro Lovato2,4,5,*, and Francesco Pederiva1,2

  • *Contact author: lovato@anl.gov
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 8, 013160 – Published 11 February, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/wmxg-cnrg

Abstract

Leveraging complementary machine-learning-based approaches, we compute properties of s- and p-shell Λ hypernuclei—including binding energies, single-particle densities, and radii—starting from the individual interactions among their constituents. These interactions are modeled based on a leading-order finite-cutoff pionless effective field theory expansion. The couplings and the range of the three-nucleon and Λ-nucleon-nucleon potentials are determined via a Gaussian process framework anchored on virtually exact few-body techniques. We solve the many-body Schrödinger equation using a variational Monte Carlo method based on neural network quantum states, extending it for the first time to include Λ particles alongside protons and neutrons. The predicted binding energies show remarkably good agreement with experimental results, given the simplicity of the input Hamiltonian. We also confirm the experimentally observed shrinkage of the proton radius in LiΛ7 compared to its parent nucleus, Li6. This work paves the way for an ab initio description of medium-mass and heavy hypernuclei, which is critical for understanding the onset of strange degrees of freedom in the core of neutron stars.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (95)

  1. E. Epelbaum, H.-W. Hammer, and U.-G. Meissner, Modern theory of nuclear forces, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 1773 (2009).
  2. R. Machleidt and D. R. Entem, Chiral effective field theory and nuclear forces, Phys. Rep. 503, 1 (2011).
  3. H. W. Hammer, S. König, and U. van Kolck, Nuclear effective field theory: Status and perspectives, Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 025004 (2020).
  4. I. Svensson, A. Ekström, and C. Forssén, Bayesian parameter estimation in chiral effective field theory using the Hamiltonian Monte Carlo method, Phys. Rev. C 105, 014004 (2022).
  5. J. M. Bub, M. Piarulli, R. J. Furnstahl, S. Pastore, and D. R. Phillips, Bayesian analysis of nucleon-nucleon scattering data in pionless effective field theory, Phys. Rev. C 111, 034005 (2025).
  6. G. Hagen, T. Papenbrock, M. Hjorth-Jensen, and D. J. Dean, Coupled-cluster computations of atomic nuclei, Rep. Prog. Phys. 77, 096302 (2014).
  7. H. Hergert, S. K. Bogner, T. D. Morris, A. Schwenk, and K. Tsukiyama, The in-medium similarity renormalization group: A novel ab initio method for nuclei, Phys. Rep. 621, 165 (2016).
  8. W. H. Dickhoff and C. Barbieri, Selfconsistent Green's function method for nuclei and nuclear matter, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 52, 377 (2004).
  9. V. Soma, C. Barbieri, and T. Duguet, Ab initio Gorkov-Green's function calculations of open-shell nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 87, 011303(R) (2013).
  10. J. Carlson, S. Gandolfi, F. Pederiva, S. C. Pieper, R. Schiavilla, K. E. Schmidt, and R. B. Wiringa, Quantum Monte Carlo methods for nuclear physics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 1067 (2015).
  11. J. E. Lynn, I. Tews, S. Gandolfi, and A. Lovato, Quantum Monte Carlo methods in nuclear physics: Recent advances, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 69, 279 (2019).
  12. M. Danysz and J. Pniewski, Delayed disintegration of a heavy nuclear fragment: I, London, Edinburgh Dublin Philos. Mag. J. Sci. 44, 348 (1953).
  13. M. May, et al., Observation of hypernuclear gamma-ray transitions in LiΛ7 and BeΛ9, Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 2085 (1983).
  14. K. Tanida, et al., Measurement of the B(E2) of hyper LiΛ7 and shrinkage of the hypernuclear size, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 1982 (2001).
  15. H. Akikawa, et al., Hypernuclear fine structure in BeΛ9, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 082501 (2002).
  16. O. Hashimoto and H. Tamura, Spectroscopy of Λ hypernuclei, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 57, 564 (2006).
  17. T. O. Yamamoto, et al. (J-PARC E13 Collaboration), Observation of spin-dependent charge symmetry breaking in ΛN interaction: Gamma-ray spectroscopy of HeΛ4, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 222501 (2015).
  18. T. Gogami, et al., High resolution spectroscopic study of BeΛ10, Phys. Rev. C 93, 034314 (2016).
  19. A. Gal, E. V. Hungerford, and D. J. Millener, Strangeness in nuclear physics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 035004 (2016).
  20. I. Bombaci, The hyperon puzzle in neutron stars, JPS Conf. Proc. 17, 101002 (2017).
  21. K. A. Maslov, E. E. Kolomeitsev, and D. N. Voskresensky, Solution of the hyperon puzzle within a relativistic mean-field model, Phys. Lett. B 748, 369 (2015).
  22. P. Demorest, T. Pennucci, S. Ransom, M. Roberts, and J. Hessels, Shapiro delay measurement of a two solar mass neutron star, Nature (London) 467, 1081 (2010).
  23. J. Antoniadis, et al., A massive pulsar in a compact relativistic binary, Science 340, 1233232 (2013).
  24. H. T. Cromartie, et al. (NANOGrav), Relativistic Shapiro delay measurements of an extremely massive millisecond pulsar, Nat. Astron. 4, 72 (2019).
  25. E. Fonseca, et al., Refined mass and geometric measurements of the high-mass PSR J0740+6620, Astrophys. J. Lett. 915, L12 (2021).
  26. D. Lonardoni, A. Lovato, S. Gandolfi, and F. Pederiva, Hyperon puzzle: Hints from quantum Monte Carlo calculations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 092301 (2015).
  27. J. Haidenbauer, U. G. Meißner, N. Kaiser, and W. Weise, Lambda-nuclear interactions and hyperon puzzle in neutron stars, Eur. Phys. J. A 53, 121 (2017).
  28. A. Nogga, H. Kamada, and W. Gloeckle, The hypernuclei HeΛ4 and HΛ4: Challenges for modern hyperon-nucleon forces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 172501 (2002).
  29. E. Hiyama, M. Kamimura, T. Motoba, T. Yamada, and Y. Yamamoto, Λ−Σ conversion in HeΛ4 and HΛ4 based on a four-body calculation, Phys. Rev. C 65, 011301(R) (2001).
  30. H. Nemura, Y. Akaishi, and Y. Suzuki, Ab initio approach to s-shell hypernuclei HΛ3, HΛ4, HeΛ4, and HeΛ5 with a ΛN–ΣN interaction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 142504 (2002).
  31. I. N. Filikhin and A. Gal, Faddeev-Yakubovsky search for HΛΛ4, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 172502 (2002).
  32. H. Garcilazo, A. Valcarce, and T. Fernandez-Carames, ΛNN and ΣNN systems at threshold: II. The effect of D waves, Phys. Rev. C 76, 034001 (2007).
  33. L. Contessi, N. Barnea, and A. Gal, Resolving the Λ hypernuclear overbinding problem in pionless effective field theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 102502 (2018).
  34. D. Lonardoni, S. Gandolfi, and F. Pederiva, Effects of the two-body and three-body hyperon-nucleon interactions in Λ-hypernuclei, Phys. Rev. C 87, 041303(R) (2013).
  35. D. Lonardoni, F. Pederiva, and S. Gandolfi, Accurate determination of the interaction between Λ hyperons and nucleons from auxiliary field diffusion Monte Carlo calculations, Phys. Rev. C 89, 014314 (2014).
  36. R. Wirth, D. Gazda, P. Navrátil, A. Calci, J. Langhammer, and R. Roth, Ab initio description of p-shell hypernuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 192502 (2014).
  37. R. Wirth and R. Roth, Induced hyperon-nucleon-nucleon interactions and the hyperon puzzle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 182501 (2016).
  38. R. Wirth and R. Roth, Light neutron-rich hypernuclei from the importance-truncated no-core shell model, Phys. Lett. B 779, 336 (2018).
  39. R. Wirth and R. Roth, Similarity renormalization group evolution of hypernuclear Hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. C 100, 044313 (2019).
  40. M. Knöll and R. Roth, Hyperon-nucleon interaction constrained by light hypernuclei, Phys. Lett. B 846, 138258 (2023).
  41. H. Le, J. Haidenbauer, U.-G. Meißner, and A. Nogga, Light Λ hypernuclei studied with chiral hyperon-nucleon and hyperon-nucleon-nucleon forces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 072502 (2025).
  42. L. H. Avraham and B. Bazak, Few-nucleon systems within finite-cutoff pionless EFT, Phys. Lett. B 872, 140100 (2026).
  43. C. Adams, G. Carleo, A. Lovato, and N. Rocco, Variational Monte Carlo calculations of A≤4 nuclei with an artificial neural-network correlator ansatz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 022502 (2021).
  44. A. Lovato, C. Adams, G. Carleo, and N. Rocco, Hidden-nucleons neural-network quantum states for the nuclear many-body problem, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 043178 (2022).
  45. J. Kim, G. Pescia, B. Fore, J. Nys, G. Carleo, S. Gandolfi, M. Hjorth-Jensen, and A. Lovato, Neural-network quantum states for ultra-cold Fermi gases, Commun. Phys. 7, 148 (2024).
  46. B. Fore, J. Kim, M. Hjorth-Jensen, and A. Lovato, Investigating the crust of neutron stars with neural-network quantum states, Commun. Phys. 8, 108 (2025).
  47. R. Schiavilla, L. Girlanda, A. Gnech, A. Kievsky, A. Lovato, L. E. Marcucci, M. Piarulli, and M. Viviani, Two- and three-nucleon contact interactions and ground-state energies of light- and medium-mass nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 103, 054003 (2021).
  48. N. Auerbach, J. Hüfner, A. K. Kerman, and C. M. Shakin, A theory of isobaric analog resonances, Rev. Mod. Phys. 44, 48 (1972).
  49. L. Contessi, A. Lovato, F. Pederiva, A. Roggero, J. Kirscher, and U. van Kolck, Ground-state properties of He4 and O16 extrapolated from lattice QCD with pionless EFT, Phys. Lett. B 772, 839 (2017).
  50. N. Barnea, L. Contessi, D. Gazit, F. Pederiva, and U. Van Kolck, Effective field theory for lattice nuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 052501 (2015).
  51. R. W. Hackenburg, Neutron-proton effective range parameters and zero-energy shape dependence, Phys. Rev. C 73, 044002 (2006).
  52. G. Alexander, U. Karshon, A. Shapira, G. Yekutieli, R. Engelmann, H. Filthuth, and W. Lughofer, Study of the Λ − N system in low-energy Λ − p elastic scattering, Phys. Rev. 173, 1452 (1968).
  53. P. F. Bedaque and U. van Kolck, Effective field theory for few nucleon systems, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 52, 339 (2002).
  54. A. Bansal, S. Binder, A. Ekström, G. Hagen, G. R. Jansen, and T. Papenbrock, Pion-less effective field theory for atomic nuclei and lattice nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 98, 054301 (2018).
  55. I. Stetcu, B. R. Barrett, and U. van Kolck, No-core shell model in an effective-field-theory framework, Phys. Lett. B 653, 358 (2007).
  56. B.-N. Lu, N. Li, S. Elhatisari, D. Lee, E. Epelbaum, and U.-G. Meißner, Essential elements for nuclear binding, Phys. Lett. B 797, 134863 (2019).
  57. A. Gnech, B. Fore, A. J. Tropiano, and A. Lovato, Distilling the essential elements of nuclear binding via neural-network quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 142501 (2024).
  58. F. Calogero, A novel approach to elementary scattering theory, Il Nuovo Cimento 27, 261 (1963).
  59. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Live chart of nuclides, https://www-nds.iaea.org/relnsd/vcharthtml/VChartHTML.html.
  60. A. Ekström and L. Platter, Quantifying the breakdown scale of pionless effective field theory, Phys. Lett. B 860, 139207 (2025).
  61. P. Cook, D. Jammooa, M. Hjorth-Jensen, D. D. Lee, and D. Lee, Parametric matrix models, Nature Commun. 16, 5929 (2025).
  62. D. Frame, R. He, I. Ipsen, D. Lee, D. Lee, and E. Rrapaj, Eigenvector continuation with subspace learning, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 032501 (2018).
  63. R. Rende, L. L. Viteritti, F. Becca, A. Scardicchio, A. Laio, and G. Carleo, Foundation neural-networks quantum states as a unified ansatz for multiple Hamiltonians, Nat. Commun. 16, 7213 (2025).
  64. Y. Suzuki and K. Varga, Stochastic Variational Approach to Quantum Mechanical Few-Body Problems, Lecture Notes in Physics New Series M, Monographs (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Barcelona, Hong Kong, London, Milan, Paris, Singapore, Tokyo, 1998), Vol. 54.
  65. P. Eckert and P. Achenbach, Chart of hypernuclides—hypernuclear structure and decay data, Mainz Hypernuclei Database, https://hypernuclei.kph.uni-mainz.de/, accessed 1 April 2025.
  66. A. Ekström, G. R. Jansen, K. A. Wendt, G. Hagen, T. Papenbrock, B. D. Carlsson, C. Forssén, M. Hjorth-Jensen, P. Navrátil, and W. Nazarewicz, Accurate nuclear radii and binding energies from a chiral interaction, Phys. Rev. C 91, 051301(R) (2015); 109, 059901(E) (2024).
  67. J. C. Owen, Independent pair correlations in a cluster expansion formalism, Phys. Lett. B 77, 9 (1978).
  68. R. P. Feynman and M. Cohen, Energy spectrum of the excitations in liquid helium, Phys. Rev. 102, 1189 (1956).
  69. D. Luo and B. K. Clark, Backflow transformations via neural networks for quantum many-body wave functions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 226401 (2019).
  70. J. Hermann, Z. Schätzle, and F. Noé, Deep-neural-network solution of the electronic Schrödinger equation, Nat. Chem. 12, 891 (2020).
  71. D. Pfau, J. S. Spencer, A. G. D. G. Matthews, and W. M. C. Foulkes, Ab initio solution of the many-electron Schrödinger equation with deep neural networks, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033429 (2020).
  72. G. Pescia, J. Nys, J. Kim, A. Lovato, and G. Carleo, Message-passing neural quantum states for the homogeneous electron gas, Phys. Rev. B 110, 035108 (2024).
  73. L. Contessi, M. Schäfer, A. Gnech, A. Lovato, and U. van Kolck, A renormalizable theory for not-so-light nuclei, arXiv:2505.09299.
  74. M. Gattobigio, A. Kievsky, and M. Viviani, Embedding nuclear physics inside the unitary-limit window, Phys. Rev. C 100, 034004 (2019).
  75. S. König, Energies and radii of light nuclei around unitarity, Eur. Phys. J. A 56, 113 (2020).
  76. F. Hildenbrand, S. Elhatisari, Z. Ren, and U.-G. Meißner, Towards hypernuclei from nuclear lattice effective field theory, Eur. Phys. J. A 60, 215 (2024).
  77. H. Le, J. Haidenbauer, U.-G. Meißner, and A. Nogga, Separation energies of light Λ hypernuclei and their theoretical uncertainties, Eur. Phys. J. A 60, 3 (2024).
  78. D. Gazda, T. Y. Htun, and C. Forssén, Nuclear physics uncertainties in light hypernuclei, Phys. Rev. C 106, 054001 (2022).
  79. E. Hiyama, M. Kamimura, T. Motoba, T. Yamada, and Y. Yamamoto, Three body model study of A = 6, A = 7 hypernuclei: Halo and skin structures, Phys. Rev. C 53, 2075 (1996).
  80. E. Hiyama, M. Kamimura, K. Miyazaki, and T. Motoba, Gamma transitions in A = 7 hypernuclei and a possible derivation of hypernuclear size, Phys. Rev. C 59, 2351 (1999).
  81. J. M. Yao, Z. P. Li, K. Hagino, M. T. Win, Y. Zhang, and J. Meng, Impurity effect of lambda hyperon on collective excitations of atomic nuclei, Nucl. Phys. A 868–869, 12 (2011).
  82. D. Lonardoni and F. Pederiva, Medium-mass hypernuclei and the nucleon-isospin dependence of the three-body hyperon-nucleon-nucleon force, arXiv:1711.07521.
  83. M. Piarulli, et al., Light-nuclei spectra from chiral dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 052503 (2018).
  84. C. E. Rasmussen and C. K. I. Williams, Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning Adaptive Computation and Machine Learning (MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2008), 3rd ed.
  85. D. Duvenaud, Automatic model construction with Gaussian processes, Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge, 2014.
  86. D. J. C. MacKay, Bayesian non-linear modeling for the prediction competition, in Maximum Entropy and Bayesian Methods, edited by G. R. Heidbreder (Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 1996), pp. 221–234.
  87. S. Acharya, et al. (ALICE Collaboration), Measurement of the lifetime and Λ separation energy of HΛ3, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 102302 (2023).
  88. SheffieldML, GPy: A Gaussian processes framework, 2024, https://github.com/SheffieldML/GPy, accessed 10 October 2024.
  89. D. Foreman-Mackey, D. W. Hogg, D. Lang, and J. Goodman, emcee: The MCMC hammer, Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 125, 306 (2013).
  90. M. Bukov, M. Schmitt, and M. Dupont, Learning the ground state of a non-stoquastic quantum Hamiltonian in a rugged neural network landscape, SciPost Phys. 10, 147 (2021).
  91. M. Zaheer, S. Kottur, S. Ravanbakhsh, B. Poczos, R. Salakhutdinov, and A. Smola, Deep sets, arXiv:1703.06114.
  92. E. Wagstaff, F. B. Fuchs, M. Engelcke, I. Posner, and M. Osborne, On the limitations of representing functions on sets, arXiv:1901.09006.
  93. P. Massella, F. Barranco, D. Lonardoni, A. Lovato, F. Pederiva, and E. Vigezzi, Exact restoration of Galilei invariance in density functional calculations with quantum Monte Carlo, J. Phys. G 47, 035105 (2020).
  94. S. Sorella, Wave function optimization in the variational Monte Carlo method, Phys. Rev. B 71, 241103(R) (2005).
  95. J. Stokes, J. Izaac, N. Killoran, and G. Carleo, Quantum natural gradient, Quantum 4, 269 (2020).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 8, 013160– Published 11 February, 2026
  • Received 7 August 2025
  • Accepted 14 January 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation