Gaussian Universality and Its Breakdown in Tensor-Network Machine Learning

Shi-Tuan Wang; Zidu Liu; Li-Wei Yu

quant-phOct 5, 2026

Gaussian Universality and Its Breakdown in Tensor-Network Machine Learning

Authors: Shi-Tuan Wang, Zidu Liu, Li-Wei Yu

Organizations: Theoretical Physics Division, Chern Institute of Mathematics and LPMC, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China · Max Planck Institute of Quantum Optics, 85748 Garching, Germany

Abstract

Gaussian-process limits are powerful in describing overparameterized machine learning models, yet their validity in structured tensor-network architectures remains unclear. Here we analytically present a moment-based approach that identifies precise conditions for the emergence and breakdown of Gaussian universality in tensor-network learning models, with a focus on matrix product states. We prove that in the large bond dimension limit, the learning models with both local and global observables converge to Gaussian processes, with explicit finite-size bounds on higher-order moment deviations. Whereas in the large physical dimension limit, the Gaussian universality no longer persists: while the models with local observables retain Gaussian-process behavior, those global cases exhibit persistent non-Gaussian corrections. Our results reveal that Gaussian-process behavior in tensor-network learning is controlled not only by parameter number, but also by architectural scaling, observable locality, and the spectral properties.

Figures & tables

Fig. 1: Schematic summary of statistical behaviors arising in different tensor-network scaling regimes. For the local observable outcome $C(\hat{O}_{l})=\langle\psi|\hat{O}_{l}|\psi\rangle$ , as either $D$ or $d$ increases, the outcome distribution approaches a Gaussian distribution. For the global observable outcome $C(\hat{O}_{g})=\langle\psi|\hat{O}_{g}|\psi\rangle$ , as $D$ increases, the outcome distribution gradually approaches a Gaussian distribution, whereas for increasing $d$ , the outcome distribution is no longer Gaussian. For a finite sequence $\{\hat{O}_{ai}\}_{i=1}^{p}$ , one has $\mathcal{P}(C(\hat{O}_{a1}),\cdots,C(\hat{O}_{ap}))\sim\mathcal{N}\left(0,\varSigma\right)$ , $a\in\{l,g\}$ .

Observable Type	Asymptotic Regime	Gaussian?	Deviation Term
	$(D,n)\to\infty,\,D^{2}\ll d^{n}$	$\checkmark$	$\mathcal{O}(k^{2}/D^{2}d)+\mathcal{O}(\mathrm{poly}\left(k\right)D^{2}/d^{n})$
Local $\hat{O}_{l}$	$(D,n)\to\infty,\,D^{2}\gg d^{n}$	$\checkmark$	$\mathcal{O}(k^{2}d^{n/2}/D)+\mathcal{O}(k^{2}/d^{n})$
Local $\hat{O}_{l}$	$d\to\infty$	$\checkmark$	$\mathcal{O}(k^{2}D^{2}/d)$
Global $\hat{O}_{g}$	$(D,n)\to\infty$	$\checkmark$	$\mathcal{O}(nk!m^{k/2}/D)+\mathcal{O}(k^{2}/d^{n})$
Global $\hat{O}_{g}$	$d\to\infty$	$\times$	Non-vanishing * * * For explicit analytical expressions, see Sec. IV D of the Supplemental Material [ 1 ]

Table 1: Summary of the statistical regimes and asymptotic behaviors of output vector

\mathscr{C}

Fig. 2: Two-dimensional joint probability densities and their scaled marginal distributions obtained numerically with $n=15$ physical sites, bond dimension $D=128$ , and $4\times 10^{6}$ samples. The left panel shows the joint distribution of $\langle X\rangle$ and $\langle Z\rangle$ , while the right panel presents the distribution for $\langle\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(X+Z\right)\rangle$ and $\langle Z\rangle$ .

Fig. 3: Numerical distributions and theoretical predictions for MPS observables, using approximately $10^{7}$ samples for each parameter set. Upper panel: local outputs $C(\hat{O}_{l})$ for different system sizes $n$ at $D=32$ , compared with the predicted Gaussian distribution. The inset shows the excess kurtosis $\kappa$ as a function of $D$ . Lower panel: global outputs $C(\hat{O}_{g})$ at $d=64$ and $D=2$ , compared with a Gaussian distribution of equal variance. The inset shows $\kappa$ as a function of $d$ at $D=2$ .

Fig. S2: Subscript connection modes in the second-order case

Fig. S3: Subscript connection modes in the third-order case

Fig. S4: Output distribution with local operator basis ( $C(\hat{Q}_{l})$ )

Fig. S5: Output distribution with global operator basis ( $C(\hat{Q}_{g})$ )

Fig. S6: Representation diagram of $X_{l}^{k}$

Fig. S7: Representation diagram of the observation site

Fig. S8: Representation diagram of the non-observation site

Fig. S9: Representation diagram of $X_{g}^{k}$

Fig. S10: Representation diagram of a local observation site in $X_{g}^{k}$

Explore similar work

Quantitative Gaussian-Process limits of Tensor Programs
Jul 7, 2026Andrea Agazzi, Eloy Mosig García, Dario TrevisanTwo-Layer Neural Networks Gaussian Process
Laplace Approximation for Bayesian Tensor Network Kernel Machines
Apr 29, 2026Albert Saiapin, Kim BatselierBayesian Neural Networks Gaussian Process
1Delft Center for Systems and Control, Delft University of Technology
Universality of empirical risk minimization
Feb 17, 2022Andrea Montanari, Basil SaeedEmpirical Risk Minimization Neural Tangent Kernel
Department of Statistics and Department of Mathematics, Stanford University · Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University

Abstract

Explore similar work

Quantitative Gaussian-Process limits of Tensor Programs

Laplace Approximation for Bayesian Tensor Network Kernel Machines

Universality of empirical risk minimization