Supervised machine learning of ultracold atoms with speckle disorder

We analyze how accurately supervised machine learning techniques can predict the lowest energy levels of one-dimensional noninteracting ultracold atoms subject to the correlated disorder due to an optical speckle field. Deep neural networks with different numbers of hidden layers and neurons per layer are trained on large sets of instances of the speckle field, whose energy levels have been preventively determined via a high-order finite difference technique. The Fourier components of the speckle field are used as the feature vector to represent the speckle-field instances. A comprehensive analysis of the details that determine the possible success of supervised machine learning tasks, namely the depth and the width of the neural network, the size of the training set, and the magnitude of the regularization parameter, is presented. It is found that ground state energies of previously unseen instances can be predicted with an essentially negligible error given a computationally feasible number of training instances. First and second excited state energies can be predicted too, albeit with slightly lower accuracy and using more layers of hidden neurons. We also find that a three-layer neural network is remarkably resilient to Gaussian noise added to the training-set data (up to 10% noise level), suggesting that cold-atom quantum simulators could be used to train artificial neural networks.

[1]  A. A. Fedorenko,et al.  Density of states in an optical speckle potential , 2010, 1008.0589.

[2]  D. Delande,et al.  Mobility edge for cold atoms in laser speckle potentials. , 2014, Physical review letters.

[3]  David Ryan Koes,et al.  Protein-Ligand Scoring with Convolutional Neural Networks , 2016, Journal of chemical information and modeling.

[4]  G V Shlyapnikov,et al.  Anderson localization of expanding Bose-Einstein condensates in random potentials. , 2006, Physical review letters.

[5]  S. Pilati,et al.  Anderson localization in optical lattices with correlated disorder , 2015, 1510.05121.

[6]  Cícero Nogueira dos Santos,et al.  Boosting Docking-Based Virtual Screening with Deep Learning , 2016, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[7]  A. Aspect,et al.  Direct observation of Anderson localization of matter waves in a controlled disorder , 2008, Nature.

[8]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Assessment and Validation of Machine Learning Methods for Predicting Molecular Atomization Energies. , 2013, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[9]  J. Behler Atom-centered symmetry functions for constructing high-dimensional neural network potentials. , 2011, The Journal of chemical physics.

[10]  Edgar A. Engel,et al.  Ab initio thermodynamics of liquid and solid water , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[11]  Sebastian Johann Wetzel,et al.  Unsupervised learning of phase transitions: from principal component analysis to variational autoencoders , 2017, Physical review. E.

[12]  J. Goodman Speckle Phenomena in Optics: Theory and Applications , 2020 .

[13]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Finding Density Functionals with Machine Learning , 2011, Physical review letters.

[14]  B. Demarco,et al.  Three-Dimensional Anderson Localization of Ultracold Matter , 2011, Science.

[15]  E. Demler,et al.  A cold-atom Fermi–Hubbard antiferromagnet , 2017, Nature.

[16]  P. Marko,et al.  ABSENCE OF DIFFUSION IN CERTAIN RANDOM LATTICES , 2008 .

[17]  A. Aspect,et al.  Three-dimensional localization of ultracold atoms in an optical disordered potential , 2011, Nature Physics.

[18]  Li Li,et al.  Understanding Machine-learned Density Functionals , 2014, ArXiv.

[19]  Li Li,et al.  Bypassing the Kohn-Sham equations with machine learning , 2016, Nature Communications.

[20]  A. Aspect,et al.  Anderson localization of ultracold atoms , 2009 .

[21]  Qiang Yang,et al.  A Survey on Transfer Learning , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[22]  J. Dalibard,et al.  Many-Body Physics with Ultracold Gases , 2007, 0704.3011.

[23]  Alexandre Tkatchenko,et al.  Quantum-chemical insights from deep tensor neural networks , 2016, Nature Communications.

[24]  Steven D. Brown,et al.  Neural network models of potential energy surfaces , 1995 .

[25]  Kristof T. Schütt,et al.  How to represent crystal structures for machine learning: Towards fast prediction of electronic properties , 2013, 1307.1266.

[26]  Christopher. Simons,et al.  Machine learning with Python , 2017 .

[27]  T. Ohtsuki,et al.  Deep Learning the Quantum Phase Transitions in Random Electron Systems: Applications to Three Dimensions , 2016, 1612.04909.

[28]  K. Müller,et al.  Machine Learning Predictions of Molecular Properties: Accurate Many-Body Potentials and Nonlocality in Chemical Space , 2015, The journal of physical chemistry letters.

[29]  Kyle Mills,et al.  Deep learning and the Schrödinger equation , 2017, ArXiv.

[30]  Dong-Ling Deng,et al.  Machine Learning Topological States , 2016, 1609.09060.

[31]  G. Carleo,et al.  Symmetries and Many-Body Excitations with Neural-Network Quantum States. , 2018, Physical review letters.

[32]  R. Kondor,et al.  Gaussian approximation potentials: the accuracy of quantum mechanics, without the electrons. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[33]  P. Anderson,et al.  Scaling Theory of Localization: Absence of Quantum Diffusion in Two Dimensions , 1979 .

[34]  Michele Parrinello,et al.  Generalized neural-network representation of high-dimensional potential-energy surfaces. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[35]  Felix M. Izrailev,et al.  LOCALIZATION AND THE MOBILITY EDGE IN ONE-DIMENSIONAL POTENTIALS WITH CORRELATED DISORDER , 1999 .

[36]  John C. Snyder,et al.  Orbital-free bond breaking via machine learning. , 2013, The Journal of chemical physics.

[37]  J. Behler Neural network potential-energy surfaces in chemistry: a tool for large-scale simulations. , 2011, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[38]  Lei Wang,et al.  Discovering phase transitions with unsupervised learning , 2016, 1606.00318.

[39]  R. Melko,et al.  Machine Learning Phases of Strongly Correlated Fermions , 2016, Physical Review X.

[40]  Semiclassical spectral function and density of states in speckle potentials , 2016, 1606.02156.

[41]  Sandro Stringari,et al.  Theory of ultracold atomic Fermi gases , 2007, 0706.3360.

[42]  Pedro J. Ballester,et al.  Performance of machine-learning scoring functions in structure-based virtual screening , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[43]  P. Popelier,et al.  Potential energy surfaces fitted by artificial neural networks. , 2010, The journal of physical chemistry. A.

[44]  J. Goodman Statistical Properties of Laser Speckle Patterns , 1963 .

[45]  Marcos Rigol,et al.  Observation of spatial charge and spin correlations in the 2D Fermi-Hubbard model , 2016, Science.

[46]  A. Gross,et al.  Representing high-dimensional potential-energy surfaces for reactions at surfaces by neural networks , 2004 .

[47]  A. Aspect,et al.  One-Dimensional Anderson Localization in Certain Correlated Random Potentials , 2009, 0902.0107.

[48]  Roger G. Melko,et al.  Machine learning phases of matter , 2016, Nature Physics.

[49]  Michael Knap,et al.  Classifying snapshots of the doped Hubbard model with machine learning , 2018, Nature Physics.

[50]  David A. Huse,et al.  Observation of antiferromagnetic correlations in the Hubbard model with ultracold atoms , 2014, Nature.

[51]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[52]  P. Zoller,et al.  The cold atom Hubbard toolbox , 2004, cond-mat/0410614.

[53]  Symmetries and many-body excited states with neural-network quantum states , 2018 .

[54]  J. Behler Perspective: Machine learning potentials for atomistic simulations. , 2016, The Journal of chemical physics.

[55]  E. M. Inack,et al.  Projective quantum Monte Carlo simulations guided by unrestricted neural network states , 2018, Physical Review B.

[56]  J M Huntley Speckle photography fringe analysis: assessment of current algorithms. , 1989, Applied optics.

[57]  Massimo Inguscio,et al.  Anderson localization of a non-interacting Bose–Einstein condensate , 2008, Nature.

[58]  M. Lukin,et al.  Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator , 2017, Nature.

[59]  S. Pilati,et al.  Anderson localization of matter waves in quantum-chaos theory , 2015, 1503.04332.

[60]  Dumitru Erhan,et al.  Training Deep Neural Networks on Noisy Labels with Bootstrapping , 2014, ICLR.

[61]  Nir Shavit,et al.  Deep Learning is Robust to Massive Label Noise , 2017, ArXiv.

[62]  Walid Gomaa,et al.  Machine learning in computational docking , 2015, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[63]  G. Modugno Anderson localization in Bose–Einstein condensates , 2010, 1009.0555.

[64]  Guigang Zhang,et al.  Deep Learning , 2016, Int. J. Semantic Comput..

[65]  Jimmy Ba,et al.  Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization , 2014, ICLR.

[66]  Matthias Troyer,et al.  Solving the quantum many-body problem with artificial neural networks , 2016, Science.

[67]  S. Huber,et al.  Learning phase transitions by confusion , 2016, Nature Physics.

[68]  Carlo Baldassi,et al.  Efficiency of quantum vs. classical annealing in nonconvex learning problems , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.