Tensor learning with orthogonal, Lorentz, and symplectic symmetries
Wilson G. Gregory, Josu\'e Tonelli-Cueto, Nicholas F. Marshall, Andrew S. Lee, Soledad Villar

TL;DR
This paper develops machine learning architectures that leverage orthogonal, Lorentz, and symplectic symmetries in tensor functions, improving performance in scientific applications like material science and time series analysis.
Contribution
It introduces universally expressive equivariant models for tensors exploiting specific group symmetries, with applications across multiple scientific domains.
Findings
Equivariant models outperform non-equivariant baselines.
Models effectively handle symmetries in tensor functions.
Applications include material science, computer science, and time series analysis.
Abstract
Tensors are a fundamental data structure for many scientific contexts, such as time series analysis, materials science, and physics, among many others. Improving our ability to produce and handle tensors is essential to efficiently address problems in these domains. In this paper, we show how to exploit the underlying symmetries of functions that map tensors to tensors. More concretely, we develop universally expressive equivariant machine learning architectures on tensors that exploit that, in many cases, these tensor functions are equivariant with respect to the diagonal action of the orthogonal, Lorentz, and/or symplectic groups. We showcase our results on three problems coming from material science, theoretical computer science, and time series analysis. For time series, we combine our method with the increasingly popular path signatures approach, which is also invariant with…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2026 Poster
**Originality** Extending equivariance theory to Lorentz and symplectic groups in a unified tensor framework is new and meaningful. **Quality** The theoretical development seems mathematically rigorous, consistent, and well-supported by references in invariant theory. Empirical results, though synthetic or semi-synthetic, convincingly show the advantage of symmetry-aware architectures across different domains. **Clarity** Despite mathematical density, definitions and proofs are clearly sta
All data are synthetic or toy (the stress–strain task uses the Garanger et al. (2024) dataset, which if I understood correctly is still a simulated material data), no large-scale, real-world or high-dimensional experiments. No complexity or scalability discussion, crucial for practical adoption. Comparative evaluation is narrow. Competes mostly with MLPs and one prior symmetry-enforcing method, no comparison to modern equivariant neural architectures (E3NN, LieConv, TFN). Without these, it’s h
I am a big fan of this work. The paper is very well-written, and generalizes several existing results. While the most general constructions are not practically implementable, the authors derive specializations in specific practical settings which are practical to implement. I think the field will benefit from having these general characterizations in one place.
The empirical comparisons could be strengthened (see comments below).
* Provides a unified theoretical construction of equivariant tensor functions across orthogonal, Lorentz, and symplectic groups. * Avoids Clebsch–Gordan contractions by using invariant scalar functions and tensor assembly, leading to simpler implementations. * The mathematical framework (Theorem 1, Corollaries 1–3) is general and connects to isotropic tensor theory. * Demonstrates practical versatility across physics, geometry, and learning tasks. * Empirical results show strong improvem
1. **Notation clarity:** The paper should explicitly distinguish permutation indices (e.g., $i,j,k,l$) from “rotational” or group indices (e.g., $a,b,c,d$). Figure 1 blurs this distinction, making it hard to track which quantities are equivariant to which symmetries. 2. **Parameterization of $q_{t,\sigma,J}$:** It would be helpful to more clearly explain how the MLPs are used in practice on the collection of inner product of input vectors. I understand that each $q_{t,\sigma,J}$ outputs
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsTensor decomposition and applications · Computational Physics and Python Applications · Seismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
MethodsFocus
