 state prior to their application as operators, so they are often used in conjunction to a starting ansatz: $$\label{eq:CPS}
 |\Psi_{\text{CPS}}\rangle = \sum_{s_1 \ldots s_L = 1}^{d}
 \left( \prod_{\alpha} C^{[\alpha]}_{ s_{v(\alpha,1)} \ldots s_{v(\alpha,k)} } \right)
 \Phi^{0}_{s_1 \ldots s_L} |s_1 \ldots s_L\rangle.$$ In this representation, $|\Phi^{0}\rangle = \sum \Phi^{0}_{s_1 \ldots s_L} |s_1 \ldots s_L\rangle$ is exactly the starting ansatz state, capable of controlling desired symmetries; e.g. nonzero $\Phi^{0}_{s_1 \ldots s_L}$ components should be only those with the right particle number. It is clear that correlator product factors $C^{[\alpha]}$ can not break such symmetry, since sectors with zero amplitude will stay zero amplitude. Nevertheless, $C^{[\alpha]}$ can build correlations, which is especially useful when $|\Phi^{0}\rangle$ is a somehow uncorrelated trial state, like a Slater determinant (in particular, see the MPS representation for Slater determinants in section \[sec:Slater\]).

Notice two facts involving : first, the action of correlator product factors $C^{[\alpha]}$ can be applied in any ordering, because they are all diagonal in the canonical basis, so they must commute as they share a basis of eigenvectors altogether. Secondly, is clearly a Tensor Network, since all the relations between the various $C^{[\alpha]}$ and $\Phi^{0}$ are linear; so we can use arguments treated in this chapter to study CPS (e.g. to guess entanglement bounds). You could argue that such picture does not match exactly the definition of TN we gave in, since the same index is shared by more tensors than merely two, but this is easily worked around by adding triple Kronecker delta nodes in the network $\delta^{[3]}_{i,j,k} = \delta_{i,j} \delta_{j,k}$.

Precisely, consider a two-site diagonal operator $\Theta$, defined as $$\Theta = \sum_{s_1, s_2 = 1}^{d} C^{[1\leftrightarrow 2
state prior to their application as operators, so they are frequently use in conjunction to a starting ansatz: $ $ \label{eq: CPS } 
  |\Psi_{\text{CPS}}\rangle = \sum_{s_1 \ldots s_L = 1}^{d } 
  \left (\prod_{\alpha } C^{[\alpha ] } _ { s_{v(\alpha,1) } \ldots s_{v(\alpha, k) } } \right) 
  \Phi^{0}_{s_1 \ldots s_L } |s_1 \ldots s_L\rangle.$$ In this representation, $ |\Phi^{0}\rangle = \sum \Phi^{0}_{s_1 \ldots s_L } |s_1 \ldots s_L\rangle$ is precisely the starting ansatz state, capable of manipulate hope symmetries; e.g. nonzero $ \Phi^{0}_{s_1 \ldots s_L}$ components should be only those with the correct particle number. It is well-defined that correlator merchandise factors $ C^{[\alpha]}$ cannot break such symmetry, since sectors with zero amplitude will stay zero amplitude. however, $ C^{[\alpha]}$ can build correlations, which is especially utilitarian when $ |\Phi^{0}\rangle$ is a somehow uncorrelated trial state, like a Slater determinant (in particular, understand the MPS representation for Slater determinants in section \[sec: Slater\ ]). 

 Notice two facts involve: first, the action of correlator product factors $ C^{[\alpha]}$ can be applied in any ordering, because they are all diagonal in the canonical basis, so they must commute as they share a basis of eigenvectors altogether. Secondly, is clearly a Tensor Network, since all the relations between the assorted $ C^{[\alpha]}$ and $ \Phi^{0}$ are linear; so we can practice argument treat in this chapter to study CPS (e.g. to think entanglement bounds). You could argue that such picture does not match precisely the definition of TN we gave in, since the same index is shared by more tensors than merely two, but this is easily work around by adding triple Kronecker delta nodes in the net $ \delta^{[3]}_{i, j, k } = \delta_{i, j } \delta_{j, k}$. 

 Precisely, regard a two - web site aslant operator $ \Theta$, defined as $ $ \Theta = \sum_{s_1, s_2 = 1}^{d } C^{[1\leftrightarrow 2
 stwte prior to their appligation as operators, so vhey ars often jsed in conjunction to a stactint ansqtz: $$\label{eq:CPS}
 |\Psi_{\text{ZPS}}\rangle = \sum_{s_1 \leots w_L = 1}^{d}
 \left( \prod_{\alpmc} C^{[\allma]}_{ s_{v(\cl'ha,1)} \ldots s_{v(\alpma,k)} } \right)
 \[hi^{0}_{s_1 \ldots s_L} |v_1 \udlts s_L\rangle.$$ In this representation, $|\Phi^{0}\ranblf = \sum \Phi^{0}_{s_1 \ldjts x_J} |s_1 \mdots s_L\rangle$ is exactly the starfing anvatz state, calable of controlling desirfd sjmmetries; e.g. nonzego $\Phi^{0}_{s_1 \ldoja s_J}$ components rhould be only those wjth the right particle number. Ig is elear that xoerepdtor producv factjrs $C^{[\alpha]}$ can not bseak suvh symmetry, sikce sxctoes with zero amplitudx will stay zero ampjitude. Neeextheless, $C^{[\alpha]}$ can byiod cotreladionr, whkch ix sspeciwllb useful whsn $|\Phi^{0}\ranglw$ is a somehow uncotrqoated trial sfate, lykq a Slater determinant (in particular, set the MPS representation for Slater determinants ln sectiog \[sec:Slater\]).

Notice two facts involving : first, the dctioi uf eirrelxrog product factors $C^{[\alpha]}$ can be applied in anr otdvring, because then are all diagonal ij yre canonical casis, so fhey must commute ws they sharw a basis of rigenvectors altogether. Secindly, is clecrlt a Tensor Network, since all che rekatioms between the various $E^{[\alpha]}$ and $\Phi^{0}$ arf linear; au we can use argjmekts treated in this chapter tj study C'S (e.g. to guers emtanglqment bounfs). Yom could argue that duch kictura does not match exactly the definition oh TN we gave on, sitce the fame lndex is shared by more tensots than mzrely gwo, but thps is easmly worked awound by addith triple Kroiecker dejta bodew in thd network $\delta^{[3]}_{o,j,k} = \deltc_{n,j} \delta_{j,j}$.

Precisely, considev a tdk-site diagonal ipetqtor $\Theta$, defonea af $$\Nheva = \stk_{s_1, s_2 = 1}^{d} C^{[1\lefdrigftaftow 2
state prior to their application as operators, are used in to a starting \ldots = 1}^{d} \left( C^{[\alpha]}_{ s_{v(\alpha,1)} \ldots } \right) \Phi^{0}_{s_1 \ldots s_L} |s_1 s_L\rangle.$$ In this representation, $|\Phi^{0}\rangle = \sum \Phi^{0}_{s_1 \ldots s_L} |s_1 \ldots s_L\rangle$ exactly the starting ansatz state, capable of controlling desired symmetries; e.g. nonzero $\Phi^{0}_{s_1 s_L}$ should only with the right particle number. It is clear that correlator product factors $C^{[\alpha]}$ can not break symmetry, since sectors with zero amplitude will stay amplitude. Nevertheless, $C^{[\alpha]}$ can correlations, which is especially useful $|\Phi^{0}\rangle$ a somehow trial like Slater determinant (in see the MPS representation for Slater determinants in section \[sec:Slater\]). Notice two facts involving : first, the of correlator $C^{[\alpha]}$ can applied any because they are in the canonical basis, so they they share a basis of eigenvectors altogether. Secondly, clearly a Network, since all the relations between various $C^{[\alpha]}$ and $\Phi^{0}$ are linear; so we use arguments treated in this chapter to study CPS (e.g. to guess entanglement bounds). You that such picture does match exactly the of we in, the same is shared by more tensors than merely two, but this is worked around by adding triple Kronecker delta nodes in the = \delta_{j,k}$. Precisely, consider two-site diagonal operator $\Theta$, as = \sum_{s_1, s_2 = 2
 state prior to their applicatIon as operaTors, sO thEy aRe OfteN useD in conjunction TO a stArting ansatz: $$\label{eq:CPS}
 |\psi_{\teXt{cpS}}\raNGlE = \sum_{s_1 \Ldots s_L = 1}^{D}
 \LeFT( \ProD_{\aLpHa} C^{[\AlPHa]}_{ S_{v(\alpHa,1)} \lDots s_{v(\aLpha,k)} } \right)
 \phi^{0}_{S_1 \lDots s_L} |s_1 \ldots S_l\rAngle.$$ In thiS rePresentation, $|\phi^{0}\Rangle = \SuM \PhI^{0}_{S_1 \ldotS s_L} |S_1 \ldotS s_L\ranGLe$ is exActly the sTaRTing anSAtz statE, CApAble Of controlling desiREd SYmmetries; e.g. nonZero $\PhI^{0}_{s_1 \LDoTS S_L}$ cOmpOnents shouLd Be onlY Those wiTH tHE RIghT Particle numbeR. It is clear tHAt cOrrelaToR prODuct faCtors $c^{[\aLPha]}$ Can not break Such Symmetry, sInce seCTors witH Zero ampLitude WilL stAy zeRO aMpLitUdE. nevERtHelESs, $C^{[\Alpha]}$ can BuIlD corrElatIONS, WhicH is EspeCiallY useful when $|\PhI^{0}\raNgle$ IS a sOmehoW uncoRrelAtEd triAl statE, like A SLater determinanT (in pArticular, See ThE MPs rEpresENtatioN foR SlAter detErminanTS in SeCTIOn \[Sec:Slater\]).

Notice two FaCTS iNvolving : First, tHE aCtIOn of corrElAtoR proDUCt facTors $c^{[\AlPha]}$ can be ApplieD In AnY orderiNg, BecausE tHey Are All diAGonaL in the CanonicaL basiS, So they must commUTe as they share A BaSIS oF EigeNveCtors altogeTher. sEconDly, iS ClEarLY a TenSor NeTwORk, SInce all the relations BeTween tHe varIous $C^{[\alpha]}$ and $\phi^{0}$ are lineAR; SO we can usE argUMeNTs treated in thiS chapTer to study cpS (e.g. to guEss enTanglemeNt bounds). YOU Could argUe tHat SucH piCTUrE does not match EXActlY tHe definItiOn of TN wE gaVe iN, siNce ThE same indeX is shareD bY mOrE tEnsOrs thAN merely tWo, But ThIs iS easiLY workeD arouNd by AdDiNG trIple KroNEcKER delTa NoDes iN thE nEtworK $\delTA^{[3]}_{i,j,K} = \delta_{i,J} \delta_{j,k}$.

PRecISely, CoNsIder a twO-site diagonal OpErator $\ThetA$, dEfiNed as $$\THETa = \sum_{s_1, s_2 = 1}^{d} c^{[1\leftrightarrow 2
 state prior to their appl ication as  oper ato rs,  s o th ey a re often usedi n co njunction to a startin g ans at z : $$ \ la bel{e q:CPS}|\ P s i_{ \t ex t{C PS } }\ rangl e =  \sum_{ s_1 \ldots  s_ L= 1}^{d}
 \l e ft ( \prod_{\ alp ha} C^{[\alp ha] }_{ s_ {v (\a l pha,1 )}\ldot s s_{v ( \alpha ,k)} } \r ig h t)
 \P h i^{0}_{ s _ 1\ldo ts s_L} |s_1 \ldo t ss _L\rangle.$$ I n this  r e pr e s ent ati on, $|\Phi ^{ 0}\ra n gle = \ s um \ P hi^ { 0}_{s_1 \ldot s s_L} |s_1 \ld ots s_ L\ ran g le$ is  exac tl y  th e startingansa tz state,  capab l e of co n trollin g desi red  sy mmet r ie s;  e. g. non z er o $ \ Phi ^{0}_{s_ 1\l dotss_L} $ c o mpon ent s sh ouldbe only those  wi th t h e r ightparti clenu mber.  It is  clea rthat correlator  pro duct fact ors  $ C^{ [\ alpha ] }$ can  no t b reak su ch symm e try ,s i n ce  sectors with zero  a m p li tude wil l stay ze ro amplitud e.  Ne vert h e less,  $C^ { [\ alpha]}$  can b u il dcorrela ti ons, w hi chisespec i ally  usefu l when $ |\Phi ^ {0}\rangle$ is a somehow unc o rr e l at e d tr ial  state, lik e aS late r de t er min a nt (i n par ti c ul a r, see the MPS repr es entati on fo r Slater dete rminants i n s ection \ [sec : Sl a ter\]).

Notic e two  facts inv o lving :first , the ac tion of c o r relatorpro duc t f act o r s$C^{[\alpha]} $ canbe  applie d i n any o rde rin g,bec au se they a re all d ia go na linthe c a nonicalba sis ,sotheym ust co mmute  asth ey sha re a ba s is o f ei ge nv ecto rsal toget her. Sec ondly,is clearl y a Tens or  N etwork,  since all th erelationsbe twe en the v arious $ C^{[\alpha]}$ and $\Phi ^ {0}$ ar e l inear ; so  we can u seargume nts treate d in t his c ha pte r to st u d yCPS  ( e.g. to gu e s s e ntang le ment  bounds ). You could argue tha t such pictur e d oesn o tmat c he xac tl y  th e definition of T N we gavein ,  s ince the s a mein dex issharedby mo r e tenso rs than m erely two ,butt h isis easilyworked a round bya dding tr ipleKro necker  d elt a nod es int henetwo rk $\d el ta^{[3 ]}_{i ,j ,k} = \d elta_{i,j} \delta_{j,k} $.

Pr ecise ly,  consider  at wo- site diag onal  operator$\T het a$, d efi n ed as  $$\ T he ta=  \sum _{s_ 1 , s_2 = 1 } ^{ d}C ^ {[ 1\leftright a r r ow2
 state_prior to_their application as operators,_so they_are_often used_in_conjunction to a_starting ansatz: $$\label{eq:CPS}
_|\Psi_{\text{CPS}}\rangle = \sum_{s_1 \ldots_s_L = 1}^{d}
_\left(_\prod_{\alpha} C^{[\alpha]}_{ s_{v(\alpha,1)} \ldots s_{v(\alpha,k)} } \right)
 \Phi^{0}_{s_1 \ldots s_L} |s_1 \ldots s_L\rangle.$$ In_this_representation, $|\Phi^{0}\rangle_=_\sum_\Phi^{0}_{s_1 \ldots s_L} |s_1 \ldots_s_L\rangle$ is exactly the starting_ansatz state,_capable of controlling desired symmetries; e.g. nonzero $\Phi^{0}_{s_1_\ldots_s_L}$ components should_be only those with the right particle number. It_is clear that correlator product factors_$C^{[\alpha]}$ can not_break_such_symmetry, since sectors with_zero amplitude will stay zero amplitude._Nevertheless, $C^{[\alpha]}$ can build correlations, which_is especially useful when $|\Phi^{0}\rangle$ is a_somehow uncorrelated trial state, like a_Slater determinant (in particular, see_the MPS_representation for Slater determinants in_section \[sec:Slater\]).

Notice two_facts involving_: first, the_action of correlator product factors $C^{[\alpha]}$_can be applied_in any ordering, because they are_all_diagonal in the_canonical_basis,_so they_must commute as_they_share a_basis_of eigenvectors altogether. Secondly, is clearly_a_Tensor Network, since all the relations between_the various $C^{[\alpha]}$ and_$\Phi^{0}$_are linear; so we_can use arguments treated in_this chapter to study CPS (e.g._to guess_entanglement bounds)._You could argue that such picture does not match exactly the_definition of TN we gave in,_since the same index_is shared_by_more tensors than_merely_two, but_this is easily worked around by adding_triple Kronecker_delta nodes in the network $\delta^{[3]}_{i,j,k}_= \delta_{i,j} \delta_{j,k}$.

Precisely, consider_a_two-site diagonal operator $\Theta$, defined as_$$\Theta = \sum_{s_1, s_2 = 1}^{d}_C^{[1\leftrightarrow 2