1. Learning trivializing flows, David Albandea, Luigi Del Debbio, Pilar Hern\'andez, Richard Kenway, J. Marsh Rossney, and Alberto Ramos, Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (7) 676, (2023), arXiv:2302.08408 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11838-8
2. Fourier-flow model generating Feynman paths, Shile Chen, Oleh Savchuk, Shiqi Zheng, Baoyi Chen, Horst Stoecker, Lingxiao Wang, and Kai Zhou, Phys. Rev. D 107 (5) 056001, (2023), arXiv:2211.03470 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.056001
3. Deformation Theory of Boltzmann Distributions, B\'alint M\'at\'e, and Fran\ccois Fleuret, 36th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems}: {Workshop on Machine Learning and the Physical Sciences, (2022), arXiv:2210.13772
4. Stochastic normalizing flows for lattice field theory, Michele Caselle, Elia Cellini, Alessandro Nada, and Marco Panero, PoS LATTICE2022 005, (2023), arXiv:2210.03139 doi:10.22323/1.430.0005
5. GomalizingFlow.jl: A Julia package for Flow-based sampling algorithm for lattice field theory, Akio Tomiya, and Satoshi Terasaki, (2022), arXiv:2208.08903
6. Sampling QCD field configurations with gauge-equivariant flow models, Ryan Abbott, and others, PoS LATTICE2022 036, (2023), arXiv:2208.03832 doi:10.22323/1.430.0036
7. Gauge-equivariant flow models for sampling in lattice field theories with pseudofermions, Ryan Abbott, and others, Phys. Rev. D 106 (7) 074506, (2022), arXiv:2207.08945 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.074506
8. Conditional normalizing flow for Markov chain Monte~Carlo sampling in the critical region of lattice field theory, Ankur Singha, Dipankar Chakrabarti, and Vipul Arora, Phys. Rev. D 107 (1) 014512, (2023), arXiv:2207.00980 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.014512
9. Learning lattice quantum field theories with equivariant continuous flows, Mathis Gerdes, Pim de Haan, Corrado Rainone, Roberto Bondesan, and Miranda C. N. Cheng, SciPost Phys. 15 (6) 238, (2023), arXiv:2207.00283 doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.15.6.238
10. Flow-based density of states for complex actions, Jan M. Pawlowski, and Julian M. Urban, Phys. Rev. D 108 (5) 054511, (2023), arXiv:2203.01243 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.054511
11. Flow-based sampling in the lattice Schwinger model at criticality, Michael S. Albergo, Denis Boyda, Kyle Cranmer, Daniel C. Hackett, Gurtej Kanwar, S\'ebastien Racani\`ere, Danilo J. Rezende, Fernando Romero-L\'opez, Phiala E. Shanahan, and Julian M. Urban, Phys. Rev. D 106 (1) 014514, (2022), arXiv:2202.11712 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.014514
12. Stochastic normalizing flows as non-equilibrium transformations, Michele Caselle, Elia Cellini, Alessandro Nada, and Marco Panero, JHEP 07 015, (2022), arXiv:2201.08862 doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2022)015
13. Tackling critical slowing down using global correction steps with equivariant flows: the case of the Schwinger model, Jacob Finkenrath, (2022), arXiv:2201.02216
14. Neural Network Field Transformation and Its Application in HMC, Xiao-Yong Jin, PoS LATTICE2021 600, (2022), arXiv:2201.01862 doi:10.22323/1.396.0600
15. HMC with Normalizing Flows, Sam Foreman, Taku Izubuchi, Luchang Jin, Xiao-Yong Jin, James C. Osborn, and Akio Tomiya, PoS LATTICE2021 073, (2022), arXiv:2112.01586 doi:10.22323/1.396.0073
16. LeapfrogLayers: A Trainable Framework for Effective Topological Sampling, Sam Foreman, Xiao-Yong Jin, and James C. Osborn, PoS LATTICE2021 508, (2022), arXiv:2112.01582 doi:10.22323/1.396.0508
17. Scaling Up Machine Learning For Quantum Field Theory with Equivariant Continuous Flows, Pim de Haan, Corrado Rainone, Miranda C. N. Cheng, and Roberto Bondesan, (2021), arXiv:2110.02673
18. Inverse Renormalization Group in Quantum Field Theory, Dimitrios Bachtis, Gert Aarts, Francesco Di Renzo, and Biagio Lucini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (8) 081603, (2022), arXiv:2107.00466 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.081603
19. Flow-based sampling for multimodal and extended-mode distributions in lattice field theory, Daniel C. Hackett, Chung-Chun Hsieh, Sahil Pontula, Michael S. Albergo, Denis Boyda, Jiunn-Wei Chen, Kai-Feng Chen, Kyle Cranmer, Gurtej Kanwar, and Phiala E. Shanahan, (2021), arXiv:2107.00734
20. Flow-based sampling for fermionic lattice field theories, Michael S. Albergo, Gurtej Kanwar, S\'ebastien Racani\`ere, Danilo J. Rezende, Julian M. Urban, Denis Boyda, Kyle Cranmer, Daniel C. Hackett, and Phiala E. Shanahan, Phys. Rev. D 104 (11) 114507, (2021), arXiv:2106.05934 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.114507
21. Efficient modeling of trivializing maps for lattice {\ensuremath{\phi}}4 theory using normalizing flows: A first look at scalability, Luigi Del Debbio, Joe Marsh Rossney, and Michael Wilson, Phys. Rev. D 104 (9) 094507, (2021), arXiv:2105.12481 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.094507
22. Adaptive Monte Carlo augmented with normalizing flows, Marylou Gabri\'e, Grant M. Rotskoff, and Eric Vanden-Eijnden, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 119 (10) e2109420119, (2022), arXiv:2105.12603 doi:10.1073/pnas.2109420119
23. Unbiased Monte Carlo cluster updates with autoregressive neural networks, Dian Wu, Riccardo Rossi, and Giuseppe Carleo, Phys. Rev. Res. 3 (4) L042024, (2021), arXiv:2105.05650 doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.3.L042024
24. Deep Learning Hamiltonian Monte Carlo, Sam Foreman, Xiao-Yong Jin, and James C. Osborn, 9th International Conference on Learning Representations, (2021), arXiv:2105.03418
25. Gauge covariant neural network for quarks and gluons, Yuki Nagai, and Akio Tomiya, Phys. Rev. D 111 (7) 074501, (2025), arXiv:2103.11965 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.074501
26. Introduction to Normalizing Flows for Lattice Field Theory, Michael S. Albergo, Denis Boyda, Daniel C. Hackett, Gurtej Kanwar, Kyle Cranmer, S\'ebastien Racani\`ere, Danilo Jimenez Rezende, and Phiala E. Shanahan, (2021), arXiv:2101.08176
27. Normalizing Flows and the Real-Time Sign Problem, Scott Lawrence, and Yukari Yamauchi, Phys. Rev. D 103 (11) 114509, (2021), arXiv:2101.05755 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.114509
28. Self-learning Monte Carlo for non-Abelian gauge theory with dynamical fermions, Yuki Nagai, Akinori Tanaka, and Akio Tomiya, Phys. Rev. D 107 (5) 054501, (2023), arXiv:2010.11900 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.054501
29. Sampling using $SU(N)$ gauge equivariant flows, Denis Boyda, Gurtej Kanwar, S\'ebastien Racani\`ere, Danilo Jimenez Rezende, Michael S. Albergo, Kyle Cranmer, Daniel C. Hackett, and Phiala E. Shanahan, Phys. Rev. D 103 (7) 074504, (2021), arXiv:2008.05456 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.074504
30. Estimation of Thermodynamic Observables in Lattice Field Theories with Deep Generative Models, Kim A. Nicoli, Christopher J. Anders, Lena Funcke, Tobias Hartung, Karl Jansen, Pan Kessel, Shinichi Nakajima, and Paolo Stornati, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (3) 032001, (2021), arXiv:2007.07115 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.032001
31. Array programming with NumPy, Charles R. Harris, and others, Nature 585 (7825) 357–362, (2020), arXiv:2006.10256 doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2
32. Language Models are Few-Shot Learners, Tom B. Brown, and others, Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 33 1901, (2020), arXiv:2005.14165
33. Extending machine learning classification capabilities with histogram reweighting, Dimitrios Bachtis, Gert Aarts, and Biagio Lucini, Phys. Rev. E 102 (3) 033303, (2020), arXiv:2004.14341 doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.102.033303
34. Equivariant flow-based sampling for lattice gauge theory, Gurtej Kanwar, Michael S. Albergo, Denis Boyda, Kyle Cranmer, Daniel C. Hackett, S\'ebastien Racani\`ere, Danilo Jimenez Rezende, and Phiala E. Shanahan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (12) 121601, (2020), arXiv:2003.06413 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.121601
35. Normalizing Flows on Tori and Spheres, Danilo Jimenez Rezende, George Papamakarios, S\'ebastien Racani\`ere, Michael S. Albergo, Gurtej Kanwar, Phiala E. Shanahan, and Kyle Cranmer, (2020), arXiv:2002.02428
36. Normalizing Flows for Probabilistic Modeling and Inference, George Papamakarios, Eric Nalisnick, Danilo Jimenez Rezende, Shakir Mohamed, and Balaji Lakshminarayanan, J. Machine Learning Res. 22 (1) 2617–2680, (2021), arXiv:1912.02762 doi:10.5555/3546258.3546315
37. Asymptotically unbiased estimation of physical observables with neural samplers, Kim A. Nicoli, Shinichi Nakajima, Nils Strodthoff, Wojciech Samek, Klaus-Robert Müller, and Pan Kessel, Phys. Rev. E 101 (2) 023304, (2020), arXiv:1910.13496 doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.101.023304
38. SciPy 1.0--Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python, Pauli Virtanen, and others, Nature Meth. 17 261, (2020), arXiv:1907.10121 doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2
39. Flow-based generative models for Markov chain Monte Carlo in lattice field theory, M. S. Albergo, G. Kanwar, and P. E. Shanahan, Phys. Rev. D 100 (3) 034515, (2019), arXiv:1904.12072 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.034515
40. Status and Future Perspectives for Lattice Gauge Theory Calculations to the Exascale and Beyond, B\'alint Jo\'o, Chulwoo Jung, Norman H. Christ, William Detmold, Robert Edwards, Martin Savage, and Phiala Shanahan, Eur. Phys. J. A 55 (11) 199, (2019), arXiv:1904.09725 doi:10.1140/epja/i2019-12919-7
41. Hot-dense Lattice QCD: USQCD whitepaper 2018, Alexei Bazavov, Frithjof Karsch, Swagato Mukherjee, and Peter Petreczky, Eur. Phys. J. A 55 (11) 194, (2019), arXiv:1904.09951 doi:10.1140/epja/i2019-12922-0
42. Lattice QCD and Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering, Andreas S. Kronfeld, David G. Richards, William Detmold, Rajan Gupta, Huey-Wen Lin, Keh-Fei Liu, Aaron S. Meyer, Raza Sufian, and Sergey Syritsyn, Eur. Phys. J. A 55 (11) 196, (2019), arXiv:1904.09931 doi:10.1140/epja/i2019-12916-x
43. Lattice Gauge Theory for Physics Beyond the Standard Model, Richard C. Brower, Anna Hasenfratz, Ethan T. Neil, Simon Catterall, George Fleming, Joel Giedt, Enrico Rinaldi, David Schaich, Evan Weinberg, and Oliver Witzel, Eur. Phys. J. A 55 (11) 198, (2019), arXiv:1904.09964 doi:10.1140/epja/i2019-12901-5
44. The Role of Lattice QCD in Searches for Violations of Fundamental Symmetries and Signals for New Physics, Vincenzo Cirigliano, Zohreh Davoudi, Tanmoy Bhattacharya, Taku Izubuchi, Phiala E. Shanahan, Sergey Syritsyn, and Michael L. Wagman, Eur. Phys. J. A 55 (11) 197, (2019), arXiv:1904.09704 doi:10.1140/epja/i2019-12889-8
45. Opportunities for Lattice QCD in Quark and Lepton Flavor Physics, Christoph Lehner, and others, Eur. Phys. J. A 55 (11) 195, (2019), arXiv:1904.09479 doi:10.1140/epja/i2019-12891-2
46. Hadrons and Nuclei, William Detmold, Robert G. Edwards, Jozef J. Dudek, Michael Engelhardt, Huey-Wen Lin, Stefan Meinel, Kostas Orginos, and Phiala Shanahan, Eur. Phys. J. A 55 (11) 193, (2019), arXiv:1904.09512 doi:10.1140/epja/i2019-12902-4
47. Solving Statistical Mechanics Using Variational Autoregressive Networks, Dian Wu, Lei Wang, and Pan Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (8) 080602, (2019), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.080602
48. Neural Network Renormalization Group, Shuo-Hui Li, and Lei Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (26) 260601, (2018), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.260601
49. Reducing Autocorrelation Times in Lattice Simulations with Generative Adversarial Networks, Jan M. Pawlowski, and Julian M. Urban, Mach. Learn. Sci. Tech. 1 045011, (2020), arXiv:1811.03533 doi:10.1088/2632-2153/abae73
50. Machine learning determination of dynamical parameters: The Ising model case, Guido Cossu, Luigi Del Debbio, Tommaso Giani, Ava Khamseh, and Michael Wilson, Phys. Rev. B 100 (6) 064304, (2019), arXiv:1810.11503 doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.100.064304
51. Horovod: fast and easy distributed deep learning in TensorFlow, Alexander Sergeev, and Mike Del Balso, (2018), arXiv:1802.05799
52. Towards reduction of autocorrelation in HMC by machine learning, Akinori Tanaka, and Akio Tomiya, (2017), arXiv:1712.03893
53. Generalizing Hamiltonian Monte Carlo with Neural Networks, Daniel Levy, Matthew D. Hoffman, and Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, (2017), arXiv:1711.09268
54. Looking behind the Standard Model with lattice gauge theory, Benjamin Svetitsky, EPJ Web Conf. 175 01017, (2018), arXiv:1708.04840 doi:10.1051/epjconf/201817501017
55. Exploring cluster Monte Carlo updates with Boltzmann machines, Lei Wang, Phys. Rev. E 96 (5) 051301, (2017), arXiv:1702.08586 doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.96.051301
56. Accelerated Monte Carlo simulations with restricted Boltzmann machines, Li Huang, and Lei Wang, Phys. Rev. B 95 (3) 035105, (2017), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.95.035105
57. Density estimation using Real NVP, Laurent Dinh, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, and Samy Bengio, (2016), arXiv:1605.08803
58. Review of strongly-coupled composite dark matter models and lattice simulations, Graham D. Kribs, and Ethan T. Neil, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 31 (22) 1643004, (2016), arXiv:1604.04627 doi:10.1142/S0217751X16430041
59. Lattice Gauge Theories and Spin Models, Manu Mathur, and T. P. Sreeraj, Phys. Rev. D 94 (8) 085029, (2016), arXiv:1604.00315 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.085029
60. Lattice tests of beyond Standard Model dynamics, Thomas DeGrand, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88 015001, (2016), arXiv:1510.05018 doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.88.015001
61. Recent progress in simulations of gauge theories on the lattice, Luigi Del Debbio, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 640 (1) 012049, (2015), doi:10.1088/1742-6596/640/1/012049
62. Variational Inference with Normalizing Flows, Danilo Jimenez Rezende, and Shakir Mohamed, (2015), arXiv:1505.05770
63. Delving Deep into Rectifiers: Surpassing Human-Level Performance on ImageNet Classification, Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun, (2015), arXiv:1502.01852 doi:10.1109/ICCV.2015.123
64. Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization, Diederik P. Kingma, and Jimmy Ba, International Conference on Learning Representations, (2014), arXiv:1412.6980
65. NICE: Non-linear Independent Components Estimation, Laurent Dinh, David Krueger, and Yoshua Bengio, (2014), arXiv:1410.8516
66. Lattice Gauge Theory for Condensed Matter Physics: Ferromagnetic Superconductivity as its Example, Ikuo Ichinose, and Tetsuo Matsui, Mod. Phys. Lett. B 28 1430012, (2014), arXiv:1408.0089 doi:10.1142/S0217984914300129
67. ADADELTA: An Adaptive Learning Rate Method, Matthew D. Zeiler, (2012), arXiv:1212.5701
68. Status and challenges of simulations with dynamical fermions, Stefan Schaefer, PoS LATTICE2012 001, (2012), arXiv:1211.5069 doi:10.22323/1.164.0001
69. Non-renormalizability of the HMC algorithm, Martin Luscher, and Stefan Schaefer, JHEP 04 104, (2011), arXiv:1103.1810 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2011)104
70. Testing trivializing maps in the Hybrid Monte Carlo algorithm, Georg P. Engel, and Stefan Schaefer, Comput. Phys. Commun. 182 2107–2114, (2011), arXiv:1102.1852 doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2011.05.004
71. Critical slowing down and error analysis in lattice QCD simulations, Stefan Schaefer, Rainer Sommer, and Francesco Virotta, Nucl. Phys. B 845 93–119, (2011), arXiv:1009.5228 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2010.11.020
72. Adaptive multigrid algorithm for the lattice Wilson-Dirac operator, R. Babich, J. Brannick, R. C. Brower, M. A. Clark, T. A. Manteuffel, S. F. McCormick, J. C. Osborn, and C. Rebbi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 201602, (2010), arXiv:1005.3043 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.201602
73. Quantum chromodynamics on the lattice, Christof Gattringer, and Christian B. Lang, 788, (2010), doi:10.1007/978-3-642-01850-3
74. Investigating the critical slowing down of QCD simulations, Stefan Schaefer, Rainer Sommer, and Francesco Virotta, PoS LAT2009 032, (2009), arXiv:0910.1465 doi:10.22323/1.091.0032
75. Trivializing maps, the Wilson flow and the HMC algorithm, Martin Luscher, Commun. Math. Phys. 293 899–919, (2010), arXiv:0907.5491 doi:10.1007/s00220-009-0953-7
76. Adaptive Multigrid Algorithm for Lattice QCD, J. Brannick, R. C. Brower, M. A. Clark, J. C. Osborn, and C. Rebbi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 041601, (2008), arXiv:0707.4018 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.041601
77. The Monte Carlo method in quantum field theory, Colin Morningstar, 21st Annual Hampton University Graduate Studies Program, (2007), arXiv:hep-lat/0702020
78. Matplotlib: A 2D Graphics Environment, John D. Hunter, Comput. Sci. Eng. 9 (3) 90–95, (2007), doi:10.1109/MCSE.2007.55
79. Critical slowing down of topological modes, Luigi Del Debbio, Gian Mario Manca, and Ettore Vicari, Phys. Lett. B 594 315–323, (2004), arXiv:hep-lat/0403001 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2004.05.038
80. Full QCD algorithms towards the chiral limit, Martin Hasenbusch, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 129 27–33, (2004), arXiv:hep-lat/0310029 doi:10.1016/S0920-5632(03)02504-0
81. Cost of QCD simulations with n(f) = 2 dynamical Wilson fermions, Thomas Lippert, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 106 193–194, (2002), arXiv:hep-lat/0203009 doi:10.1016/S0920-5632(01)01661-9
82. Computational cost of full QCD simulations experienced by CP-PACS and JLQCD Collaborations, A. Ukawa, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 106 195–196, (2002), doi:10.1016/S0920-5632(01)01662-0
83. Speeding up the hybrid Monte Carlo algorithm for dynamical fermions, Martin Hasenbusch, Phys. Lett. B 519 177–182, (2001), arXiv:hep-lat/0107019 doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)01102-9
84. Requirements for high performance computing for lattice QCD: Report of the ECFA working panel, F. Jegerlehner, R. D. Kenway, G. Martinelli, Christopher Michael, O. Pene, B. Petersson, R. Petronzio, Christopher T. Sachrajda, and K. Schilling, (2000), doi:10.5170/CERN-2000-002
85. CRITICAL SLOWING DOWN, Ulli Wolff, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 17 93–102, (1990), doi:10.1016/0920-5632(90)90224-I
86. Hybrid Monte Carlo, S. Duane, A. D. Kennedy, B. J. Pendleton, and D. Roweth, Phys. Lett. B 195 216–222, (1987), doi:10.1016/0370-2693(87)91197-X
87. Monte Carlo Integration for Lattice Gauge Theories with Fermions, D. H. Weingarten, and D. N. Petcher, Phys. Lett. B 99 333–338, (1981), doi:10.1016/0370-2693(81)90112-X
88. A Proposal for Monte Carlo Simulations of Fermionic Systems, F. Fucito, E. Marinari, G. Parisi, and C. Rebbi, Nucl. Phys. B 180 369, (1981), doi:10.1016/0550-3213(81)90055-9
89. Monte Carlo Sampling Methods Using Markov Chains and Their Applications, W. K. Hastings, Biometrika 57 97–109, (1970), doi:10.1093/biomet/57.1.97
90. Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines, N. Metropolis, A. W. Rosenbluth, M. N. Rosenbluth, A. H. Teller, and E. Teller, J. Chem. Phys. 21 1087–1092, (1953), doi:10.1063/1.1699114
91. On Information and Sufficiency, S. Kullback, and R. A. Leibler, The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 22 (1) 79–86, (1951), doi:10.1214/aoms/1177729694