Parametric Matrix Models Overview

• Parametric matrix models are frameworks that represent matrix-valued objects as functions of a continuous parameter set, enabling structured, efficient high-dimensional modeling.
• They employ diverse methodologies such as affine, low-rank, neural, and operator-based approaches to capture complex dependencies and support model order reduction.
• Applications span scientific computing, quantum systems, and machine learning, balancing computational efficiency with robust uncertainty quantification and error control.

A parametric matrix model is any formalism in which matrix-valued objects are defined, learned, or approximated as explicit or implicit functions of a continuous, finite, or structured set of parameters. Appearing at the intersection of scientific computing, physics, machine learning, statistics, signal processing, and control, these models leverage the structure of matrix equations, operator-valued maps, or matrix factorizations to efficiently encode the parametric dependence of high-dimensional systems. The unifying principle is the representation of the map $\theta \mapsto M(\theta)$ (with $\theta$ ranging over a parameter space $\Theta$) either via analytic, algebraic, low-rank, neural, or probabilistic constructions that expose underlying geometry, enable tractable computation, and facilitate learning from data. Across the literature, parametric matrix models subsume reduced basis approaches, spectral surrogates, hierarchical matrix approximations, matrix-valued autoregressive and mixture models, quantum information geometry parametrizations, and Bayesian spectral learning methods.

1. Mathematical Foundations and Structural Classes

Let $\Theta \subset \mathbb{R}^d$ (or a more general measurable space) denote the parameter domain. A parametric matrix model defines a mapping

$$\theta \in \Theta \longmapsto M(\theta) \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times m}~\text{or}~\mathbb{C}^{n\times m},$$

with $M(\theta)$ often satisfying additional algebraic, differential, or statistical properties. The most general form encodes constraints through equations of the type

$\mathcal{F}(\theta, \{M_i\}, y) = 0,$

where $\{M_i\}$ are the learnable matrices, $y$ are outputs, and $\mathcal{F}$ encodes algebraic, spectral, differential, or integral structure (Cook et al., 2024).

Key structural classes include:

• Affine (Linear) PMMs: $M(\theta) = M_0 + \sum_{i=1}^d \theta_i M_i$; extensively used in physics-inspired modeling, reduced-basis methods, and Koopman/von Neumann operator flows (Cook et al., 2024, Matthies et al., 2019).
• Low-Rank/Separated: $M(\theta) \approx \sum_{i=1}^r \phi_i(\theta) A_i$, with $\{\phi_i\}$ parameter-dependent coefficients and $\{A_i\}$ fixed mode matrices, emerging formally from the Karhunen–Loève or Proper Orthogonal Decomposition (POD) of the parametric map (Matthies et al., 2019, Matthies et al., 2018).
• Neural Parameterizations: Matrix-valued results encoded as continuous neural network surrogates (e.g., $M(\theta) = C \times_3 \Phi(\theta)$ with $C$ a core tensor and $\Phi$ an MLP), enabling fast parametric inversion, SVD, or general matrix computations (Wang et al., 28 Nov 2025).
• Implicit Differential/Operator Models: $M(\theta, D)\,y = f(\theta)$, where $D$ may encode differentiation or integration, as in operator learning, parametric PDE surrogates, or spectral learning (Cook et al., 2024).
• Statistical Covariance/Information Geometry: $\theta \mapsto \rho(\theta)$, a smoothly parameterized positive-definite (or density) matrix, with induced metrics and information-geometric structure (Ciaglia et al., 2022).

Universal function approximation results hold for PMMs constructed with a sufficiently large $n$, as any continuous function can be represented as a polynomial matrix eigenvalue (Cook et al., 2024), and general low-rank separable forms follow from the spectral decomposition of associated correlation operators (Matthies et al., 2019, Matthies et al., 2018).

2. Operator-Theoretic and Reduced Order Modeling Perspectives

A unifying analytic framework rewrites parametric matrix families as linear operators: $$\mathcal{R}: V \to L^2(\Theta, \mu), \qquad (\mathcal{R}A)(\theta) := \langle M(\theta), A\rangle_{V},$$ where $V$ is the Hilbert space of $n\times m$ matrices (or vectorized equivalents) (Matthies et al., 2019). The adjoint, correlation operator, and induced kernel

$$C = \mathcal{R}^*\mathcal{R}, \qquad K(\theta_1, \theta_2) = \langle M(\theta_1), M(\theta_2)\rangle,$$

yield a canonical affine representation of the form

$$M(\theta) \approx \sum_{i=1}^r \sigma_i s_i(\theta) u_i,$$

with $(\sigma_i, s_i, u_i)$ the singular values, parameter-dependent coefficients, and fixed basis matrices of the SVD of $\mathcal{R}$ (Matthies et al., 2019, Matthies et al., 2018). This formalism encompasses reduced-basis, POD, and polynomial chaos models, and directly informs practical offline-online decomposition, uncertainty quantification, and error estimation (Matthies et al., 2019).

Tensor product and hierarchical decompositions (e.g., PGD, tensor trains) generalize the affine representations to high-parametric-dimension settings (Matthies et al., 2019, Khan et al., 5 Nov 2025), supporting low-rank, highly compressed online models for parameter sweeps or uncertainty propagation.

3. Learning Paradigms: Neural and Probabilistic PMMs

PMMs can be learned from empirical data by fitting the parametric matrices to observed outputs using gradient-based methods, with the loss function tailored to the application: mean-squared error for regression, KL divergence for out-of-sample prediction, or problem-specific structure constraints (e.g., enforcing algebraic residuals, symmetries, or boundary conditions) (Cook et al., 2024, Wang et al., 28 Nov 2025). When $M(\theta)$ arises as the result of an expensive operation (e.g., inversion, SVD, exponential), lightweight neural surrogates of the NeuMatC type leverage low-rank core tensor factorization and MLPs for continuous parameter-to-matrix mappings, achieving orders-of-magnitude acceleration over classic direct solvers while preserving algebraic fidelity (Wang et al., 28 Nov 2025).

Probabilistic versions, such as Bayesian parametric matrix models (B-PMMs), attach a prior distribution to the parameter vector and propagate uncertainty through the matrix eigenvalue map, employing structured manifold-aware variational inference to yield calibrated uncertainties on spectral quantities. This is crucial for safety-critical scientific applications and is underpinned by perturbation-theoretic error bounds and information-theoretic calibration guarantees (Nooraiepour, 15 Sep 2025).

Matrix-valued neural architectures (e.g., mMLPs) can be constructed to preserve positive-definiteness and trace constraints by design, optimizing matrix-valued objectives with von Neumann or LogDet divergences, and enabling learning of parametrized covariance or dispersion matrices in high-dimensional settings (Taghia et al., 2019, Rivero et al., 2018).

4. Model Order Reduction, Matrix Interpolation, and Hierarchical Matrix Schemes

For large-scale parametric systems (e.g., in mechanics, electromagnetics, or Gaussian process kernels), hierarchical matrix schemes efficiently organize and compress $M(\theta)$ across parameter ranges. Parametric hierarchical ($\mathcal{H}$ and $\mathcal{H}^2$) matrix methods encode parameter dependence of near-field and far-field blocks via polynomial tensor approximations (e.g., Chebyshev, tensor train), allowing rapid online instantiation of $M(\theta_0)$ for arbitrary $\theta_0$, with negligible new kernel calls (Khan et al., 5 Nov 2025, Ansari-Oghol-Beig et al., 2013). Rational interpolation and blockwise consolidation further support wideband or high-dimensional parameter sweeps.

Model order reduction by matrix interpolation entails sampling reduced models at selected parameter values, aligning bases to remove consistencies via adaptive sampling and clustering, and interpolating reduced operators across the parameter space. Techniques such as angle-based basis alignment, Delaunay triangulation, and local polynomial or ridge regression interpolation reduce errors by orders of magnitude compared to classic unaligned approaches (Resch-Schopper et al., 2024).

These approaches facilitate the construction of globally accurate, low-order representations even when the underlying system undergoes strong modal transitions or regime shifts over $\Theta$.

5. Statistical PMMs, Matrix-Valued Autoregression, and Information Geometry

Statistical and machine learning domains deploy parametric matrix models in multiple forms:

• Matrix-valued autoregressive (MAR/MMAR) models: For time series or spatiotemporal arrays, parameterized dynamics are encoded as $X_t = C + \sum_{k} A_k X_{t-k} B_k^T + E_t$, with constrained Kronecker-lifted coefficients for parsimony, or as mixtures (MMAR) to capture regime switching (Wu et al., 2023).
• Mutual Kernel Matrix Completion: Parametrized low-rank plus isotropic (PCA-MKMC) or factor analysis (FA-MKMC) structure is imposed on global covariance models $M$, sharing information across incomplete kernel matrices and optimizing LogDet divergences to avoid overfitting (Rivero et al., 2018).
• Quantum/state-space PMMs: Parameterizations of density matrices or positive linear functionals over W*-algebras induce information geometric structure via the Jordan product, yielding Riemannian metrics (Bures–Helstrom, Fisher–Rao, Fubini–Study) that inform parameter identifiability and optimality in both classical and quantum estimation problems (Ciaglia et al., 2022).
• Identifiability in Random Matrix Models: Parameter identifiability is characterized up to natural invariances (rotations, unitary conjugations) using free probability and moment-cumulant techniques, supporting consistent inference and asymptotic normality in high-dimensional models (Hayase, 2018).

6. Practical Applications and Computational Trade-offs

PMMs find application in a diverse set of tasks:

• Scientific computing/emulation: quantum system extrapolation, eigenstructure learning, and PDE operator surrogates (Cook et al., 2024).
• Wireless communications: NeuMatC yields $3\times$–$62\times$ speedup over classical inversion/SVD in MIMO channel modeling (Wang et al., 28 Nov 2025).
• Uncertainty quantification: B-PMMs quantitatively estimate calibration errors and eigenvalue uncertainties even under spectral degeneracies (Nooraiepour, 15 Sep 2025).
• Machine learning: mMLP-based VAEs, parametric t-SNE analogs for embeddings, and semi-supervised or unsupervised clustering via matrix eigenspace embeddings (Taghia et al., 2019, Cook et al., 2024).
• Kernel machine acceleration: parametric $\mathcal{H}$ and $\mathcal{H}^2$ matrices provide $>100\times$ online speedup in kernel instantiation and matrix-vector products over large data sets (Khan et al., 5 Nov 2025, Ansari-Oghol-Beig et al., 2013).

Fundamental trade-offs exist between rank, network or parameter complexity, and error: tighter rank truncation, higher tensor or neural width yields better accuracy at higher storage/computation cost. Proper basis alignment and consistency checks are critical for model order reduction efficacy in presence of discontinuous or clustering system dynamics (Resch-Schopper et al., 2024).

7. Limitations, Extensions, and Theoretical Guarantees

Parametric matrix models confront challenges as dimensionality increases: scaling to very high-dimensional input (e.g., raw images) motivates the use of tensor network or block-sparse ansätze (Cook et al., 2024). Implicitly defined models, e.g., those governed by PDE constraints or non-self-adjoint operators, may necessitate specialized solvers for gradient computation and inference (Cook et al., 2024, Nooraiepour, 15 Sep 2025). Non-convex optimization landscapes can induce local minima, although structured probabilistic methods (e.g., B-PMM with regularized perturbation bounds) formally control uncertainty propagation and achieve near-optimal calibration with established information-theoretic lower bounds (Nooraiepour, 15 Sep 2025).

The universality of PMMs as function approximators, their synthesis of statistical, analytic, and geometric perspectives, and their applicability to both linear operators and nonlinear surrogates position them as central abstractions for modern high-dimensional scientific modeling and machine learning.

---

Table: Major Paradigms of Parametric Matrix Models

Paradigm	Core Representation	Typical Applications
Affine PMM	$M(\theta) = M_0 + \sum_i \theta_i M_i$	Physics emulation, quantum systems
Low-Rank/Separated	$M(\theta) \approx \sum_{i} \phi_i(\theta) A_i$	Reduced basis, uncertainty quantification
Neural Surrogate	$M(\theta) = C \times_3 \Phi(\theta)$	Fast parametric inversion/SVD, surrogates
Hierarchical	Parametric $\mathcal{H}$/$\mathcal{H}^2$	Fast kernel, EM scattering, GP acceleration
Information geometry	$\theta \to \rho(\theta)$, induced metric	Quantum/statistical estimation
Probabilistic	B-PMM, probabilistic mMLP	Uncertainty quantification, spectral learning

---

Parametric matrix models continue to unify and extend the analytic, computational, and probabilistic toolkits deployed in contemporary scientific and engineering research.