Hard-sphere MCMC algorithms, and Physics of two-dimensional melting - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

hard sphere mcmc algorithms and physics of two
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Hard-sphere MCMC algorithms, and Physics of two-dimensional melting - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Hard-sphere MCMC algorithms, and Physics of two-dimensional melting and Perfect sampling Physics of algorithms, Santa Fe 2009 Werner Krauth CNRS-Laboratoire de Physique Statistique Ecole Normale Suprieure, Paris 3 September 2009 Table of


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Hard-sphere MCMC algorithms, and Physics of two-dimensional melting and Perfect sampling

Physics of algorithms, Santa Fe 2009 Werner Krauth

CNRS-Laboratoire de Physique Statistique Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris

3 September 2009

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Table of contents

Monte Carlo methods and hard spheres

MD and MC Transfer matrices The physics of melting General remarks on MC algorithms

Cluster Monte Carlo algorithms, Event chains

Estimating mixing times Event chains Breaking detailed balance Applications

Perfect sampling

Infinitely long Monte Carlo simulations (Propp & Wilson) Monte Carlo simulations with an equilibration guarantee More transfer matrices Application to spin glasses & hard spheres

Conclusion

Statistical Mechanics ≡ Algorithms &Computations

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Molecular dynamics (‘Newton’)

A molecular dynamics algorithm for hard spheres (billiard):

t = 0 t = 1.25 wall collision t = 2.18 t = 3.12 pair collision t = 3.25 t = 4.03 t = 4.04 t = 5.16 t = 5.84 t = 8.66 t = 9.33 t = 10.37

. . . starting point of Molecular dynamics, in 1957 . . . . . . treats positions and velocities . . . . . . useful for N ≫ 4, but times extremely short . . . . . . converges towards thermal equilibrium.

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Markov-chain Monte Carlo (‘Boltzmann’)

A local Markov-chain Monte Carlo algorithm for hard spheres (billiard):

i = 1 (rej.) i = 2 i = 3 i = 4 (rej.) i = 5 i = 6 i = 7 i = 8 (rej.) i = 9 (rej.) i = 10 i = 11 i = 12 (rej.)

. . . starting point of Markov chain Monte Carlo, in 1953 . . . . . . treats only positions . . . . . . useful for N ≫ 4 . . . . . . converges towards thermal equilibrium.

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Physics of crystallization in 2D

density η = 0.48 density η = 0.72 At low density, disks move easily (liquid) . . . at high density, MC algorithms slow down and disks crystallize . . . . . . but the crystal cannot have long-range (positional) order

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Single discrete hard sphere (‘3 × 3 pebble game’)

Monte Carlo algorithm for one hard sphere on a lattice:

i = 0 initial conf. i = 1 i = 2 (rej.) i = 3 i = 4 i = 5 (rej.) i = 6 i = 7 i = 8 i = 9 i = 10 i = 11

Move ‘up’, ‘down’, ‘left’, ‘right’, each with probability 1/4. Reject moves if necessary (i = 2, i = 5).

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Transfer matrix of 3 × 3 pebble game

Transfer matrix of algorithmic probabilities p(a → b): {p(a → b)} =                       

1 2 1 4

.

1 4

. . . . .

1 4 1 4 1 4

.

1 4

. . . . .

1 4 1 2

. .

1 4

. . .

1 4

. .

1 4 1 4

.

1 4

. . .

1 4

.

1 4 1 4

.

1 4

. . .

1 4

.

1 4 1 4

. .

1 4

. . .

1 4

. .

1 2 1 4

. . . .

1 4

.

1 4 1 4 1 4

. . . . .

1 4

.

1 4 1 2

                       . {π(1), . . . , π(9)} = { 1

9, . . . , 1 9} is eigenvector.

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Exponential convergence in the 3 × 3 pebble game

πi(site 1) for simulation started in the right upper corner (site 9):

0.0001 0.01 1 10 20 30

  • prob. (shifted) 1/9 − πi(1)

iteration i exact (0.75)i

Exponential convergence ≡ scale: (0.75)i = exp [i · log 0.75] = exp

i 3.476

  • .
slide-9
SLIDE 9

Correlation time in larger simulations

i = 0 disk k ... i = 25600000000 same disk τ exists, but it is large (τ ≫ 25 600 000 000).

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Minimum running time of a Monte Carlo algorithm

Knowing correlation time τ would be nice (Part I). A faster algorithm would be nice (Part II). An infinitely long simulation would be nice (Part III).

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Mixing time (square box)

  • 0.5

0.5

  • 0.5

0.5 Im Ψ Re Ψ 0.5 1 108 ∆t C(∆t) exp(-∆t/τ)

Correlation time ≡ correlation time of order parameter much better than diffusion-constants criterion . . . . . . hypothesis, but more cautious than what others do...

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Cluster algorithm for hard spheres

a a ( + move) b return move

Satisfies p(a → b) = p(b → a), is ergodic. Cluster move, rejection-free (Dress & Krauth ’95). Many applications, but algorithm no good for 2d melting.

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Event-chain . . . maximizing local moves

i f

rejection-free detailed balance OK (θ ∈ [0, 2π]) moves each disk as far as possible

  • E. Bernard, W. Krauth, D. B. Wilson (arXiv:0903.2954)
slide-14
SLIDE 14

Giving up detailed balance

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Timing issues

100000 1e+06 1e+07 1e+08 1e+09 1e+10 1e+11 1e+12 1e+13 322 642 1282 2562 5122 10242 # of equiv. SEC part.-displacements N SEC/h Metropolis/h MD/h (2008)[2] Total simulation time from [1] τΨ τ|Ψ|2

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Equilibrated configuration

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Dislocations

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Return of the ‘3 × 3 pebble game’

i = 0 initial conf. i = 1 i = 2 (rej.) i = 3 i = 4 i = 5 (rej.) i = 6 i = 7 i = 8 i = 9 i = 10 i = 11

To prove that Monte Carlo simulation is in equilibrium, we must either compute correlation time τ = 3.476 . . . . . .

  • r do an infinitely long simulation (reach i = ∞) . . .
  • r both
slide-19
SLIDE 19

Infinite simulations (in 3 × 3 pebble game)

Do not start at t = 0, start in the past, at i = −∞:

i = 0 (now) i = − ∞

The configuration at i = 0 is an ‘exact sample’.

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Coupling random maps in the 3 × 3 pebble game

i = − 17 i = − 16 i = − 15 i = − 14 i = − 13 i = − 12 i = − 11 i = − 10 i = − 9 i = − 8 i = − 7 i = − 6 i = − 5 i = − 4 i = − 3 i = − 2 i = − 1 i = 0 (now)

NB: Proof of coupling by naive enumeration and exhaustion.

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Infinite simulation with random maps

i = 0 (now) i = − ∞

The configuration at i = 0 is a perfect sample. It can be computed through finite back-track. Propp & Wilson (1995): landmark paper. Can work for spin glasses and hard spheres (Chanal & Krauth (’08, ’09)).

slide-22
SLIDE 22

More transfer matrices...

The dynamics of the new pebble game is again described by a transfer matrix: T forward =        T 1,1 T 2,1 . . . . . . T 2,2 T 3,2 . . . T 3,3 . . . . . . ... T N,N        Triangular matrix: second-largest eigenvalue ≥ second-largest eigenvalue of T 1,1. therefore: coupling time ≥ convergence time

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Updates on large lattices (spin systems)

64 × 64 Ising spin glass has 232×64 ∼ 3 × 10616 states. We must rigorously show that they ‘all’ couple. Non-monotone model. Using patches k on the lattice, and sets of patches Sk on patch k (k = 1, . . . , N), we define Ω = S1 ⊗ S2 ⊗ · · · ⊗ SN/(pairwise compat.). Ω is overcomplete, but storage linear in lattice size N × 2m2/2 for N lattice sites and patches of size m × m.

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Patches and compatibilities

l k spin configs patch l patch k

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Exact sampling for hard spheres

Continuous system...with hidden discrete structure... Patch algorithm reaches finite densities η ≤ 0.3 for N → ∞... . . . improves on Wilson’s algorithm.

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Conclusion

We discussed Monte Carlo methods for hard spheres Convergence issues new algorithms new insight into melting transition.. Exact sampling, coupling from the past (doing an infinitely long Monte Carlo simulation). . . .