Physics and Complexity David Sherrington University of Oxford & - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

physics and complexity
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Physics and Complexity David Sherrington University of Oxford & - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Physics and Complexity David Sherrington University of Oxford & Santa Fe Institute Physics Dictionary definition: Branch of science concerned with the nature and properties of matter and energy But today I want to use it as much as a


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Physics and Complexity

David Sherrington

University of Oxford & Santa Fe Institute

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Physics

Dictionary definition: Branch of science concerned with the nature and properties of matter and energy But today I want to use it as much as a mind-set with valuable methodologies And to show application to many complex systems in many different arenas

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Physics

as sometimes portrayed

Particle Physics Cosmology

‘Fundamental’ particles How it all began Search for the

‘Theory of everything’

slide-4
SLIDE 4

But not today

‘More is different’

Particle Physics Cosmology

‘Fundamental’ particles How it all began

‘Theory of everything’ TOE is by no means the whole story Many body systems often give new behaviour through co-operation

Both ‘fundamental’ and applicable

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Examples of emergent phenomena

  • Superconductivity
  • Magnetism
  • Giant Magnetoresistence
  • Quantum Hall Effect
slide-6
SLIDE 6

Useful

& often give very high accuracy

  • Superconductivity

– Flux quantization

  • Magnetism
  • Giant Magnetoresistence

– Basis of modern high capacity data storage

  • Quantum Hall Effect

– Quantized conductivity plateaux

Highest accuracy measurements of fundamental constants even in dirty systems

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Complexity/Complex Systems

  • Many body systems
  • Cooperative behaviour complex

– non-trivial and new – not simply anticipated from microscopics – even with simple individual units – and simple interaction rules

  • But with surprising conceptual similarities between

superficially different systems

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Typical approach

  • Essentials?

– Minimal models – Comparisons/checks: e.g. simulation – Analysis: maths & ansätze

  • Important consequences?
  • Universalities?
  • Conceptualization
  • Generalization
  • Application

Build

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Key ingredients

Frustration

Conflicts

Disorder

Frozen

  • r time-dependent; e.g. uncertainty
slide-10
SLIDE 10

Emphasis

  • Novel physics
  • New concepts
  • Minimalist models
  • Interdisciplinary transfers
  • Much ubiquity, some differences
  • Relevance of noise and memory
  • Applicability
slide-11
SLIDE 11

Spin glasses

Hard Optimization Information Science Computer Science Biology Economics Glassy Materials Mathematical Physics Probability Theory

Examples

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Spin glasses

Hard Optimization Information Science Computer Science Biology Economics Glassy Materials Mathematical Physics Probability Theory

Examples

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Rugged Landscape Paradigm

Two-dimensional cartoon of high dimensional concept Many metastable states Hierarchy

Valleys within valleys

Hard to minimise: sticks: glassiness

Cost

Coordinate to minimise Dynamics c.f. motion

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Control functions

Statics:

Fixed Variable

(variable)

Dynamics:

Slow Fast External influences .. .. ..

( , { ) } { } { },

ij ij k

J S F T

General theoretical structure

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Control functions, but who controls?

  • Physics: nature/physical laws
  • Biology: nature but not necess. equilibrium
  • Hard optimization: we choose algorithms
  • Information science: we have choice
  • Markets: partly supervising bodies, partly

manufacturers, partly speculators

  • Society: governments can change rules
slide-16
SLIDE 16

Physics: Magnets: Spin glasses

  • Disordered magnetic alloys e.g. Au1-x Fex

– Competitive magnetic interactions – No periodicity → no simple best compromise

  • Non-periodic magnetic moment freezing
  • Slow macrodynamics/ history-dependence/ aging
  • Similar for site or bond disorder

Ferro Antiferro

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Phase transitions & preparation-dependence

Susceptibility

non-equilibrium equilibrium

Field-cooled Zero-field cooled

Tg

AuFe

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Quenched random interaction: ±

Minimalist Model

1 s

( ) ij i j ij

H J s s = −

Magnetic elements Frustration & Disorder

Cost or Hamiltonian

Spin up/down

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Minimalist Model

( ) ij i j ij

H J s s = −

Simulations ~ experiment Range-free case soluble but very subtle

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Inter-student friendship: ±

“The Dean’s Problem”

1 s

( ) ij i j ij

H J s s = +

Satisfaction Dorm A/B To maximise

Allocate N students to 2 residences with maximum happiness Also

i i

s =

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Phase diagram

No freezing

Ferromagnetic freezing GFM

Temperature/noise/uncertainty/Dean’s impatience Attractive bias

Glassy

Many metastable states

‘Rugged landscape Slow dynamics Easy to equilibrate Hard to equilibrate

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Spin glasses

Hard Optimization Information Science Computer Science Biology Economics Glassy Materials Mathematical Physics Probability Theory

Examples

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Examples

  • Minimizing a cost

– e.g. distribution of tasks, partitioning

  • Satisfiability

– Simultaneous satisfaction of ‘clauses’

  • Error correcting codes

– Capacity and accuracy

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Two issues

  • What is achievable?

– Analogue: “statics”/equilibrium

  • May be hard to find?
  • Is it possible?
  • If achievable, how to achieve it?

– Needs algorithms = dynamics

  • We may be able to devise
  • But glassiness can badly hinder efficacy
slide-25
SLIDE 25

K-satisfiability

simultaneous satisfiability

  • f many ‘clauses’ of length K

Phase transition(): SAT / UNSAT

# of clauses # of variables M N

  • 1

2 3 3 4 5

(

  • r
  • r

) and (

  • r
  • r

) and ... x x x x x x

Recent example of hard optimization from computer science

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Compare: K-satisfiability

HARD-SAT N/M UNSAT SAT αc

  • 1

α d

  • 1

Simple algorithms stick Theoretically achievable limit

Physicists recognised this subtlety through comparison with K-spin glass Phase transitions

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Potts or K (>2) -spin glass

RSB1 T Td Ts RS

Dynamical transition Thermodynamical transition

Where the idea came from

RSB=Glassy

RSB2

Originally looked at as a purely intellectually interesting extension

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Similarly: error-correcting codes

HARD TO RETRIEVE

Redundancy

UNRETRIEVABLE RETRIEVABLE

Shannon limit

RETRIEVABLE

Normal algorithms stick And now we know why

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Clustering: Random K-SAT

α

α* αd αc αs

SAT UNSAT EASY HARD In fact, more regimes

slide-30
SLIDE 30

New algorithms

  • Understanding brings opportunities
  • Normal physics

– Algorithms given

  • Artificial systems

– We can design algorithms

  • e.g. Computational

– Simulated annealling – Simulated tempering – Clustering……. Great advance: Survey propagation

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Artificial ‘temperature’ Tanneal

Optimum achievable

Achieving it requires (algorithmic) dynamics Frustration & disorder → glassiness But we can choose the dynamics

exp( / )

anneal configurations

Z Cost kT = −

  • Simulated annealing

effective stat. mech./thermodynamics

= ln

A

A T

Min Cost Lim T Z

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Landscape paradigm for hard optimization

Cost

  • bstacles

Steepest descent gets stuck

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Simulated annealing

Probabilistic hill-climbing

Add ‘temperature’: freedom

Variables Cost

TA

Annealing temperature

( ) ~ exp( / )

A

P move C T −∆

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Simulated annealing

Gradually reduce TA Variables Cost

TA

Annealing temperature

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Gradually reduce TA

Simulated annealing

Variables Cost

TA

Annealing temperature

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Simulated annealing

Variables Cost Hopefully

Good basic tool but now better ones

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Spin glasses

Hard Optimization Information Science Computer Science Biology Economics Glassy Materials Mathematical Physics Probability Theory

Examples

slide-38
SLIDE 38

‘Statistical physics

  • f

the brain’

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Typical neuron Schematize

(a) (b)

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Schematic neural network

Input Output

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Mathematical modelling

j1 j2

i

j3

  • Neuronal activity: Vi
  • Synaptic weights: Jij > 0 switch-on, < 0 switch-off
  • Total input:

i ij j j

U J V =

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Consequence of input ‘potential’

Output activity of neuron/ probability of firing

  • and so on through the network

Input potential

Rounding ~ “temperature” T

slide-43
SLIDE 43

Maps to analogue

  • f spin glass

;

ij i j ij i j ij

H J S S J

µ µ µξ ξ

= − =

  • Quasi-random +/- but trained

Synaptic response

slide-44
SLIDE 44

Attractors: tuned metastable states

  • Associative memory

‘attractors’

~ memorized patterns

‘basins of attraction’ determined by {Jij}

  • Many memories

~ many attractors require frustration

Phase space

slide-45
SLIDE 45

Rugged landscape analogy

Valleys ~ attractors Sculpture ~ learning {si}

{Jij} Different timescales fast retrieval slow learning

slide-46
SLIDE 46

Phase diagram: Hopfield model

Retrieval ‘Spin glass’

(metastable attractors unrelated to memories)

Para Synaptic ‘temperature’ Capacity: Pattern interference noise

(c.f. ferromagnet) (No attractors)

Retrieval

c.f. ferro

slide-47
SLIDE 47

Extensions

  • Artificial neural networks

– We design

  • Non-biological elements
  • Train by experience
  • Other biological evolution

– self-train/select

  • maybe without knowing what is “good”
  • e.g. evolution of proteins from heteropolymeric soup
  • Autocatalytic sets
slide-48
SLIDE 48

Spin glasses

Hard Optimization Information Science Computer Science Biology Economics Glassy Materials Mathematical Physics Probability Theory

Examples

slide-49
SLIDE 49

Price Time

Different strategies (Disorder) Common information (Mean field) Learn from Experience (Dynamics II) Not all can win (Frustration) Buy & sell (Dynamics I)

Stockmarket

slide-50
SLIDE 50

Minority game

N agents 2 choices Aim to be in minority Individual strategies → Collective consequence

  • act on common information (e.g. minority choice for last m steps)
  • preferences modified by experience (keep point-score)

Correlated behaviour & phase transition

Minimalist model

slide-51
SLIDE 51

Phase transition & ergodicity-breaking

Phase transition: α c

minimum in volatility α < α c non-ergodic α > α c ergodic

Random Non- ergodic Ergodic

Random strategies, random histories c.f. spin glass susc.

slide-52
SLIDE 52

Coarse-grained time-average

Effective interaction between agents

Quasi-random J and h related to agent strategies c.f. spin glass or neural network ** Strategy point-score dynamics for agents with 2 strategies

{ sgn ( )}

( 1) ( ) /

i i

i i i s p t

p t p t H s

=

+ = − ∂ ∂

ij i j i i ij i

H J s s h s = +

slide-53
SLIDE 53

Minority game

a

Phase space

ij i j ij

H J s s + =

ij i j

J

µ µ µ

ξ ξ =

Many repellors

Difference from Hopfield neural network

slide-54
SLIDE 54

Macrodynamics

Generating functional

Map to macroscopic variables (multi-time) Effective ensemble of single agents with ensemble-self-consistent memory and coloured noise

1 ' '

( 1) ( ) sgn ( ') ( ) ( )

tt t t

p t p t p t t η α α

− ≤

+ + = − +

1

G

“Representative agent ensemble”

slide-55
SLIDE 55

Simulations & iterated theory

pi(0)=0 pi(0)=1

Open = simulations Solid = numerical iteration of analytic effective agent equations

pi(0)=0.5 Initial bias

slide-56
SLIDE 56

Limit-order book

Current price (t) buy sell

Price-line

c.f. Evaporation-deposition-annihilation Agents place or remove orders: buy, sell, market. May be executed.

Speculators gain on price changes. Manufacturers must absorb → liquidity.

But how do they choose what to do? Evolution of strategies?

Driven by individual attitudes, co-operative actions, learning? More realistic extension of minority game?

slide-57
SLIDE 57

Spin glasses

Glassy Materials Hard Optimization Information Science Economics Biology Computer Science Mathematical Physics Probability Theory

Examples

slide-58
SLIDE 58

Mathematics & probability

slide-59
SLIDE 59

Symbiosis of techniques

  • Theoretical physics interplay

– Minimalist modelling – Sophisticated mathematical analysis – Computer simulation

  • Both to check with more complicated real world
  • And to do experiments for which no real analogue

– Conceptualization

  • Real experiment

+ Conclusion I

slide-60
SLIDE 60

Useful interdisciplinary transfer

Not only of

materials and experimental methods

but also of

concepts & mathematical techniques

for

Understanding, quantification & application

And there are many more applications still to consider

through physics

ConclusionII

slide-61
SLIDE 61

Caveats

  • I have only given brief indications

– Needs much fleshing – but I hope illustrative of possibilities

  • Concentrated on macroscopic properties

– Not individuals

  • And on typical/average behaviour, not fluctuations

– e.g. Not a guide for stockmarket speculation

  • But one could do more

– And there is much more to do

slide-62
SLIDE 62

Collaborators

Tomaso Aste Jay Banavar Arnaud Buhot Andrea Cavagna Premla Chandra Tuck Choy Ton Coolen Dinah Cragg Lexie Davison Malcolm Dunlop Alex Duering Sam Edwards David Elderfield Fernando Nobre Dominic O’Kane Reinhold Oppermann Richard Penney Albrecht Rau Hans-Juergen Sommers Nicolas Sourlas Byron Southern Mike Thorpe Tim Watkin Andreas Wendemuth Werner Wiethege Michael Wong Julio Fernandez Juan Pedro Garrahan S.K.Ghatak Irene Giardina Peter Gillin Paul Goldbart Lev Ioffe Peter Kahn Scott Kirkpatrick Stephen Laughton Esteban Moro Peter Mottishaw Normand Mousseau Hidetoshi Nishimori

Collaborators

Teachers, colleagues, students, postdocs, friends

Tomaso Aste Jay Banavar Ludovic Berthier Stefan Boettcher Arnaud Buhot Andrea Cavagna Premla Chandra Tuck Choy Ton Coolen Dinah Cragg Lexie Davison Andrea De Martino Malcolm Dunlop Alex Duering David Elderfield Julio Fernandez Tobias Galla Juan Pedro Garrahan S.K.Ghatak Irene Giardina Peter Gillin Paul Goldbart Lev Ioffe Robert Jack Alexandre Lefevre Turab Lookman Peter Kahn Scott Kirkpatrick Helmut Katzgraber Stephen Laughton Francesco Mancini Marc Mezard Esteban Moro Peter Mottishaw Normand Mousseau Hidetoshi Nishimori Fernando Nobre Dominic O’Kane Reinhold Oppermann Giorgio Parisi Richard Penney Albrecht Rau Avadh Saxena Manuel Schmidt Hans-Juergen Sommers Nicolas Sourlas Byron Southern Mike Thorpe Tim Watkin Andreas Wendemuth Werner Wiethege Stephen Whitelam Peter Wolynes Michael Wong Phil Anderson Sam Edwards Walter Kohhn

slide-63
SLIDE 63

Theoretical methodology

  • Statics/thermodynamics:

– Partition function

  • Dynamics:

– Generating functional * Transform to macrovariables: average over disorder

Multi-replica/ multi-time correlation & response fns

* Infinite-range

extremal dominance ~ solubility + subtlety)

{exp[ ]} Z Tr H β = −

( ) (microscopic eqn. of motion) Z D t δ = S

For aficionados