Convergence in the Wasserstein Metric for Markov Chain Monte Carlo Algorithms with Applications to Image Restoration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we show how the time for convergence to stationarity of a Markov chain can be assessed using the Wasserstein metric, rather than the usual choice of total variation distance. The Wasserstein metric may be more easily applied in some applications, particularly those on continuous state spaces. Bounds on convergence time are established by considering the number of iterations required to approximately couple two realizations of the Markov chain to within ε tolerance. The particular application considered is the use of the Gibbs sampler in the Bayesian restoration of a degraded image, with pixels that are a continuous grey-scale and with pixels that can only take two colours. On finite state spaces, a bound in the Wasserstein metric can be used to find a bound in total variation distance. We use this relationship to get a precise O(N log N) bound on the convergence time of the stochastic Ising model that holds for appropriate values of its parameter as well as other binary image models. Our method employing convergence in the Wasserstein metric can also be applied to perfect sampling algorithms involving coupling from the past to obtain estimates of their running times.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".