Non-Reversible Parallel Tempering: A Scalable Highly Parallel MCMC Scheme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Parallel tempering (PT) methods are a popular class of Markov chain Monte Carlo schemes used to sample complex high-dimensional probability distributions. They rely on a collection of N interacting auxiliary chains targeting tempered versions of the target distribution to improve the exploration of the state space. We provide here a new perspective on these highly parallel algorithms and their tuning by identifying and formalizing a sharp divide in the behaviour and performance of reversible versus non-reversible PT schemes. We show theoretically and empirically that a class of non-reversible PT methods dominates its reversible counterparts and identify distinct scaling limits for the non-reversible and reversible schemes, the former being a piecewise-deterministic Markov process and the latter a diffusion. These results are exploited to identify the optimal annealing schedule for non-reversible PT and to develop an iterative scheme approximating this schedule. We provide a wide range of numerical examples supporting our theoretical and methodological contributions. The proposed methodology is applicable to sample from a distribution π with a density L with respect to a reference distribution π0 and compute the normalizing constant ∫Ldπ0. A typical use case is when π0 is a prior distribution, L a likelihood function and π the corresponding posterior distribution.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".