An asymptotic Peskun ordering and its application to lifted samplers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Peskun ordering between two samplers, implying a dominance of one over the other, is known among the Markov chain Monte Carlo community for being a remarkably strong result. It is however also known for being a result that is notably difficult to establish. Indeed, one has to prove that the probability to reach a state y from a state x, using a sampler, is greater than or equal to the probability using the other sampler, and this must hold for all pairs (x,y) such that x≠y. We provide in this paper a weaker version that does not require an inequality between the probabilities for all these states: essentially, the dominance holds asymptotically, as a varying parameter grows without bound, as long as the states for which the probabilities are greater than or equal to belong to a mass-concentrating set. The weak ordering turns out to be useful to compare lifted samplers for partially-ordered discrete state-spaces with their Metropolis–Hastings counterparts. An analysis in great generality yields a qualitative conclusion: they asymptotically perform better in certain situations (and we are able to identify them), but not necessarily in others (and the reasons why are made clear). A quantitative study in a specific context of graphical-model simulation is also conducted.
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 | 0.008 | 0.043 |
| 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 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".