Convergence of Langevin Monte Carlo in Chi-Squared and Renyi Divergence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study sampling from a target distribution $ν_* = e^{-f}$ using the unadjusted Langevin Monte Carlo (LMC) algorithm when the potential $f$ satisfies a strong dissipativity condition and it is first-order smooth with a Lipschitz gradient. We prove that, initialized with a Gaussian random vector that has sufficiently small variance, iterating the LMC algorithm for $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(λ^2 dε^{-1})$ steps is sufficient to reach $ε$-neighborhood of the target in both Chi-squared and Renyi divergence, where $λ$ is the logarithmic Sobolev constant of $ν_*$. Our results do not require warm-start to deal with the exponential dimension dependency in Chi-squared divergence at initialization. In particular, for strongly convex and first-order smooth potentials, we show that the LMC algorithm achieves the rate estimate $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(dε^{-1})$ which improves the previously known rates in both of these metrics, under the same assumptions. Translating this rate to other metrics, our results also recover the state-of-the-art rate estimates in KL divergence, total variation and $2$-Wasserstein distance in the same setup. Finally, as we rely on the logarithmic Sobolev inequality, our framework covers a range of non-convex potentials that are first-order smooth and exhibit strong convexity outside of a compact region.
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 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".