Complexity results for MCMC derived from quantitative bounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers how to obtain MCMC quantitative convergence bounds which can be translated into tight complexity bounds in high-dimensional settings. We propose a modified drift-and-minorization approach, which establishes generalized drift conditions defined in subsets of the state space. The subsets are called the “large sets”, and are chosen to rule out some “bad” states which have poor drift property when the dimension of the state space gets large. Using the “large sets” together with a “fitted family of drift functions”, a quantitative bound can be obtained which can be translated into a tight complexity bound. As a demonstration, we analyze several Gibbs samplers and obtain complexity upper bounds for the mixing time. In particular, for one example of Gibbs sampler which is related to the James–Stein estimator, we show that the number of iterations required for the Gibbs sampler to converge is constant under certain conditions on the observed data and the initial state. It is our hope that this modified drift-and-minorization approach can be employed in many other specific examples to obtain complexity bounds for high-dimensional Markov chains.
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 | 0.012 | 0.083 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| 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".