MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413134665 · doi:10.1088/1751-8121/adf924

Dual formulation of the maximum entropy method applied to analytic continuation of quantum Monte Carlo data

2025· article· en· W4413134665 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Chuna, Nicholas Barnfield, Tobias Dornheim, Michael P. Friedlander, Tim Hoheisel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Laser Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersH2020 European Research Council
KeywordsAnalytic continuationMonte Carlo methodQuantum Monte CarloStatistical physicsAlgorithmQuasi-Monte Carlo methodHybrid Monte CarloComputer scienceMonte Carlo algorithmQuantumPhysicsMarkov chain Monte CarloMathematicsQuantum mechanicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Many fields of physics use quantum Monte Carlo techniques, but struggle to estimate dynamic spectra via the analytic continuation of imaginary-time quantum Monte Carlo data. One of the most ubiquitous approaches to analytic continuation is the maximum entropy method (MEM). We supply a dual Newton optimization algorithm to be used within the MEM and provide analytic bounds for the algorithm’s error. The optimization algorithm is freely availible on github ( repository ). The MEM is typically used with Bryan’s controversial algorithm (Rothkopf 2020 Data 5 55). We present new theoretical issues that are not yet in the literature. Our algorithm has all the theoretical benefits of Bryan’s algorithm without these theoretical issues the implementation of the dual Newton optimizer within the MEM is freely available on github ( repository ). We compare the MEM with Bryan’s optimization to the MEM with our dual Newton optimization on test problems from lattice quantum chromodynamics and plasma physics. These comparisons show that in the presence of noise the dual Newton algorithm produces better estimates and error bars; this indicates the limits of Bryan’s algorithm’s applicability. We use the MEM to investigate authentic quantum Monte Carlo data for the uniform electron gas at warm dense matter conditions and further substantiate the roton-type feature in the dispersion relation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and TheoreticalSame topicSpectroscopy and Laser ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207