XVI International Congress on Mathematical Physics


 Lenard Wheeler
 6 months ago
 Views:
Transcription
1 Aug 2009 XVI International Congress on Mathematical Physics
2 Underlying geometry: finite graph G=(V,E ). Set of possible configurations: V (assignments of +/ spins to the vertices). Probability of a configuration is given by the Gibbs distribution (no external field): ( ) exp ( x) ( y) x y E Z( ) Ferromagnetic with inversetemperature : as the measure favors configurations with aligned neighboring spins. 2
3 MC sampler for the Gibbs distribution: Update each u V via an independent Poisson() clock, replacing it by a new spin conditioned on V u. Ergodic reversible MC with stationary measure. How fast is the convergence to equilibrium? Measuring convergence in L 2 ( ) : Spectral gap : gap =  (where = largest nontrivial eigenvalue of the kernel H ). Measuring convergence in L : Mixing time : tmix t H t ( ) inf : max, TV 3
4 Setting: Ising model on the lattice ( /n ) d. Belief: For some critical inversetemperature c : Low temperature ( > c ) : gap  and t mix are exponential in the surface area. Critical temperature ( = c ) : gap  and t mix are polynomial in the surface area. High temperatures:. Rapid mixing: gap  =O() and t mix log n 2. Mixing occurs abruptly, i.e., there is cutoff. 4
5 Describes a sharp transition in the convergence of finite ergodic Markov chains to stationarity. Steady convergence it takes a while to reach distance ½ from, then a while longer to reach distance ¼, etc. Abrupt convergence the distance from quickly drops from to 0 5
6 Suppose we run Glauber dynamics for the Ising Model satisfying t mix f(n) for some f(n). Cutoff some c 0 0 so that: Must run the chain for at least c 0 f(n) steps to even reach distance (  ) from. Running it any longer than that is essentially redundant. (c 0 o()) f(n) Proofs usually require (and thus provide) a deep understanding of the chain (its reasons for mixing). Many natural chains are believed to have cutoff, yet proving cutoff can be extremely challenging. 6
7 Recall: The chain has cutoff if the following holds: t () mix lim for any 0. n tmix ( ) That is, for any 0 < a, < we have t ( ) ( o()) t ( ). mix t ( ) inf t : max H,, mix TV sup A A. A mix t TV 7
8 No interactions: Uniform {±} updates on the n sites [the discretetime analogue of the chain is the lazy random walk on the hypercube] The magnetization is a Markov Chain (analogous to the classical Ehrenfest s Urn birth & death chain). The Coupon Collector approach: t ( ) log n c, whereas mix mix 2 t ( ) log n c. [Aldous 83]: lower bound is tight: ½ log n + O() time suffices! 8
9 Known: Low temperature: gap  exp(c n) and t mix exp(c n) for some c > 0. High temperatures: gap  =O() and t mix log n Open: Polynomial gap , t mix at the critical? Static critical already highly involved... Open: Cutoff at high temperatures? Cutoff unknown even in dimension (Q. of Peres) To this date, no proof of cutoff for any chain whose stationary distribution is not completely understood... 9
10 . Complete graph (CurieWeiss model): Believed to predict the behavior of the Ising model on highdimensional tori. Size of the system plays the role of surfacearea. 2. Regular tree (Bethe lattice): Canonical example of a nonamenable graph (with boundary proportional to its volume). Height of tree plays the role of surfacearea. 0
11 Rescaling : [Griffiths, Weng, Langer 66], [Ellis 87]), : For : gap, t mix exponential in n. [Aizenman, Holley 84], [Bubley, Dyer 97]), : For : gap = O(), t mix log n.. [Levin, Luczak, Peres 07], [Ding, L., Peres 09]: For : gap, t mix n /2 For : cutoff : t log n O( ) mix 2 ( ) Critical window around c is of order Picture completely verified. ( ) exp ( n) ( x) ( y) x y n
12 Theorem [Ding, L., Peres 09]: = with 2 n : Cutoff at log( 2 n) with a window of /. gap  2 = (+o())/. = with =O(n /2 ) : gap , t mix n /2 and there is no cutoff. = + with 2 n : n gx ( ) gap, t exp[ log( ) dx], where mix 2 0 gx ( ) tanh( x) is the unique positive root of gx (). x tanh( x) There is no cutoff. x 2
13 gap, exp[ ( ) n] 3 2 t mix 4 gap,t n / 2 mix gap t o() o() 2 mix 2 ( ) log[( ) n] 3
14 Key element in the analysis: By the complete symmetry, the magnetization is in fact a birthanddeath Markov Chain. Its mixing governs the mixing of the full dynamics. Proof involves a delicate analysis of certain hitting times to establish the precise point of reaching the center of mass. Stationary distribution of the magnetization chain for the dynamics on n = 500 vertices. 4
15 Potts model: [] q V (assigning colors to the sites) ( ) Z ( )exp xy E { ( x) ( y)} [Ellis 87]: MeanField Potts has a phase transition in q the structure of the around 2 log( ) : q c q 2 Disordered phase for < c : Each of the q spins appears roughly the same # of times. Ordered phase for > c : One of the spins dominates. [Gore, Jerrum 96]: Mixing is exponentially slow at = c even for (faster) SwendsenWang dynamics No powerlaw of gap , t mix at criticality!?! 5
16 [Cuff, Ding, L., Louidor, Peres, Sly]: confirm the picture w.r.t. a new critical point m < c! The smallest such that g( x) has a nontrivial root in (, ]. x e e ( q ) e x ( x)/( q ) Analogous behavior to Ising around m, e.g.: q Rapid mixing (log n) with cutoff at < m. Power law at criticality: gap , t mix n /3 for = m. Critical window has order n 2/3. Exp. mixing, yet fast essential mixing in ( m, c ). x 6
17 m m : : Rapid mixing with cutoff 3 / Power law mixing ( n ) Between ( m, c ): Exponential mixing, yet fast essential mixing with cutoff. c : Exponential mixing 7
18 Underlying graph = bary tree of height h. has a constructive representation (free boundary): Assign a uniform spin to the root Scan the tree top to bottom: Every site inherits the spin of its parent with probability ( tanh ) and mutates o/w. Two critical temperatures: 2. :Uniqueness threshold (does the effect of a plus boundary on the root vanish as h ). 2. : Purity threshold (does the effect of a typical boundary on the root vanish as h ). c coincides with critical spinglass parameter. 8
19 c is the critical mixing parameter : [Kenyon, Mossel, Peres 0], [Berger, Kenyon, Mossel, Peres 05]: Under free boundary: For : gap = O(), t mix h For : log(gap ) h At criticality: No upper bound; shown that gap is at least linear in h and conjectured that this is tight. [Martinelli, Sinclair, Weitz 04]: Under allplus BC: gap = O(), t mix h for all >0. What is the behavior at the critical c? 9
20 Theorem [Ding, L., Peres 09]: Fix b 2 and let c = arctanh(b /2 ) be the critical inversetemperature for the Ising model on the bary tree of height h. There exist C, c, c 2 > 0 independent of b such that :. For any boundary condition : gap , t mix = O( h C ). 2. In the free boundary case: gap  c h 2, t mix c 2 h 3. (first geometry other than the complete graph where powerlaw mixing at criticality is verified) 20
21 Use block dynamics [Martinelli 97] to form a recursion on the tree: inf{gap } inf{gap } inf{gap } h 2 Reduces to estimating a quantity that, in the free boundary case, corresponds to a reconstructiontype result of [Pemantle, Peres 05] ( propagate a spin at the root down to level, then reconstruct it back ). In our case: we have, an arbitrary boundary condition (greatly complicates the proof)... Still open: Is there cutoff for c? r 2
22 Theorem [L., Sly]: Let log( 2) be the critical inversetemperature c 2 for the Ising model on 2. Then the continuoustime Glauber dynamics for the Ising model on ( /n ) 2 with periodic boundary conditions at 0 < c has cutoff at (/l) log n, where l is the spectral gap of the dynamics on the infinite volume lattice. Analogous result holds for any dimension d. [e.g., for d = there is cutoff at logn 2( tanh( 2 )) for any temperature]. 22
23 Main result hinges on an L L 2 reduction, enabling the application of logsobolev inequalities. Generic method that gives further results on: Arbitrary external field and nonuniform interactions. Boundary conditions (including free, allplus, mixed). Other spin system models: Antiferromagnetic Ising Gas Hardcore Potts (ferromagnetic /antiferromagnetic) Coloring Spinglass Other lattices (e.g., triangular, graph products). 23
24 Aug 2009 XVI International Congress on Mathematical Physics 24