SWAT/35 Novembe 10, 2017 Simulation of Field Theoies in Wavelet Repesentation axiv:hep-lat/9407010v1 15 Jul 1994 I.G. Halliday and P. Suanyi 1 Depatment of Physics, Univesity of Wales Swansea, Wales, United Kingdom SA2 8PP Abstact The field is expanded in a wavelet seies and the wavelet coefficients ae vaied in a simulation of the 2D φ 4 field theoy. The dastically educed autocoelations esult in a substantial decease of computing equiements, compaed to those in local Metopolis simulations. The impovement is shown to be the esult of an additional feedominthechoice oftheallowed angeofchangeat themetopolis updateofwavelet components, namely the ange can be optimized independently fo all wavelet sizes. 1 Pemanent addess: Depatment of Physics, Univesity of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, 45221 U.S.A.
1 Intoduction In the pesent wok we intoduce a new appoach to simulations of field theoies, based on wavelet expansions. [1] [2] [3] Wavelets fom complete sets of localized, othonomal states. Elements of a set of wavelets diffe both in thei locations and in thei scales. In fact, complete sets contain wavelets at all scales, stating fom an elementay scale up to the scale of the system. Wavelets can be labeled by two integes, n and k, chaacteizing thei scale and thei location. They can be fomed fom a function ψ(x) as ψ k,n (x) = 2 n/2 ψ(2 n x+k). (1) Wavelets have been applied succcessfully to linea poblems, like signal analysis. In the continuum, wavelets fom a complete othonomal system, allowing the expansion of L 2 integable functions, in a manne analogous to Fouie expansion. The othogonal functions of the Fouie expansion ae not localized, consequently they ae not nomalizable. Wavelets ae localized, albeit on vaying scales, fom the elementay scale to the scale of the system. They ae themselves L 2 integable function. As a ule, they lead to seies expansions with convegence consideably faste then that of a Fouie expansion. The popety of wavelets of analysing data at all scales makes them, in pinciple, attactive fo the investigation of lattice poblems. One can define wavelet epesentations, in which fields ae expessed by thei wavelet expansion coefficients, athe then by thei values at given spacetime points. Onfinite lattices, theangeof integes k andnin(1) is finite. It is not obvious that wavelet expansions, designed fo investigating linea poblems ae useful fo investigating a highly nonlinea poblem such as a lattice field theoy. The pesence of lage scale wavelets intoduces nonlocality in the expession fo inteaction tems. The decese in autocoelation time is patially countebalanced by the inceased computational equiements. It is then impotant to give estimates fo the gowth of nonlineaity in tems of the lattice size. The question is the balance: whethe one gains moe by deceasing autocoelation times than one loses by having to deal with a numbe of nonlocal tems in the action. This question will be investigated extensively in the emainde of this pape. Wavelets have aleady been used in lattice poblems: as a vaiational basis in the XY model [4], and as a tool to facilitate gauge fixing [5]. Simulations in wavelet epesentation ae somewhat simila to simulations using collective updating methods, such as Swendsen and Wang s algoithm [6] o the multigid method [7]. While the multigid method is a so called smoothing filte, aveaging a lage numbe of points, the wavelet epesentation is, in a way, the opposite. Wavelets ae designed to have thei fist few moments vanish. Collective updating methods have been designed to decease the dynamical exponent z appeaing in the expession of the autocoelation time (τ) of physical quantities τ c ξ z, (2) whee ξ is the spacetime coelation length, the invese of the mass gap. In fact, some of the algoithms ae able to educe z to almost zeo. Nea second ode phase tansition points the coelation length is popotional to the linea size of the lattice, L. Thus, collective updating algoithms ae paticulay useful nea citical points and fo lage lattices. In fact, fo lattices of small o modeate size o at some distance away fom the citical point, most collective updating algoithms ae not much supeio to local updating methods. 1
In the next section we will intoduce the wavelet fomalism and tansfom the φ 4 field theoy into wavelet epesentation. Then we will count the numbe of nonlocal tems, to get a handle on the incease of computational needs as a function of lattice size. In Section 3. we put the wavelet method to a diect test, we simulate a 2 dimensional φ 4 theoy, both using the standad Metopolis algoithm and the wavelet method. The last section contains ou conclusions. 2 The Wavelet Method in Field Theoies Wavelets fom a othonomal system of vaiables intepolating between coodinate and momentum epesentations. In fact, wavelet epesentations (thee ae many diffeent choices) unify the advantages of both. They ae much moe local and stable against small petubations than the momentum epesentation, and at the same time they can descibe long ange coelations with a small numbe of tems, unlike the coodinate epesentation. The most widely used wavelet filtes wee discoveed by Daubechies [1]. Daubechies wavelets on discete sets ae defined as othogonal matix tansfoms. 2p of 2 n spatial components, x 1,...,x 2 n ae combined togethe in two diffeent ways: with coefficients c 1 x 1 + c 2 x 2 +...+c 2p x 2p (smoothed combinations) and with diffeent odeing and signs of the same coefficients c 2p x 1 +c 2p 1 x 2...+c 1 x 2p (wavelets). The seies is equied to have p vanishing moments, i.e. k( k) l c 2p k = 0, l = 0,1,...,p 1. Similaly, one foms such linea combination fom subsequent components x i, shifted by two lattice units an abitay numbe of times. Then equiing the othogonality of the tansfomation makes the coefficients essentially unique. The wavelet tansfom consists of n p subsequent othogonal tansfomations of the above descibed type, applied to the smoothed combinations obtained in the pevious othogonal tansfomation. The coefficients c 1,...,c 2p ae called the Daubechies wavelet filte coefficients. Fo p = 1 c 0 = c 1 = 1/ 2, and the wavelets ae called Haa-wavelets [2]. The th Haa wavelet of length 2 k on a one dimensional lattice is fomed as 2 k 1 χ k, = 2 k/2 [φ(i+2 k ) φ(i+2 k 1 +2 k )], (3) i=1 whee φ(j) denotes the field at the nth site. The ange of k and is k = 1,2,...,n, and = 0,...,2 n k 1, espectively, whee L = 2 n, is the size of the lattice. The othogonal system is fomed fom the wavelets χ(k, ), and one smoothed combination χ = 1 L φ(i), (4) L which is the nomalized total magnetization. The stuctue of the wavelet coefficients fo geneal p is simila to that of (3). Thus, the fist 2 n 1 wavelets ae combinations of 2p neighboing data points shifted by multiples of 2. Then the next 2 n 2 wavelets (each shifted fom the next by 4 data points) ae of length l 2 = 1+(2 2 1)(2p 1), etc. The 2 n k 1 kthtype of wavelets aeoflength l k = 1+(2 k 1)(2p 1). i=1 2
They ae shifted fom each othe by 2 k points. The last p combinations ae not wavelets, but maximally smoothed combinations of the oiginal data points. In an application to lattice field theoy one has to use wavelets in moe then one dimension. In fact, wavelets can easily be defined in any numbe of dimensions. In each dimension thewavelets aelabeled bythei scale, k i, andbythei location,. Thus, awavelet coefficient χ(k 1, 1 ;k 2, 2 ;...;k d, d ) coesponds to a wavelet box of length 2 k i in the ith lattice dimension. d is the numbe of dimensions. Thee ae 2 nd k 1 k 2... k d wavelets labeled by a given scale vecto k = {k 1,k 2,...,k d }. The lattice field has a linea expansion in tems of the coefficients χ(k 1, 1 ;k 2, 2 ;...;k d, d ). We will call these coefficients the wavelet epesentation. It is on an equal footing with the momentum and coodinate epesentations. Wavelets ae well suited to analyzing linea poblems. Consequently a Gaussian model is just as simple in wavelet epesentation as in coodinate epesentation. Othonomality implies that the fom of the mass tem is unchanged in wavelet epesentation S = m2 2 2 χ(j,) 2 (5) j, whee fo the sake of simplicity we have dopped the limits of the summations. The kinetic tem is slightly moe complicated, and its explicit fom is not vey enlightening. It has a modeate numbe of nonlocal tems. The popagato in wavelet space is quite analogous to the one in coodinate space. Thus, it hasthesame asympotic behavio andit also becomes singula at thecitical point, m 2 = 0. Citical phenomena can be investigated in wavelet epesentation just as well as in coodinate epesentation. Altenatively, one can easily tansfom coelation functions back to coodinate epesentation, using the wavelet tansfomation. The question aises, howeve, how well the wavelet epesentation is suited to investigate nonlinea poblems, like any nontivial field theoy. In the cuent pape we will investigate a typical example of nonlinea field theoies, the φ 4 theoy. We need to expess the inteaction tem in tems of wavelets. Using the othogonality of the wavelet tansfomation an explicit expession fo the inteaction tem of the Lagangian g φ 4 is vey complicated. It has many non-local tems, some of them coespond to long-ange inteactions. The success of the wavelet epesentation depends on the aveage numbe of these long ange inteaction tems pe wavelet. If this aveage numbe inceases slowly with size we have a chance that simulations in wavelet epesentation will be moe efficient then those in coodinate epesentation. Fist, we will calculate the aveage numbe of inteaction tems pe wavelet coefficient on a d-dimensional lattice. It is sufficient to do the calculation in one dimension. If the numbe of inteaction tems pe wavelet is N in one dimension then it is N d in d dimensions. The inteaction tem is a quatic combination of the wavelet coefficients. Fo the sake of simplicity we will do the counting fo the Haa-wavelet epesentation. Then it is easy to see that in evey tem the coefficient with the lowest value of j must be squaed. Let that coefficient be χ(j,m). Then the combinations of othe wavelets multiplying χ(j,m) 2 can be found as follows: fo each j thee is only one wavelet ovelaping χ(j, m). Then the bilinea multiplie has (n j)(n j +1)/2 diffeent types of tems. The numbe of wavelets with 3
scale j is L/2 j. Then the total numbe of types of non-local inteaction tems is LN = n 1 j=1 L (n j)(n j +1). (6) 2 j 2 In othe wods, the aveage numbe of non-local inteaction tems pe wavelet is N n2 2 = (logl)2 2(log2) 2. (7) This numbe should be compaed with 1, the aveage numbe of tems pe site in the coodinate epesentation. In d dimension the appopiate facto is N d = (logl)2d 2 d (log2) 2d. (8) In the next section, befoe discussing ou simulations, we will pefom a moe pecise analysis of computational needs. It will tun out that the numbe of computations pe lattice site in a d dimensional model inceases only as (logl) d and not as (logl) 2d. The application of multiple hits at each wavelet coefficient in the Monte Calo simulation futhe deceases the atio of computational needs. 3 Simulations The diffeence in the numbe of cycles needed between local and wavelet simulations is due to the calculation of the change of the action. The lagest computational needs aise fom the calculation of the inteaction tem. The action has the fom S = 1 d m 2 φ 2 2 + (φ φ êj ) 2 + g 12 φ4 (9) j This expession is vey complicated in tems of the wavelet coefficients, even fo the simplest, Haa wavelets. Fo that eason it is not conducive to the calculations to expess (9) in tems of χ(k 1, 1,...,k d, d ). It is moe efficient to stoe both the coodinate and the wavelet epesentation coefficients. This doubles stoage needs, but acceleates and simplifies the code consideably. Supposethatduingasweepofthelatticeweupdatethecoefficientχ = χ(k 1, 1,...,k d, d ). Then the action has the following dependence on χ: S = m2 χ 2 + [ 2 χ[φ φ φ êj ] j χ φ ] +ê j χ ( ) + χ4 4 ( ) φ + χ3 3 φ φ + χ2 4! χ 3! χ 4 + χ 6 ( φ χ ) + χ2 2 ( ) 2 φ φ 2 χ [ φ χ φ ] 2 +ê j χ φ 3 +tems independent of χ, (10) 4
The coefficients φ / χ depend only on the elative position of the lattice points. They ae given by poducts of coefficients c (k) i, fo k = k 1,k 2,...,k d. These coefficients can be easily tabulated with minimal stoage equiements, even fo geneal p. The coefficient of χ 4, and that of the quadatic pat of the kinetic tem depend on k only. Fo Haa wavelets the coefficient of the fouth ode tem is 2 (k 1+k 2 +...+k d dn)/2 The action defines the pobability distibution of χ. It must be evaluated epeatedly duing simulations.the calculation of the inteaction pat equies 8 floating point opeations (5 fo Haa wavelets) fo evey individual coodinate point,. Thee ae l ki (2p 1) d 2 k 1+...+k d points inside the wavelet. Now, fo a complete sweep one has to update all 2 nd k 1... k d coefficients of the same kind, giving the numbe of floating point opeations as 8(2p 1) d 2 nd. Finally, one has to update the coefficients fo all values of k 1,...,k d, binging in an additional coefficient of n d, whee n = logl/log2, whee L is the length of an edge of the lattice. Then the aveage numbe of floating point opeations pe lattice site is N d = 8(2p 1) d n d. The calculation of the kinetic tem equies futhe 4(2p 1) d n d opeations. Fo Haa wavelets the calculation of the kinetic tem equies only O(n d 1 ) floating point opeations. Thee is a futhe equiement in the updating algoithm. Afte evey change of a vaiable χ one has to ecalculate the affected fields in coodinate epesentation. It is easy to get a simila estimate fo the aveage numbe of floating point opeations needed fo such an updating. It just changes the coefficient of N d fom 8+4d to 10+ 4d. The atio to the aveage numbe of floating point opeations pe site in a staightfowad simulation in local simulation (coodinate epesentation) (6+2d) is then t w t l = 10+4d 6+2d [n(2p 1)]d [1+O(1/n)]. (11) whee t l and t w ae the aveage times a sweep of the lattice takes in local and wavelet simulations, espectively. In paticula, fo Haa wavelets and two dimensions, R d (n 2 /2)[1+ O(1/n)]. In fact, one can obtain a substantially smalle atio as follows. Notice that the facto (logl) d appeas in (11) due to the computation of the coefficients of χ in action (10). If one pefoms the Metopolis simulation in such a way that thee ae seveal hits at evey wavelet χ, then the same coefficients of (10) can be used and the exta calculation becomes not moe costly then that of a hit in coodinate epesentation (local simulation). At the same time, having seveal hits at the same field component does not lead to any substantial savings in the local updating algoithm. Thus, in the limit of lage numbe of hits the aveage sweeptimes fo the two types of simulations convege. Of couse, afte a cetain numbe of hits, the etun in deceasing statistical eos diminishes. As usual, one has to find the optimal numbe of hits, so that the statistical eos wee minimized using a fixed amount of computational time. Figue 1. shows the dependence of autocoelation times on the numbe of hits. The autocoelation times have been calculated using two diffeent techniques. One, by diect measuement of the autocoelation of the total magnetization, and the othe by calculating the squae of the elative eo of the same physical quantity. They povide vey simila infomation. When choosing the numbe of hits in the simulation, we had to keep in mind that the equiements on computing computing time slowly incease with the numbe of hits. The poduct of τ w with the aveage time a sweep, t w, should be 5
optimized. We chose the optimum value of 5 in all of ou simulations. Fo 5 hits we find the following values fo t w /t l : 1.2, 1.3, 1.54, 1.82, on lattices of sizes L = 8,16,32, and 64, espectively. The quality of an algoithm is detemined by its impovement facto, which is defined as I = t wτ w t l τ l, (12) whee τ l and τ w efe to eal time autocoelation lengths. Having detemined (11) in the est of this pape we will concentate on the detemination of autocoelation times τ w and τ l. It is impotant to emphasize a substantial diffeence between a simulation using the standad, local (coodinate epesentation) algoithm and a simulation in wavelet epesentation. A hidden paamete of all simulations is the size of the window,, in which a new field value is picked duing the Metopolis algoithm. In othe wods, if the value of the field component is φ, then we choose a andom new value fo φ, φ, in the inteval φ /2 < φ < φ+ /2. While in a local simulation thee is only one possible paamete, in the wavelet epesentation thee is the possibility, and indeed the necessity, of choosing diffeent values ij, i,j = 1,...,n+1, fo diffeent sizes of wavelets. The effect of this feedom of choice of the window sizes on autocoelation times will be discussed late. The evaluation of the impovement facto I of (12) equies the detemination of autocoelation times. We have pefomed extensive simulations on lattices of sizes L =8,16,32, and 64. In wavelet simulation, afte a wamup peiod of O(10 4 ) sweeps we ead out the elevant physical vaiables in the next O(10 5 ) sweeps. Using the local updating algoithm we had to have much longe uns, O(10 6 ) sweeps to be able to detemine autocoelation lengths. We compaed the values of vaious physical quantities, such as φ 2, H, M, c v, and χ, whee M is the magnetization, c v is the specific heat, and χ is the magnetic susceptibility. All the physical quantities ageed within statistical eos in the two simulations. The simulations wee pefomed at fixed g = 1 and vaying m 2 between the limits of -0.31 and -0.25, a ange which includes the citical point. The pupose of the simulations was to calculate autocoelation times, obtained fom the t dependence of autocoelation functions Γ(t) = X(t )X(t t) t, (13) whee X is a physical quantity, t and t label eal time duing the simulation, measued in units of sweeps. The aveage of (13) is ove time t. Fo modeate values of t, Γ(t) is expected to have an exponential dependence on t, Γ(t) Γ(0) e t/τ, whee τ is the autocoelation time. In fact, the integated autocoelation function, Γ I (t) = 1 Γ(0) t Γ(t ) t =0 1 1 e 1/τ. (14) seves as a bette measue of the autocoelation time [8] [9] The integated autocoelation function goes into satuation at lage t. The satuation value detemines the autocoelation time, τ. 6
We calculated autocoelation times (measued in units of sweeps) fo thee physical quantities: Total magnetization, M, aveage value of φ(x) 2, and the aveage value of the action. The dependence of autocoelation times on the mass paamete of the Lagangian, nea the citical point is shown in Figue 2. Typical eos ae about 5-10%. The point of Fig. 2. epesent data on lattice size L = 32. It is impotant to detemine the dependence of autocoelation times on the size of the lattice. Let us define an exponent ζ in a manne, somewhat analogous to (2) τ = cl ζ. (15) At the citical point ζ coincides with z. Away fom the citical point ζ is smalle then z because L > ξ. The diffeence of z and ζ measues the finite size effect on the coelation length. The exponent ζ, plotted in Fig. 3. in the citical egion was calculated using all fou lattice sizes we studied. Nea the citical point, m 2 0.285, the exponent is almost 2. In fact, if the smallest lattice, L = 8, is omitted fom the fit the value exceeds 2. This shows that simulations in wavelet epesentation do not cicumvent citical slowing down. In fact, a plot of exponent ζ in local simulations is almost identical to Fig. 3. In othe wods, the possible gain in autcoelation times (15) in local and wavelet simulations. Indeed, the atio of autocoelation times in local and wavelet epesentation simulations has a lage and faily constant value fo all lattice sizes consideed. Fig. 4. shows these atios in the citical egion of m 2. A multiplie 5 coesponding to the numbe of hits pe wavelet coefficient has been included in τ w. The atio has only a modeate vaiation with lattice size o m 2. It is in the ange of 10-15. Then the impovement facto, I, of (12) at the citical point vaies between 7 on the lagest lattice to a value ove 10 on the smalle lattices. Thee is a slight tendency to an incease of I when one moves away fom citical point towad the disodeed phase. 4 Discussion The geneal expectation of substantially deceased autocoelation times in a simulation in wavelet epesentation was bone out by ou simulations. One can demonstate quite damatically the effectiveness of ou method on the fee bosonic theoy (g = 0). Conside the autocoelation of the total magnetization. As we mentioned ealie, the magnetization is popotional to one of the wavelet expansion coefficients, the non-wavelet component. Let us denote this component by χ. Since the kinetic tem is independent of χ, χ completely decouples. The χ dependence of the action is S = 1 2 m2 χ 2. (16) In othe wods, the action is a Gaussian function of χ. Then the autocoelation length fo magnetization, can only depend on the dimensionless poduct m, whee is the ange of change of χ in the simulation. The dynamical citical exponent is 2. This can be seen by the following heuistic agument. Suppose m << 1. Then stating fom an aveage value, χ 1/m, afte n sweeps the value of χ wandes away by an aveage value of δχ n 7
(andom walk). Complete decoelation equies δχ χ 1/m. Then we obtain the following estimate fo the autocoelation time: τ = n 1 (m ) = λ2 2 2, (17) whee λ is the spatial coelation length on the lattice. (17) shows not only that the citical exponent, z = 2, but also shows that the numeical value of the autocoelation length is invesely popotional to 2. In othe wods, if one chooses fo the non-wavelet coefficient too small one can get vey long autocoelation times. In a wavelet simulation one can contol independently fo diffeent types of coefficients. Indeed, in ou simulation we have chosen the window fo χ in such a way that the acceptance was appoximately 0.5. In a local, coodinate epesentation simulation one has no contol ove the allowed ange of change of the total magnetization. In fact, it is expected to change by a vey small amount in evey sweep. Since χ = φ/ M, thus, δχ = δφ/ M, oughly speaking δχ Mδφ/ M = δφ. We pefomed some simulations at g = 0 as well (fee bosonic theoy), and in those simulations the optimal window was independent of the mass, m. Since the autocoelation can only depend on the poduct m, at small m and constant one can use the asymptotic behavio which should be the same as (17). Indeed we obtained the following autocoelation times fo the total magnetization: 865 at m 2 =.005, 310 at m 2 =.01, 228 at m 2 =.015, and 179 at m 2 =.02. All of these have about 10% eo. These autocoelation times give a good fit to (17). In othe wods, the effective value of fo the magnetization was indeed constant, as we assumed fom the outset. Notice, howeve, what happens in a simulation in wavelet epesentation. The window is adjusted fo each type of wavelet sepaately. In paticula, one adjusts fo the magnetization as well. If one equies constant acceptance, then m and so the autocoelation time is kept constant. The citical slowing down, at least fo fee theoies, is completely eliminated. In the inteacting case thee is substantial mass enomalization. Still, fo modeate values of the m one expects a geneal dependence like (17) on whee one should use the enomalized mass. Unfotunately, in inteacting theoies in D = 2 thee is anothe dimensional quantity, g. The autocoelation time also depends on the dimensionless quantity g/m 2. The dependence on this quantity seems to dominate the behavio of exponent ζ. The constant c is, howeve, affected vey stongly by the value of m, leading to a damatic decease of autocoelation times in simulations in wavelet epesentation. To check the above ideas, we an a seies of simulations in wavelet epesentation on an L = 32 lattice, at the same value of the physical paametes, set at the appoximate location of the citical point, g = 1 and µ 2 =.285, but vaying the window size fo the wavelet component, that is popotional to the total magnetization. Fig. 5. shows autocoelation times fo magnetization as a function of the window size,, fo the appopiate wavelet component, χ = φ/ M, whee M is the total numbe of lattice sites. The cuve has, fo these values of m 2 and g, a boad minimum aound an optimal window size. The optimal value of window size fo the change of φ in local simulations is about = 3. Due to the othogonality of the tansfomation fom local vaiables, φ, to wavelet components, χ, a local simulation is in some sense equivalent to a wavelet simulation in which evey window is set equal to the value of in the local simulation. Fo this eason we an a simulation on a 32 32 lattice at m 2 =.285, setting all windows equal to = 3.0. 8
We obtained an autocoelation time of τ w = 226, compaable to τ l 436. At the same point, if we optimize all the windows, such that all acceptances ae between 0.4 and 0.5, then τ w = 39. This esult suppots the idea that a majo pat of the decease in autocoelation time is not the esult of elaxing the system at diffeent scales simultaneously. It is athe the consequence of the exta feedom of setting the windows fo evey scale independently. InthepesentpapewehaveusedHaawavelets. Itwouldbeofsomeiteesttoinvestigate simulations with othe examples of the Daubechies wavelet seies. Because the wavelet expansion coefficients would be all diffeent, the calculation of the action would take a longe time. It is still possible that the impoved convegence popeties of the wavelet expansion would make the compaision with the local simulation even moe favoable. Finally, we would like to point out that wavelet epesentations can be used fo theoies with moe complicated ode paametes as well. In such simulations the atio of sweeptimes should be oughly the same as has been obtained in the cuent pape. As an example, fo compact Abelian gauge theoies wavelets should be fomed fom the components of the vecto potential. The calculation of the change of the action equies the calculation of tigonometic function in both epesentations. The estimate we have given fo computational equiements in Sec. 2. would still stand. Unfotunately, since the action is nonpolynomial, the atio of simulation times may not be substantially impoved by epeated hits at individual wavelet coefficients. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The wok of P. S. is suppoted by funds fom Reseach Committee of the Highe Education Funding Council fo Wales (HEFCWR). He is also indebted fo the patial suppot of the United States Depatment of Enegy unde gant no. DE-FG02-84ER40153. Refeences [1] I. Daubechies, Communications in Pue and Applied Mathematics,41 (1988) 909 [2] C.K. Chui, An Intoduction to Wavelets, Academic Pess, Boston, 1992 [3] W.H. Pen, S.A. Teulkosky, W.T. Vettekin, and B.P. Flanney, Numeical Recipes in C, Cambidge Univ. Pess, Cambidge 1992 [4] C. Best, A. Schäfe, and W. Geine, Contibution to Lattice 93, Dallas, Texas, Oct. 1993; C.Best and A. Schäfe, Fankfut pepint TP 357/1994 [5] T. Dape and C. McNeile, Kentucky pepint, UK/93-06 [6] R.H.Swendsen and J.S.Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58 (1987) 86 [7] A. Bandt, Nucl. Phys. B (Poc. Suppl.) 26 (1992) 137 [8] R.G. Edwads and A.D. Sokal, Phys. Rev. D38 (1988) 2009; [9] U. Wolff, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62 (1989) 361; Nuclea Physics B322 (1989) 759 9
FIGURE CAPTIONS Fig. 1. Fig. 2. Fig. 3. Fig. 4. Fig. 5. τ w fo magnetization as a function of the numbe of hits pe wavelet coefficient on a 32 32 lattice. The diamonds epesent a diect measuement, while the tiangles epesent τ eff calculated fom elative eos. τ w asafunctionofm 2 fothetotalmagnetization(diamonds), fo φ 2 (tiangles), and fo the total enegy (stas). The exponent ζ as a function of m 2. The atio of autocoelation times τ l /τ w as a function of m 2. Figues 4a, 4b, 4c, and 4d coespond to lattices of size L =8,16,32, qnd 64, espectively. Autocoelation time τ w as a function of at m 2 =.285 on a lattice of size L = 32. 10