An improved variant of simulated annealing that converges under fast cooling

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Abstract

Given a target function UU to minimize on a finite state space X\mathcal{X}, a proposal chain with generator QQ and a cooling schedule T(t)T(t) that depends on time tt, in this paper we study two types of simulated annealing (SA) algorithms with generators M1,t(Q,U,T(t))M_{1,t}(Q,U,T(t)) and M2,t(Q,U,T(t))M_{2,t}(Q,U,T(t)) respectively. While M1,tM_{1,t} is the classical SA algorithm, we introduce a simple and improved variant that we call M2,tM_{2,t} which provably converges faster. When T(t)>cM2/log⁡(t+1)T(t) > c_{M_2}/\log(t+1) follows the logarithmic cooling schedule, our proposed algorithm is strongly ergodic both in total variation and in relative entropy, and converges to the set of global minima, where cM2c_{M_2} is a constant that we explicitly identify. If cM1c_{M_1} is the optimal hill-climbing constant that appears in logarithmic cooling of M1,tM_{1,t}, we show that cM1≥cM2c_{M_1} \geq c_{M_2} and give simple conditions under which cM1>cM2c_{M_1} > c_{M_2}. Our proposed M2,tM_{2,t} thus converges under a faster logarithmic cooling in this regime. The other situation that we investigate corresponds to cM1>cM2=0c_{M_1} > c_{M_2} = 0, where we give a class of fast and non-logarithmic cooling schedule that works for M2,tM_{2,t} (but not for M1,tM_{1,t}). In addition to these asymptotic convergence results, we compare and analyze finite-time behaviour between these two annealing algorithms as well. Finally, we present two algorithms to simulate M2,tM_{2,t}.

Explore this paper’s authors, topics and related work.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Reviews 0

Write a reviewWrite

No reviews yet.

Discussion 0

Add a commentWrite

No comments yet.