Paper detail

Determining efficient temperature sets for the simulated tempering method

In statistical physics, the efficiency of tempering approaches strongly depends on ingredients such as the number of replicas $R$, reliable determination of weight factors and the set of used temperatures, ${\mathcal T}_R = \{T_1, T_2, \ldots, T_R\}$. For the simulated tempering (SP) in particular -- useful due to its generality and conceptual simplicity -- the latter aspect (closely related to the actual $R$) may be a key issue in problems displaying metastability and trapping in certain regions of the phase space. To determine ${\mathcal T}_R$'s leading to accurate thermodynamics estimates and still trying to minimize the simulation computational time, here it is considered a fixed exchange frequency scheme for the ST. From the temperature of interest $T_1$, successive $T$'s are chosen so that the exchange frequency between any adjacent pair $T_r$ and $T_{r+1}$ has a same value $f$. By varying the $f$'s and analyzing the ${\mathcal T}_R$'s through relatively inexpensive tests (e.g., time decay toward the steady regime), an optimal situation in which the simulations visit much faster and more uniformly the relevant portions of the phase space is determined. As illustrations, the proposal is applied to three lattice models, BEG, Bell-Lavis, and Potts, in the hard case of extreme first-order phase transitions, always giving very good results, even for $R=3$. Also, comparisons with other protocols (constant entropy and arithmetic progression) to choose the set ${\mathcal T}_R$ are undertaken. The fixed exchange frequency method is found to be consistently superior, specially for small $R$'s. Finally, distinct instances where the prescription could be helpful (in second-order transitions and for the parallel tempering approach) are briefly discussed.

preprint2014arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.