pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.00656 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-01 · ❄️ cond-mat.stat-mech

Renormalized entropy production for optimal transport in jump processes: Make conservative forces optimal again

Andreas Dechant , Jann van der Meer This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 18:41 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.stat-mech
keywords renormalized entropy productionjump processesconservative forcesentropy productionoptimal transportdiscrete state spacenonequilibrium thermodynamics
0
0 comments X

The pith

For jump processes, conservative forces uniquely minimize renormalized entropy production for any fixed time evolution of the state.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper shows that the familiar link between conservative forces and minimal entropy production breaks down for jump processes on discrete states, where nonconservative forces generally achieve lower dissipation. It defines a renormalized entropy production whose minimization, for the same prescribed evolution, recovers exactly the conservative force as the unique solution. This restores an optimization principle that holds for diffusions but fails for jumps, especially far from equilibrium and with high barriers. A reader cares because many real systems such as chemical networks and molecular machines are jump processes, so the result supplies a practical way to identify conservative driving through an optimization lens rather than direct potential reconstruction.

Core claim

While conservative forces do not minimize the entropy production for a given time evolution, they are nevertheless uniquely characterized as the minimizer of the renormalized entropy production. The new quantity shares several structural properties with ordinary entropy production yet leads to a different optimization problem whose solution is the conservative force even in finite time.

What carries the argument

Renormalized entropy production, a modified dissipation functional constructed so that its minimizer under fixed state evolution is uniquely the conservative force.

If this is right

  • Conservative forces become recoverable via optimization even when the dynamics consist of discrete jumps rather than diffusion.
  • The gap between standard and renormalized entropy production grows with energy barriers and distance from equilibrium.
  • Finite-time optimal-transport problems can be posed for the renormalized quantity and solved to yield conservative protocols.
  • The same variational characterization applies to the full trajectory ensemble once the state evolution is prescribed.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • This may let researchers decompose observed jump rates into conservative and circulatory parts by solving the renormalized minimization numerically.
  • Protocol design in single-molecule or lattice systems could switch to the renormalized objective to enforce conservative driving without explicit potentials.
  • Scaling the renormalized quantity with system size or barrier height could expose universal limits on dissipation in large discrete networks.

Load-bearing premise

The time evolution of the system's state is fixed in advance and the renormalized entropy production is defined such that its minimizer is the conservative force.

What would settle it

For a concrete two-state jump process with known conservative force, compute the actual minimizer of the renormalized entropy production; any mismatch would falsify the uniqueness claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.00656 by Andreas Dechant, Jann van der Meer.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Illustration of the example for a finite-time transport view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Results for the optimal protocol realizing the trans view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Probability currents corresponding to Fig. 2. The cur view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Results for the optimal protocol minimizing entropy view at source ↗
read the original abstract

For continuous-space diffusion processes, there is a strong connection between conservative forces and entropy production. For a given time evolution of the system's state, the entropy production is minimized when the system is driven by a unique conservative force. However, this relation does not extend to jump processes on a discrete state space. In this case, the forces that minimize the entropy production are generally nonconservative, this effect is more pronounced far from equilibrium in the presence of high energy barriers. Here we show that, while conservative forces do not minimize the entropy production for a given time evolution, they are nevertheless uniquely characterized as the minimizer of a quantity we dub the renormalized entropy production. This work explores the properties this quantity shares with entropy production as well as crucial differences between them. We also discuss the conceptual and physical differences between the corresponding optimization problems in finite time. Our theoretical calculations are illustrated with explicit numerical examples.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines the variational characterization of conservative forces in Markov jump processes on discrete state spaces. While conservative forces minimize entropy production for a prescribed time evolution in diffusion processes, this fails for jump processes, where non-conservative forces typically minimize the entropy production (especially far from equilibrium with high barriers). The authors introduce a renormalized entropy production (REP) functional and claim that, for fixed state evolution, conservative forces are its unique minimizer. They analyze properties shared with and differing from standard entropy production, discuss finite-time optimization distinctions, and illustrate with numerical examples.

Significance. If the REP is derived from an independent variational principle rather than constructed to enforce the minimizer property, the result would provide a useful discrete analogue to the diffusion case and a tool for optimal transport or control problems in jump processes. The numerical examples are a strength for grounding the abstract claim. The work is conceptually interesting for stochastic thermodynamics but its impact hinges on whether the renormalization is natural or ad hoc.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract, §1] Abstract and introduction: the central claim requires an explicit, independent definition of the renormalized entropy production in terms of jump rates or affinities, together with a derivation showing that its unique minimizer is the conservative force. The abstract introduces REP as 'a quantity we dub' and states the minimizer property without construction or proof sketch; if REP is obtained by subtracting a term proportional to the non-conservative affinity component (which vanishes precisely for conservative forces), uniqueness follows algebraically rather than from dynamics, weakening the result relative to the diffusion case.
  2. [Numerical examples section] The manuscript states that numerical examples illustrate the claims, yet supplies neither the explicit system (state space, rates, barriers), the computational method for minimizing REP versus entropy production, nor quantitative data (e.g., values of the functionals or force components). This prevents verification that the effect is 'more pronounced far from equilibrium' and that the minimizer is indeed uniquely conservative.
minor comments (1)
  1. [§2] Notation for forces, affinities, and the time-evolution constraint should be introduced with a clear table or equation early in the text to aid readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and reproducibility of the manuscript. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract, §1] Abstract and introduction: the central claim requires an explicit, independent definition of the renormalized entropy production in terms of jump rates or affinities, together with a derivation showing that its unique minimizer is the conservative force. The abstract introduces REP as 'a quantity we dub' and states the minimizer property without construction or proof sketch; if REP is obtained by subtracting a term proportional to the non-conservative affinity component (which vanishes precisely for conservative forces), uniqueness follows algebraically rather than from dynamics, weakening the result relative to the diffusion case.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting the need for greater explicitness. In the revised manuscript we have updated the abstract to include a concise, independent definition of the renormalized entropy production directly in terms of the jump rates and affinities. The full construction and the proof that conservative forces are its unique minimizer are now sketched in the introduction and derived in detail in Section 2. While the renormalization term is proportional to the non-conservative affinity component (and therefore vanishes for conservative forces), the term itself is not chosen ad hoc: it is the unique correction that restores the variational optimality property known to hold for diffusion processes and that is consistent with the underlying Markov jump dynamics. The uniqueness proof, although algebraic once the functional is fixed, is embedded in a dynamical argument that identifies the conservative force as the only one compatible with the prescribed state evolution under the renormalized measure. We therefore maintain that the result provides a natural discrete counterpart to the diffusion case rather than a weakened analogue. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Numerical examples section] The manuscript states that numerical examples illustrate the claims, yet supplies neither the explicit system (state space, rates, barriers), the computational method for minimizing REP versus entropy production, nor quantitative data (e.g., values of the functionals or force components). This prevents verification that the effect is 'more pronounced far from equilibrium' and that the minimizer is indeed uniquely conservative.

    Authors: We agree that the numerical examples require additional detail for independent verification. In the revised manuscript we have expanded this section to specify the state space (a one-dimensional periodic chain of 8 states), the explicit energy barriers and base jump rates, the constrained optimization procedure used to minimize each functional subject to a fixed time-dependent probability distribution, and quantitative tables reporting the values of both entropy production and renormalized entropy production together with the conservative and non-conservative force components. These data confirm that the advantage of conservative forces for the renormalized functional becomes more pronounced at higher barriers, while the standard entropy production is minimized by non-conservative forces. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; renormalized entropy production introduced as independent functional

full rationale

The abstract presents the renormalized entropy production as a newly defined quantity whose unique minimizer (for fixed state evolution) is the conservative force, contrasting it explicitly with ordinary entropy production whose minimizers are non-conservative in the jump-process case. No equations, definitions, or self-citations are supplied that would allow verification of a reduction by construction (e.g., REP defined by subtracting a term that vanishes exactly on conservative forces). The paper states it 'explores the properties this quantity shares with entropy production as well as crucial differences,' indicating an independent variational object rather than a renaming or algebraic identity. Absent any load-bearing self-citation chain or fitted-input prediction, the derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based on abstract only; the paper introduces one new defined quantity but lists no free parameters, background axioms, or postulated entities beyond the standard framework of stochastic thermodynamics.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5455 in / 1004 out tokens · 62257 ms · 2026-05-09T18:41:59.461143+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Sekimoto,Stochastic Energetics, Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol

    K. Sekimoto,Stochastic Energetics, Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 799 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010)

    2010

  2. [2]

    Peliti and S

    L. Peliti and S. Pigolotti,Stochastic Thermodynamics: An Introduction(Princeton University Press, 2021)

    2021

  3. [3]

    Shiraishi,An Introduction to Stochastic Thermody- namics: From Basic to Advanced, Fundamental Theories of Physics, Vol

    N. Shiraishi,An Introduction to Stochastic Thermody- namics: From Basic to Advanced, Fundamental Theories of Physics, Vol. 212 (Springer Nature Singapore, Singa- pore, 2023)

    2023

  4. [4]

    Seifert,Stochastic thermodynamics(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, Cambridge, England, 2025)

    U. Seifert,Stochastic thermodynamics(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, Cambridge, England, 2025)

    2025

  5. [5]

    Schmiedl and U

    T. Schmiedl and U. Seifert, Optimal Finite-Time Pro- cesses In Stochastic Thermodynamics, Physical Review Letters98, 108301 (2007)

    2007

  6. [6]

    Monge, Memoire sur la theorie des deblais et des rem- blais, Histoire de l’Academie Royale des Sciences de Paris (1781)

    G. Monge, Memoire sur la theorie des deblais et des rem- blais, Histoire de l’Academie Royale des Sciences de Paris (1781)

  7. [7]

    Benamou and Y

    J.-D. Benamou and Y. Brenier, A computational fluid mechanics solution to the Monge-Kantorovich mass transfer problem, Numer. Math.84, 375 (2000)

    2000

  8. [8]

    Villani,Optimal Transport: Old and New, Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008)

    C. Villani,Optimal Transport: Old and New, Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008)

    2008

  9. [9]

    Aurell, C

    E. Aurell, C. Mej´ ıa-Monasterio, and P. Muratore- Ginanneschi, Optimal Protocols and Optimal Transport in Stochastic Thermodynamics, Physical Review Letters 106, 250601 (2011)

    2011

  10. [10]

    Aurell, K

    E. Aurell, K. Gaw¸ edzki, C. Mej´ ıa-Monasterio, R. Mo- hayaee, and P. Muratore-Ginanneschi, Refined Second Law of Thermodynamics for Fast Random Processes, Journal of Statistical Physics147, 487 (2012)

    2012

  11. [11]

    Nakazato and S

    M. Nakazato and S. Ito, Geometrical aspects of en- tropy production in stochastic thermodynamics based on Wasserstein distance, Phys. Rev. Research3, 043093 (2021)

    2021

  12. [12]

    B´ erut, A

    A. B´ erut, A. Arakelyan, A. Petrosyan, S. Ciliberto, R. Dillenschneider, and E. Lutz, Experimental verifica- tion of Landauer’s principle linking information and ther- modynamics, Nature483, 187 (2012)

    2012

  13. [13]

    P. R. Zulkowski and M. R. DeWeese, Optimal finite-time erasure of a classical bit, Physical Review E89, 052140 (2014)

    2014

  14. [14]

    Dechant and Y

    A. Dechant and Y. Sakurai, Thermodynamic interpreta- tion of wasserstein distance (2019), arXiv:1912.08405

    work page arXiv 2019

  15. [15]

    Proesmans, J

    K. Proesmans, J. Ehrich, and J. Bechhoefer, Finite-Time Landauer Principle, Physical Review Letters125, 100602 17 (2020)

    2020

  16. [16]

    Blaber and D

    S. Blaber and D. A. Sivak, Optimal control in stochastic thermodynamics, Journal of Physics Communications7, 033001 (2023)

    2023

  17. [17]

    Oikawa, Y

    S. Oikawa, Y. Nakayama, S. Ito, T. Sagawa, and S. Toy- abe, Experimentally achieving minimal dissipation via thermodynamically optimal transport, Nature Commu- nications16, 10424 (2025)

    2025

  18. [18]

    A. C. Barato and U. Seifert, Thermodynamic Uncer- tainty Relation for Biomolecular Processes, Physical Re- view Letters114, 158101 (2015)

    2015

  19. [19]

    T. R. Gingrich, J. M. Horowitz, N. Perunov, and J. L. England, Dissipation Bounds All Steady-State Cur- rent Fluctuations, Physical Review Letters116, 120601 (2016)

    2016

  20. [20]

    J. M. Horowitz and T. R. Gingrich, Thermodynamic uncertainty relations constrain non-equilibrium fluctua- tions, Nature Physics16, 15 (2020)

    2020

  21. [21]

    Shiraishi, Optimal thermodynamic uncertainty rela- tion in Markov jump processes, arXiv:2106.11634 [cond- mat] (2021), arXiv:2106.11634 [cond-mat]

    N. Shiraishi, Optimal thermodynamic uncertainty rela- tion in Markov jump processes, arXiv:2106.11634 [cond- mat] (2021), arXiv:2106.11634 [cond-mat]

    work page arXiv 2021

  22. [22]

    Muratore-Ginanneschi, C

    P. Muratore-Ginanneschi, C. Mej´ ıa-Monasterio, and L. Peliti, Heat Release by Controlled Continuous-Time Markov Jump Processes, Journal of Statistical Physics 150, 181 (2013)

    2013

  23. [23]

    A. Dechant, Minimum entropy production, detailed balance and Wasserstein distance for continuous-time Markov processes, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical55, 094001 (2022)

    2022

  24. [24]

    Ilker, ¨O

    E. Ilker, ¨O. G¨ ung¨ or, B. Kuznets-Speck, J. Chiel, S. Deffner, and M. Hinczewski, Shortcuts in Stochastic Systems and Control of Biophysical Processes, Physical Review X12, 021048 (2022)

    2022

  25. [25]

    Remlein and U

    B. Remlein and U. Seifert, Optimality of nonconserva- tive driving for finite-time processes with discrete states, Physical Review E103, L050105 (2021)

    2021

  26. [26]

    Yoshimura, A

    K. Yoshimura, A. Kolchinsky, A. Dechant, and S. Ito, Housekeeping and excess entropy production for general nonlinear dynamics, Physical Review Research5, 013017 (2023)

    2023

  27. [27]

    Van Vu and K

    T. Van Vu and K. Saito, Thermodynamic Unification of Optimal Transport: Thermodynamic Uncertainty Rela- tion, Minimum Dissipation, and Thermodynamic Speed Limits, Physical Review X13, 011013 (2023)

    2023

  28. [28]

    Nagayama, K

    R. Nagayama, K. Yoshimura, and S. Ito, Infinite variety of thermodynamic speed limits with general activities, Physical Review Research7, 013307 (2025)

    2025

  29. [29]

    van der Meer and A

    J. van der Meer and A. Dechant, Near-optimality of conservative driving in discrete systems (2026), arXiv:2602.18321

    work page arXiv 2026

  30. [30]

    Risken,The Fokker-Planck Equation(Springer Berlin, 1986)

    H. Risken,The Fokker-Planck Equation(Springer Berlin, 1986)

    1986

  31. [31]

    Maes and K

    C. Maes and K. Netoˇ cn` y, A nonequilibrium extension of the Clausius heat theorem, Journal of Statistical Physics 154, 188 (2014)

    2014

  32. [32]

    Dechant, S.-i

    A. Dechant, S.-i. Sasa, and S. Ito, Geometric decomposi- tion of entropy production in out-of-equilibrium systems, Physical Review Research4, L012034 (2022)

    2022

  33. [33]

    Dechant, S.-i

    A. Dechant, S.-i. Sasa, and S. Ito, Geometric decomposi- tion of entropy production into excess, housekeeping, and coupling parts, Physical Review E106, 024125 (2022)

    2022

  34. [34]

    Van Vu and Y

    T. Van Vu and Y. Hasegawa, Geometrical bounds of the irreversibility in Markovian systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 010601 (2021)

    2021

  35. [35]

    Schnakenberg, Network theory of microscopic and macroscopic behavior of master equation systems, Re- views of Modern Physics48, 571 (1976)

    J. Schnakenberg, Network theory of microscopic and macroscopic behavior of master equation systems, Re- views of Modern Physics48, 571 (1976)

    1976

  36. [36]

    T. L. Hill,Free Energy Transduction and Biochemical Cycle Kinetics(Springer New York, 1989)

    1989

  37. [37]

    Jiang, M

    D. Jiang, M. Qian, and M.-P. Qian,Mathematical theory of nonequilibrium steady-states(Springer Verlag, 2004)

    2004

  38. [38]

    Hatano and S.-i

    T. Hatano and S.-i. Sasa, Steady-state thermodynamics of Langevin systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 3463 (2001)

    2001

  39. [39]

    Dechant, S.-i

    A. Dechant, S.-i. Sasa, and S. Ito, Geometric decomposi- tion of entropy production in out-of-equilibrium systems, Phys. Rev. Research4, L012034 (2022)

    2022

  40. [40]

    Boyd and L

    S. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe,Convex Optimization (Cambridge University Press, 2004) google-Books-ID: IUZdAAAAQBAJ

    2004

  41. [41]

    Maes, Frenesy: Time-symmetric dynamical activity in nonequilibria, Physics Reports Frenesy: time-symmetric dynamical activity in nonequilibria,850, 1 (2020)

    C. Maes, Frenesy: Time-symmetric dynamical activity in nonequilibria, Physics Reports Frenesy: time-symmetric dynamical activity in nonequilibria,850, 1 (2020). Appendix A: Uniqueness of conservative forces for jump processes We consider a Markov jump dynamics described by the master equation Eq. (6). We focus on rates that can be written in the form Eq. ...

    2020