Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Kalman-Langevin dynamics : exponential convergence, particle approximation and numerical approximation

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that Kalman-Langevin dynamics, the mean-field stochastic differential equation preconditioned by the ensemble covariance, converges exponentially to the Gibbs measure for quadratic-plus-Lipschitz potentials, and that its…

desk verdict The headline theorem is false as stated because it misses a nondegeneracy condition on the initial law; otherwise the paper has a promising extension and is worth serious revision. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.18139 v1 pith:LYW5TEDR submitted 2025-04-25 math.PR cs.NAmath.NAmath.STstat.TH

Axel Ringh , Akash Sharma This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.PRcs.NAmath.NAmath.STstat.TH MSC 65C3060H3560H1037H1035Q84
keywords McKean-Vlasovstochasticdifferentialequationsinteractingparticlesystemspropagationofchaosexponentialconvergencerelativeentropylog-SobolevinequalitytamedEuler-Maruyamaschemecovariancepreconditioning
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Kalman-Langevin dynamics is a mean-field stochastic differential equation in which the drift is preconditioned by the current covariance of the ensemble, a device borrowed from Kalman-based estimation. This paper proves that the law of this dynamics converges exponentially fast to the Gibbs measure with density proportional to $e^{-\beta U(x)}$ for potentials of the form $U(x)=\tfrac12 x^\top A x + V(x)$, where $A$ is positive definite and $V$ is a continuously differentiable Lipschitz function. That extends earlier convergence results, which were limited to quadratic potentials, to targets arising in Bayesian inverse problems with Gaussian priors and Lipschitz perturbations. The paper also establishes uniform-in-time moment bounds, convergence in $p$-Wasserstein distance, convergence of a weak particle system that avoids the expensive matrix square root, and uniform-in-$N$ strong convergence of an explicit tamed Euler scheme. If the claims hold, the full pipeline of mean-field limit, particle approximation, and discretization is justified for practical ensemble sampling.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the covariance matrix $\Sigma(\mu_t)$, defined as the second central moment of the time-marginal law. It evolves by a nonlinear matrix ODE, and the whole argument hangs on showing that its smallest eigenvalue stays bounded away from zero (Lemma 2.2) and its largest eigenvalue stays bounded above (Lemma 2.4). These estimates convert a log-Sobolev inequality for the invariant Gibbs measure into the differential inequality $\frac{d}{dt} H(\rho_t|\pi) \le -\frac{\lambda_{\min}^{\Sigma}(t)}{2\beta\lambda_{LS}} H(\rho_t|\pi)$, which integrates to exponential convergence. The same eigenvalue bounds supply the uniform $p$-th moment bounds used for Wasserstein convergence. For the particle approximation, the deviation matrix $Q_N(t)=[X^{1,N}(t)-M_N(t),\dots,X^{N,N}(t)-M_N(t)]$ replaces the square root: the empirical covariance $\Sigma_N(t)=\frac1N Q_N(t)Q_N(t)^\top$ appears directly in the noise term via $\frac{1}{\sqrt{\beta N}}Q_N(t)\,dB^i(t)$. For the numerical scheme, taming factors $(1+h^\alpha |\Sigma_k^N \nabla U(X_k^{i,N})|)^{-1}$ control the non-globally Lipschitz drift and produce uniform-in-$N$ moment bounds.

What would settle it

Set $d=1$, $\beta=1$, $U(x)=x^2/2$, and start the mean-field dynamics at the deterministic point $X(0)=0$. Then $\Sigma(0)=0$, so drift and diffusion both vanish, the law stays $\delta_0$ forever, and relative entropy to the Gaussian target is infinite at every time; this directly shows Theorem 2.1 cannot hold as stated unless the initial covariance is required to be positive definite. A less degenerate check is to initialize with covariance $\varepsilon I$ and measure the KL-decay rate as $\varepsilon \to 0$; the formula in (2.25) predicts the rate constant tends to zero with $\varepsilon$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, stated on the paper's own terms, is that the time-marginal law of the nonlinear Langevin SDE (1.3) converges exponentially in relative entropy to the Gibbs measure (1.1), not only when $U$ is quadratic but whenever $U=\tfrac12 x^\top A x + V$ with $A$ positive definite and $V$ $C^1$ and Lipschitz. The mechanism is a two-step estimate: first control the covariance matrix $\Sigma(\mu_t)$ from below and above, uniformly in time; then use the log-Sobolev inequality satisfied by the target to turn the relative-entropy dissipation into an exponential decay. The eigenvalue lower bound makes the proof work, and the same control yields uniform moment bounds and convergence in $p$-Wasserstein distance for every $p>0$. In addition, the paper proves that a weak interacting particle system, driven by the deviation matrix $Q_N(t)$ instead of the square root of the empirical covariance, converges to the mean-field limit, and that a tamed Euler-Maruyama scheme converges strongly and uniformly in the number of particles to the continuous-time process.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the ensemble covariance never collapses to zero: the convergence proof needs a uniform positive lower bound on the smallest eigenvalue of the covariance matrix, and the lower bound the paper proves depends on the initial covariance being strictly positive definite; if the starting distribution is a point mass, the dynamics freeze and never approach the Gibbs measure, so the stated theorem silently requires this non-degeneracy.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Exponential relative-entropy convergence, together with Talagrand's inequality, gives exponential convergence in 2-Wasserstein distance and total variation, so ergodic averages computed from the sampler converge at an exponential rate.
  • Uniform-in-time moment bounds imply that for every $p>0$ the $p$-th moment of the time marginal converges to that of the Gibbs measure, making heavy-tailed targets and higher-moment diagnostics accessible.
  • The weak particle approximation means a sampler can be implemented without computing the matrix square root of the empirical covariance, lowering the cost per particle update.
  • The uniform-in-$N$ strong convergence of the tamed Euler scheme means a fixed time step does not lose control as the number of particles grows, so many-particle simulations can be discretized on the same grid.
  • Taken together, the mean-field, particle, and numerical results provide a coherent justification for using the covariance-preconditioned sampler on non-Gaussian Bayesian targets.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the rate constant in (2.25) is proportional to $\min\{\lambda_{\min}(\Sigma(0)), 1/(2\beta(L_A+2\beta L_V^2))\}$, so the proof predicts a measurable diagnostic: a sampler started with a nearly degenerate initial covariance will mix noticeably slower, and one could benchmark this by initializing with $\varepsilon I$ and measuring the KL decay as $\varepsilon \to 0$.
  • Editorial inference: the proof structure, uniform spectral bounds on the preconditioner plus a log-Sobolev target, should transfer to other measure-dependent preconditioners such as affine-invariant or consensus-based dynamics whenever the same two ingredients hold; the paper does not explore those extensions.
  • Editorial inference: the numerical section suggests a finite-sample statement not proven here, namely that the strong error of the tamed Euler scheme at fixed step $h$ is bounded independently of $N$ uniformly over all particle numbers; a direct check would compute $E|X_k^{i,N}-Y^{i,N}(t_k)|^2$ for growing $N$.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the covariance-preconditioned McKean-Vlasov Langevin dynamics (1.3). Its main claims are: exponential convergence of the time-marginal law to the Gibbs measure in relative entropy under Assumption 2.1; uniform-in-time moment bounds and convergence in p-Wasserstein distance; propagation of chaos for a weak particle approximation that avoids computing the square root of the empirical covariance; and uniform-in-N strong convergence of an explicit tamed Euler scheme. The proofs combine matrix-valued ODE estimates for the covariance with log-Sobolev inequalities, Sznitman's propagation-of-chaos trilogy, and a stopping-time localization argument for the numerical scheme.

Significance. If all the stated results were correct, the paper would make a substantial contribution: it would extend the known Gaussian-potential analysis of Kalman-Langevin dynamics to Lipschitz perturbations of quadratic potentials, introduce a practically attractive weak particle approximation, and give a uniform-in-N convergence result for an implementable explicit scheme. The overall strategy, especially the covariance matrix ODE estimates and the use of external log-Sobolev results, is promising. However, the current statement of Theorem 2.1 is false because of a missing nondegeneracy condition on the initial law, and the proofs of the particle and numerical results contain coefficient errors that invalidate the arguments as written. These issues are reparable, but the manuscript in its present form is not acceptable.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2, Theorem 2.1 and Lemma 2.2, Eq. (2.3)] Theorem 2.1 is false as stated because no nondegeneracy condition on the initial covariance is imposed. Consider d=1, U(x)=x^2/2 (so V=0), and mu_0=delta_0. Then Sigma(0)=0, and from the covariance ODE (2.10) every term has range contained in range(Sigma_t), so Sigma(t)=0 for all t. The SDE (1.3) reduces to X(t)=0, and H(delta_0 | pi)=infinity for the standard Gaussian Gibbs measure, contradicting the asserted exponential relative-entropy convergence. The lower bound in Lemma 2.2 already degenerates when lambda_min(Sigma(0))=0. The theorem and Lemma 2.2 need an explicit assumption such as lambda_min(Sigma(0))>0, together with a statement that this is genuinely necessary.
  2. [Section 2.4, proof of Theorem 2.3, Eq. (2.35)] The proof of Theorem 2.3 uses the boundedness of the second derivatives of U to assert trace(nabla^2 U(X(t)) Sigma_t) <= B, but bounded second derivatives are not part of Assumption 2.1, under which V is only C^1 and Lipschitz. Thus the Hessian of U need not exist, and the Ito computation for U^l(X(t)) is not justified. This affects Theorem 2.3 and Corollaries 2.1-2.2. The authors should either add a C^2-with-bounded-Hessian condition to Assumption 2.1 or provide a proof that does not need it.
  3. [Section 3.1.2, Eqs. (3.16), (3.17), (3.19)] The weak PDE and the Ito formula for the particle system have mutually inconsistent diffusion coefficients. For the mean-field SDE (1.3), the generator diffusion term is (1/beta) trace(nabla^2 phi Sigma), not (2/beta) trace(nabla^2 phi Sigma) as written in (3.16) and (3.17). For the particle SDE (3.5), the noise coefficient is sqrt(2/(beta N)) Q_N, so the Ito formula should contain (1/(beta N)) trace(nabla^2 phi Q_N Q_N^T) and sqrt(2/(beta N)) <nabla phi, Q_N dB>, not (2/beta) trace(nabla^2 phi Q_N Q_N^T) and sqrt(2/beta) <nabla phi, Q_N dB> as written in (3.19). With the printed coefficients, Psi_t^phi(E_N) does not reduce to the martingale term, and the bound (3.23) does not follow. The errors appear algebraic and fixable, but they invalidate the proof of Theorem 3.1 as it stands.
  4. [Section 4, Eq. (4.8) and proof of Lemma 4.3] The continuous-time interpolation of the tamed Euler scheme is written with the wrong diffusion coefficient: Eq. (4.8) gives sqrt(2/beta) Q_Y^N(chi_h(t)) dB^i(t), whereas the discrete scheme (4.3) and the later estimates in Lemma 4.3 use sqrt(2/(beta N)) Q_Y^N. In particular, the Ito isometry step in (4.35) contains a factor 1/N that would not be present with the coefficient printed in (4.8). This inconsistency means the continuous-time process Y analyzed in the proof is not the interpolation of the scheme actually stated. The factor should be corrected throughout Section 4.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Lemma 2.5] The lemma states the log-Sobolev inequality for mu = e^{-U(x)} dx, but Theorem 2.1 uses the Gibbs measure with exponent -beta U. The factor beta is missing, and the constant in (2.20) needs to be adjusted accordingly.
  2. [Eq. (2.25)] The rate in (2.25), namely min(1/(beta(2L_A+beta L_V^2)), lambda_min(Sigma(0))), does not match Lemma 2.2, whose lower bound is min(1/(2 beta (L_A+2 beta L_V^2)), lambda_min(Sigma(0))). The algebra should be reconciled.
  3. [Section 4.1, stopping times] The stopping times in (4.36)-(4.37) are defined with 'inf { t <= 0 ; ... }', which should be 'inf { t >= 0 ; ... }'.
  4. [Section 4.1, proof of Theorem 4.1] The events Omega_R and Lambda_R are used in (4.51) but never defined.
  5. [Throughout] There are minor typographical issues, including 'Fatau' for Fatou in Section 3.1.2 and an unclosed parenthesis in the definition of K2 in Eq. (2.20). The paper would benefit from a careful proofreading pass.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main convergence proof is self-contained apart from external log-Sobolev and well-posedness inputs, with all constants derived from the SDE rather than fitted.

full rationale

The central derivation, Theorem 2.1, is not circular. The proof differentiates the relative entropy H(ρ_t|π) and obtains dH/dt ≤ −(λminΣ(t)/(2λLSβ))H, then lower-bounds λminΣ(t) in Lemma 2.2 using the closed covariance ODE (2.10), and finally applies a log-Sobolev inequality for the Gibbs measure. The log-Sobolev input is imported from the external paper [CG22, Theorem 0.1] via Lemma 2.5; its authors are not the present authors, and its assumptions do not include the target convergence result. The exponential rate is expressed explicitly in terms of A, V, β, λminΣ(0), and the LSI constant, with no parameter fitted to data and no prediction equivalent to an input by construction. The propagation-of-chaos and numerical-scheme results use standard Sznajdman-trilogy, Gronwall, and localization arguments, with external well-posedness from [Vae24]; the constants are derived, not fitted. The self-citations [MRSS25] and [HST25] appear only in contextual lists of related work and are not load-bearing for the main theorems. Two correctness gaps exist but are not circularity: Theorem 2.1 omits a nondegeneracy condition λminΣ(0) > 0, since the bound (2.3) becomes vacuous at zero and the covariance ODE preserves the range of Σ0, so a point-mass initial condition cannot converge in relative entropy to the full-support Gibbs measure; and the proof of Theorem 2.3 silently assumes bounded second derivatives of U. These are fixable missing assumptions, not cases where the derivation reduces to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no free parameters or invented entities. All assumptions are standard structural conditions on the potential, except for the implicit nondegenerate initial covariance and the unstated bounded second derivative assumption in Theorem 2.3.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Assumption 2.1: U(x) = (1/2)x^T A x + V(x) with A positive definite and V C^1 and Lipschitz continuous.
    This structure is the basis for the exponential convergence result and the eigenvalue bounds on Σ_t.
  • domain assumption Assumption 3.1: U ∈ C^2(R^d), U ≥ 0, with quadratic growth outside a compact set and linear growth of ∇U, and uniformly bounded second derivatives.
    Used for well-posedness of the particle system and for propagation of chaos.
  • domain assumption Assumption 4.1: U ∈ C^4(R^d) with uniformly bounded third and fourth order partial derivatives.
    Needed for the tamed Euler scheme convergence proof.
  • domain assumption Initial covariance Σ(0) is positive definite (λmin(Σ(0)) > 0).
    Implicit in Lemma 2.2: the lower bound on λmin(Σ_t) is min(..., λmin(Σ(0))). If Σ(0)=0, the dynamics do not move and cannot converge.
  • ad hoc to paper Bounded second derivatives of U in the proof of Theorem 2.3.
    The proof states 'Due to boundedness of second derivatives of U', but Assumption 2.1 only gives V ∈ C^1 and Lipschitz. This regularity is silently assumed and used for the moment bound.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Kalman-Langevin dynamics : exponential convergence, particle approximation and numerical approximation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LYW5TEDR

@misc{pith2026250418139,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Kalman-Langevin dynamics : exponential convergence, particle approximation and numerical approximation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LYW5TEDR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.18139}
}
abstract

Langevin dynamics has found a large number of applications in sampling, optimization and estimation. Preconditioning the gradient in the dynamics with the covariance - an idea that originated in literature related to solving estimation and inverse problems using Kalman techniques - results in a mean-field (McKean-Vlasov) SDE. We demonstrate exponential convergence of the time marginal law of the mean-field SDE to the Gibbs measure with non-Gaussian potentials. This extends previous results, obtained in the Gaussian setting, to a broader class of potential functions. We also establish uniform in time bounds on all moments and convergence in $p$-Wasserstein distance. Furthermore, we show convergence of a weak particle approximation, that avoids computing the square root of the empirical covariance matrix, to the mean-field limit. Finally, we prove that an explicit numerical scheme for approximating the particle dynamics converges, uniformly in number of particles, to its continuous-time limit, addressing non-global Lipschitzness in the measure.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.18139 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The difference in behavior of overdamped Langevin dynamic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Treasure Search Optimization

    math.OC 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Treasure Search Optimization — explorers that keep searching plus a hunter that only teleports to improvements — has a well-posed conditional McKean-Vlasov limit and an O(1/α) stationary guarantee near the global minimizer.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    S. I. Aanonsen, G. N vdal, D. S. Oliver, A. C. Reynolds, and B. Vall \`e s. The ensemble K alman filter in reservoir engineering—a review. Spe Journal , 14(03):393--412, 2009

    work page 2009

  2. [2]

    Bakry, F

    D. Bakry, F. Barthe, P. Cattiaux, and A. Guillin. A simple proof of the poincar \'e inequality for a large class of probability measures. Electronic Communications in Probability , 2008

    work page 2008

  3. [3]

    Billingsley

    P. Billingsley. Convergence of probability measures . John Wiley & Sons, 2013

    work page 2013

  4. [4]

    Blömker, C

    D. Blömker, C. Schillings, and P. Wacker. A strongly convergent numerical scheme from ensemble K alman inversion. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis , 56(4):2537--2562, 2018

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Bl \"o mker, C

    D. Bl \"o mker, C. Schillings, P. Wacker, and S. Weissmann. Well posedness and convergence analysis of the ensemble K alman inversion. Inverse Problems , 35(8):085007, 2019

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    J. A. Carrillo, Y.-P. Choi, C. Totzeck, and O. Tse. An analytical framework for consensus-based global optimization method. Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences , 28(06):1037--1066, 2018

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Chen and G

    X. Chen and G. Dos Reis. Euler simulation of interacting particle systems and M c K ean-- V lasov SDE s with fully super-linear growth drifts in space and interaction. IMA Journal of Numerical Analysis , 44(2):751--796, 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Cattiaux and A

    P. Cattiaux and A. Guillin. Supplement to functional inequalities for perturbed measures with applications to log-concave measures and to some B ayesian problems. Bernoulli , 28(4):2294--2321, 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    Chiang, C.-R

    T.-S. Chiang, C.-R. Hwang, and S. J. Sheu. Diffusion for global optimization in R^n . SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization , 25(3):737--753, 1987

    1987

  2. [10]

    N. K. Chada, A. M. Stuart, and X. T. Tong. Tikhonov regularization within ensemble K alman inversion. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis , 58(2):1263--1294, 2020

    2020

  3. [11]

    J. A. Carrillo and U. Vaes. Wasserstein stability estimates for covariance-preconditioned F okker-- P lanck equations. Nonlinearity , 34(4):2275, 2021

    2021

  4. [12]

    Ding and Q

    Z. Ding and Q. Li. Ensemble K alman inversion: mean-field limit and convergence analysis. Statistics and computing , 31:1--21, 2021

    2021

  5. [13]

    Ding and Q

    Z. Ding and Q. Li. Ensemble K alman sampler: mean-field limit and convergence analysis. SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis , 53(2):1546--1578, 2021

    2021

  6. [14]

    Del Moral and E

    P. Del Moral and E. Horton. A theoretical analysis of one-dimensional discrete generation ensemble K alman particle filters. The Annals of Applied Probability , 33(2):1327--1372, 2023

    2023

  7. [15]

    Del Moral and J

    P. Del Moral and J. Tugaut. On the stability and the uniform propagation of chaos properties of ensemble K alman-- B ucy filters. The Annals of Applied Probability , 28(2):790--850, 2018

    2018

  8. [16]

    G. Evensen. Sequential data assimilation with a nonlinear quasi-geostrophic model using monte carlo methods to forecast error statistics. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans , 99(C5):10143--10162, 1994

    1994

  9. [17]

    Evensen and P

    G. Evensen and P. J. Van Leeuwen. Assimilation of geosat altimeter data for the A gulhas current using the ensemble K alman filter with a quasigeostrophic model. Monthly weather review , 124(1):85--96, 1996

    1996

  10. [18]

    Garbuno-Inigo, F

    A. Garbuno-Inigo, F. Hoffmann, W. Li, and A. M. Stuart. Interacting L angevin diffusions: Gradient structure and ensemble K alman sampler. SIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical Systems , 19(1):412--441, 2020

    2020

  11. [19]

    Garbuno-Inigo, N

    A. Garbuno-Inigo, N. Nusken, and S. Reich. Affine invariant interacting L angevin dynamics for B ayesian inference. SIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical Systems , 19(3):1633--1658, 2020

    2020

  12. [20]

    Graham, T

    C. Graham, T. G. Kurtz, S. M \'e l \'e ard, P. E. Protter, M. Pulvirenti, D. Talay, and S. M \'e l \'e ard. Asymptotic behaviour of some interacting particle systems; M ckean- V lasov and B oltzmann models. Probabilistic Models for Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations: Lec...

    1995

  13. [21]

    Hutzenthaler, A

    M. Hutzenthaler, A. Jentzen, and P. E. Kloeden. Strong and weak divergence in finite time of E uler's method for stochastic differential equations with non-globally lipschitz continuous coefficients. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sc...

    2011

  14. [22]

    Hutzenthaler, A

    M. Hutzenthaler, A. Jentzen, and P. E. Kloeden. Strong convergence of an explicit numerical method for SDE s with nonglobally L ipschitz continuous coefficients . The Annals of Applied Probability , 22(4):1611 -- 1641, 2012

    2012

  15. [23]

    P. L. Houtekamer and H. L. Mitchell. A sequential ensemble K alman filter for atmospheric data assimilation. Monthly weather review , 129(1):123--137, 2001

    2001

  16. [24]

    Hasenpflug, D

    M. Hasenpflug, D. Rudolf, and B. Sprungk. Wasserstein convergence rates of increasingly concentrating probability measures. The Annals of Applied Probability , 34(3):3320--3347, 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    P. D. Hinds, A. Sharma, and M. V. Tretyakov. Well-posedness and approximation of reflected M c K ean- V lasov SDE s with applications. Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences , 2025

    2025

  18. [26]

    C.-R. Hwang. Laplace's method revisited: weak convergence of probability measures. The Annals of Probability , 8(6):1177--1182, 1980

    1980

  19. [27]

    M. A. Iglesias, K. J. H. Law, and A. M. Stuart. Ensemble K alman methods for inverse problems. Inverse Problems , 29(4):045001, 2013

    2013

  20. [28]

    Kovachki and A

    N. Kovachki and A. Stuart. Ensemble K alman inversion: a derivative-free technique for machine learning tasks. Inverse Problems , 35(9):095005, 8 2019

    2019

  21. [29]

    Kalise, A

    D. Kalise, A. Sharma, and M. V. Tretyakov. Consensus-based optimization via jump-diffusion stochastic differential equations. Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences , 33(02):289–339, February 2023

    2023

  22. [30]

    Leimkuhler, C

    B. Leimkuhler, C. Matthews, and J. Weare. Ensemble preconditioning for M arkov chain M onte C arlo simulation. Statistics and Computing , 28:277--290, 2018

    2018

  23. [31]

    Lindsey, J

    M. Lindsey, J. Weare, and A. Zhang. Ensemble M arkov chain M onte C arlo with teleporting walkers. SIAM/ASA Journal on Uncertainty Quantification , 10(3):860--885, 2022

    2022

  24. [32]

    G. N. Milstein, E. Platen, and H. Schurz. Balanced implicit methods for stiff stochastic systems. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis , 35(3):1010--1019, 1998

    1998

  25. [33]

    Molin, A

    V. Molin, A. Ringh, M. Schauer, and A. Sharma. Controlled stochastic processes for simulated annealing. arXiv:2504.08506 , 2025

    2025 arXiv

  26. [34]

    G. N. Milstein and M. V. Tretyakov. Stochastic numerics for mathematical physics , volume 39. Springer, 2004

    2004

  27. [35]

    P. J. Rossky, J. D. Doll, and H. L. Friedman. Brownian dynamics as smart M onte C arlo simulation. The Journal of Chemical Physics , 69(10):4628--4633, 1978

    1978

  28. [36]

    Schillings and A

    C. Schillings and A. M. Stuart. Analysis of the ensemble K alman filter for inverse problems. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis , 55(3):1264--1290, 2017

    2017

  29. [37]

    Sznitman

    A.-S. Sznitman. Topics in propagation of chaos. Ecole d’ \'e t \'e de probabilit \'e s de Saint-Flour XIX—1989 , 1464:165--251, 1991

    1989

  30. [38]

    M. V. Tretyakov and Z. Zhang. A fundamental mean-square convergence theorem for sdes with locally lipschitz coefficients and its applications. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis , 51(6):3135--3162, 2013

    2013

  31. [39]

    U. Vaes. Sharp propagation of chaos for the ensemble L angevin sampler. Journal of the London Mathematical Society , 110(5):e13008, 2024

    2024

  32. [40]

    A. W. Van der Vaart. Asymptotic statistics . Cambridge University Press, Cambrdige, UK, 1998

    1998

  33. [41]

    C. Villani. Topics in Optimal Transportation . Graduate studies in mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, USA, 2003

    2003

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.