The Bouncy Particle Sampler: A Nonreversible Rejection-Free Markov Chain Monte Carlo Method

ABSTRACT Many Markov chain Monte Carlo techniques currently available rely on discrete-time reversible Markov processes whose transition kernels are variations of the Metropolis–Hastings algorithm. We explore and generalize an alternative scheme recently introduced in the physics literature (Peters and de With 2012) where the target distribution is explored using a continuous-time nonreversible piecewise-deterministic Markov process. In the Metropolis–Hastings algorithm, a trial move to a region of lower target density, equivalently of higher “energy,” than the current state can be rejected with positive probability. In this alternative approach, a particle moves along straight lines around the space and, when facing a high energy barrier, it is not rejected but its path is modified by bouncing against this barrier. By reformulating this algorithm using inhomogeneous Poisson processes, we exploit standard sampling techniques to simulate exactly this Markov process in a wide range of scenarios of interest. Additionally, when the target distribution is given by a product of factors dependent only on subsets of the state variables, such as the posterior distribution associated with a probabilistic graphical model, this method can be modified to take advantage of this structure by allowing computationally cheaper “local” bounces, which only involve the state variables associated with a factor, while the other state variables keep on evolving. In this context, by leveraging techniques from chemical kinetics, we propose several computationally efficient implementations. Experimentally, this new class of Markov chain Monte Carlo schemes compares favorably to state-of-the-art methods on various Bayesian inference tasks, including for high-dimensional models and large datasets. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

[1]  I. I. Gikhman Convergence to Markov processes , 1969 .

[2]  S. Tavaré Some probabilistic and statistical problems in the analysis of DNA sequences , 1986 .

[3]  L. Devroye Non-Uniform Random Variate Generation , 1986 .

[4]  Creutz Global Monte Carlo algorithms for many-fermion systems. , 1988, Physical review. D, Particles and fields.

[5]  T Gojobori,et al.  Molecular phylogeny and evolution of primate mitochondrial DNA. , 1988, Molecular biology and evolution.

[6]  John Villadsen Simulation of biochemical reactions , 1989 .

[7]  A. Horowitz A generalized guided Monte Carlo algorithm , 1991 .

[8]  John Geweke,et al.  Evaluating the accuracy of sampling-based approaches to the calculation of posterior moments , 1991 .

[9]  J. Rosenthal,et al.  Optimal scaling for various Metropolis-Hastings algorithms , 2001 .

[10]  John P. Huelsenbeck,et al.  MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees , 2001, Bioinform..

[11]  Tim Hesterberg,et al.  Monte Carlo Strategies in Scientific Computing , 2002, Technometrics.

[12]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Graphical Models, Exponential Families, and Variational Inference , 2008, Found. Trends Mach. Learn..

[13]  M. Einsiedler,et al.  Ergodic Theory: with a view towards Number Theory , 2010 .

[14]  Jeffrey S. Rosenthal,et al.  Optimal Proposal Distributions and Adaptive MCMC , 2011 .

[15]  Robert J. Adler,et al.  Topological complexity of smooth random functions , 2011 .

[16]  École d'été de probabilités de Saint-Flour,et al.  Topological Complexity of Smooth Random Functions: École d'Été de Probabilités de Saint-Flour XXXIX-2009 , 2011 .

[17]  Yee Whye Teh,et al.  Bayesian Learning via Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamics , 2011, ICML.

[18]  M. Girolami,et al.  Riemann manifold Langevin and Hamiltonian Monte Carlo methods , 2011, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology).

[19]  E A J F Peters,et al.  Rejection-free Monte Carlo sampling for general potentials. , 2011, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[20]  Nando de Freitas,et al.  Adaptive Hamiltonian and Riemann Manifold Monte Carlo , 2013, ICML.

[21]  Ryan P. Adams,et al.  Firefly Monte Carlo: Exact MCMC with Subsets of Data , 2014, UAI.

[22]  Werner Krauth,et al.  Generalized event-chain Monte Carlo: constructing rejection-free global-balance algorithms from infinitesimal steps. , 2013, The Journal of chemical physics.

[23]  Maurizio Dapor Monte Carlo Strategies , 2020, Transport of Energetic Electrons in Solids.

[24]  Andrew Gelman,et al.  The No-U-turn sampler: adaptively setting path lengths in Hamiltonian Monte Carlo , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[25]  Werner Krauth,et al.  Event-chain algorithm for the Heisenberg model: Evidence for z≃1 dynamic scaling. , 2015, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[26]  Werner Krauth,et al.  Event-chain Monte Carlo for classical continuous spin models , 2015, 1508.06541.

[27]  Corrado Priami,et al.  Simulation of biochemical reactions with time-dependent rates by the rejection-based algorithm. , 2015, The Journal of chemical physics.

[28]  Tobias A. Kampmann,et al.  Monte Carlo simulation of dense polymer melts using event chain algorithms. , 2015, The Journal of chemical physics.

[29]  Cheng Soon Ong,et al.  Multivariate spearman's ρ for aggregating ranks using copulas , 2016 .

[30]  Nicholas Galbraith On Event-Chain Monte Carlo Methods , 2016 .

[31]  Michela Ottobre,et al.  Markov Chain Monte Carlo and Irreversibility , 2016 .

[32]  Nando de Freitas,et al.  Bayesian Analysis of Continuous Time Markov Chains with Application to Phylogenetic Modelling , 2016 .

[33]  Yee Whye Teh,et al.  Consistency and Fluctuations For Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamics , 2014, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[34]  Arnaud Doucet,et al.  On Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for tall data , 2015, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[35]  P. Fearnhead,et al.  The Zig-Zag process and super-efficient sampling for Bayesian analysis of big data , 2016, The Annals of Statistics.