Skip to main content
Log in

Split Hamiltonian Monte Carlo

  • Published:
Statistics and Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We show how the Hamiltonian Monte Carlo algorithm can sometimes be speeded up by “splitting” the Hamiltonian in a way that allows much of the movement around the state space to be done at low computational cost. One context where this is possible is when the log density of the distribution of interest (the potential energy function) can be written as the log of a Gaussian density, which is a quadratic function, plus a slowly-varying function. Hamiltonian dynamics for quadratic energy functions can be analytically solved. With the splitting technique, only the slowly-varying part of the energy needs to be handled numerically, and this can be done with a larger stepsize (and hence fewer steps) than would be necessary with a direct simulation of the dynamics. Another context where splitting helps is when the most important terms of the potential energy function and its gradient can be evaluated quickly, with only a slowly-varying part requiring costly computations. With splitting, the quick portion can be handled with a small stepsize, while the costly portion uses a larger stepsize. We show that both of these splitting approaches can reduce the computational cost of sampling from the posterior distribution for a logistic regression model, using either a Gaussian approximation centered on the posterior mode, or a Hamiltonian split into a term that depends on only a small number of critical cases, and another term that involves the larger number of cases whose influence on the posterior distribution is small.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Algorithm 1
Algorithm 2
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Indeed, in this two-dimensional example, it is better to use Metropolis with a large proposal standard deviation, even though this leads to a low acceptance probability, because this also avoids a random walk. However, in higher-dimensional problems with more than one highly-confining direction, a large proposal standard deviation leads to such a low acceptance probability that this strategy is not viable.

References

  • Beskos, A., Pinski, F.J., Sanz-Serna, J.M., Stuart, A.M.: Hybrid Monte-Carlo on Hilbert spaces. Stoch. Process. Appl. 121, 2201–2230 (2011)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • de Campos, D.A., Bernardes, J., Garrido, A., de Sa, J.M., Pereira-Leite, L.: SisPorto 2.0 a program for automated analysis of cardiotocograms. J. Matern.-Fetal Med. 9, 311–318 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • Duane, S., Kennedy, A.D., Pendleton, B.J., Roweth, D.: Hybrid Monte Carlo. Phys. Lett. B 195(2), 216–222 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geyer, C.J.: Practical Markov chain Monte Carlo. Stat. Sci. 7(4), 473–483 (1992)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Girolami, M., Calderhead, B.: Riemann manifold Langevin and Hamiltonian Monte Carlo methods (with discussion). J. R. Stat. Soc. B 73(2), 123–214 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, M., Gelman, A.: The No-U-Turn sampler: adaptively setting path lengths in Hamiltonian Monte Carlo. arXiv:1111.4246 (2011)

  • Leimkuhler, B., Reich, S.: Simulating Hamiltonian Dynamics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A.W., Rosenbluth, M.N., Teller, A.H., Teller, E.: Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J. Chem. Phys. 21(6), 1087–1092 (1953). doi:10.1063/1.1699114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neal, R.M.: Probabilistic inference using Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. Technical report CRG-TR-93-1, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto (1993)

  • Neal, R.M.: MCMC using Hamiltonian dynamics. In: Brooks, S., Gelman, A., Jones, G., Meng, X.L. (eds.) Handbook of Markov Chain Monte Carlo. Chapman and Hall/CRC, London/Boca Raton (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Polyanin, A.D., Zaitsev, V.F., Moussiaux, A.: Handbook of First Order Partial Differential Equations. Taylor & Francis, London (2002)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, M.B.: A comparison of methods for computing autocorrelation time. Technical report 1007 (2010)

  • Tierney, L., Kadane, J.B.: Accurate approximations for posterior moments and marginal densities. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 81, 82–86 (1986)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

B. Shahbaba is supported by the National Science Foundation, Grant No. IIS-1216045. R.M. Neal’s work is supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. He holds a Canada Research Chair in Statistics and Machine Learning.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Babak Shahbaba.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shahbaba, B., Lan, S., Johnson, W.O. et al. Split Hamiltonian Monte Carlo. Stat Comput 24, 339–349 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-012-9373-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-012-9373-1

Keywords

Navigation