A continuation multilevel Monte Carlo algorithm


We propose a novel Continuation Multi Level Monte Carlo (CMLMC) algorithm for weak approximation of stochastic models. The CMLMC algorithm solves the given approximation problem for a sequence of decreasing tolerances, ending when the required error tolerance is satisfied. CMLMC assumes discretization hierarchies that are defined a priori for each level and are geometrically refined across levels. The actual choice of computational work across levels is based on parametric models for the average cost per sample and the corresponding variance and weak error. These parameters are calibrated using Bayesian estimation, taking particular notice of the deepest levels of the discretization hierarchy, where only few realizations are available to produce the estimates. The resulting CMLMC estimator exhibits a non-trivial splitting between bias and statistical contributions. We also show the asymptotic normality of the statistical error in the MLMC estimator and justify in this way our error estimate that allows prescribing both required accuracy and confidence in the final result. Numerical results substantiate the above results and illustrate the corresponding computational savings in examples that are described in terms of differential equations either driven by random measures or with random coefficients.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8


  1. 1.

    For the variance estimator, one can also use the unbiased estimator; by dividing by \(\overline{M}_\ell -1\) instead of \({\overline{M}}_\ell \). All discussions in this work still apply.


  1. 1.

    Amestoy, P.R., Duff, I.S., L’Excellent, J.Y., Koster, J.: A fully asynchronous multifrontal solver using distributed dynamic scheduling. SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 23, 15–41 (2001)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Amestoy, P.R., Guermouche, A., L’Excellent, J.Y., Pralet, S.: Hybrid scheduling for the parallel solution of linear systems. Parallel Comput. 32(2), 136–156 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Babuška, I., Nobile, F., Tempone, R.: A stochastic collocation method for elliptic partial differential equations with random input data. SIAM Rev. 52(2), 317–355 (2010)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Balay, S., Brown, J., Buschelman, K., Gropp, W.D., Kaushik, D., Knepley, M.G., McInnes, L.C., Smith, B.F., Zhang, H.: PETSc Web page (2013). http://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc

  5. 5.

    Barth, A., Schwab, C., Zollinger, N.: Multi-level Monte Carlo finite element method for elliptic PDEs with stochastic coefficients. Numer. Math. 119(1), 123–161 (2011)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Charrier, J., Scheichl, R., Teckentrup, A.: Finite element error analysis of elliptic PDEs with random coefficients and its application to multilevel Monte Carlo methods. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 51(1), 322–352 (2013)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Cliffe, K., Giles, M., Scheichl, R., Teckentrup, A.: Multilevel Monte Carlo methods and applications to elliptic PDEs with random coefficients. Comput. Vis. Sci. 14(1), 3–15 (2011)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Collier, N., Dalcin, L., Calo, V.: PetIGA: high-performance isogeometric analysis. (2013). http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.4452

  9. 9.

    Dalcin, L., Collier, N.: PetIGA: a framework for high performance isogeometric analysis (2013). https://bitbucket.org/dalcinl/petiga

  10. 10.

    Durrett, R.: Probability: Theory and Examples, 2nd edn. Duxbury Press, Belmont (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Giles, M.: Improved multilevel Monte Carlo convergence using the Milstein scheme. In: Monte Carlo and quasi-Monte Carlo methods 2006, pp. 343–358. Springer, Berlin (2008)

  12. 12.

    Giles, M.: Multilevel Monte Carlo path simulation. Oper. Res. 56(3), 607–617 (2008)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Giles, M., Reisinger, C.: Stochastic finite differences and multilevel Monte Carlo for a class of SPDEs in finance. SIAM J. Financ. Math. 3(1), 572–592 (2012)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Giles, M., Szpruch, L.: Antithetic multilevel Monte Carlo estimation for multidimensional SDEs. In: Monte Carlo and Quasi-Monte Carlo Methods 2012. Springer, Berlin (2013)

  15. 15.

    Giles, M., Szpruch, L.: Multilevel Monte Carlo methods for applications in finance, pp. 3–48. World Scientific, Singapore (2013)

  16. 16.

    Giles, M., Szpruch, L.: Antithetic multilevel Monte Carlo estimation for multi-dimensional SDEs without Lévy area simulation. Ann. Appl. Probab. (2014)

  17. 17.

    Glasserman, P.: Monte Carlo methods in financial engineering. Applications of Mathematics (New York), vol. 53. Stochastic Modelling and Applied Probability. Springer, New York (2004)

  18. 18.

    Heinrich, S.: Monte Carlo complexity of global solution of integral equations. J. Complex. 14(2), 151–175 (1998)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Heinrich, S., Sindambiwe, E.: Monte Carlo complexity of parametric integration. J. Complex. 15(3), 317–341 (1999)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Hoel, H., Schwerin, E.v., Szepessy, A., Tempone, R.: Adaptive multilevel Monte Carlo simulation. In: Engquist, B., Runborg, O., Tsai, Y.H. (eds.) Numerical Analysis of Multiscale Computations, no. 82 in Lecture Notes in Computational Science and Engineering, pp. 217–234. Springer, New York (2012)

  21. 21.

    Hunter, J.D.: Matplotlib: a 2D graphics environment. Comput. Sci. Eng. 9(3), 90–95 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Jouini, E., Cvitanić, J., Musiela, M. (eds.): Handbooks in Mathematical Finance. Option Pricing, Interest Rates and Risk Management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Karatzas, I., Shreve, S.E.: Brownian Motion and Stochastic Calculus, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 2nd edn, vol. 113. Springer, New York (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Kebaier, A.: Statistical Romberg extrapolation: a new variance reduction method and applications to options pricing. Ann. Appl. Probab. 14(4), 2681–2705 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Mordecki, E., Szepessy, A., Tempone, R., Zouraris, G.E.: Adaptive weak approximation of diffusions with jumps. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 46(4), 1732–1768 (2008)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Øksendal, B.: Stochastic differential equations. Universitext, 5th edn. Springer, Berlin (1998)

  27. 27.

    Sivia, D.S., Skilling, J.: Data Analysis.: A Bayesian Tutorial, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2006)

  28. 28.

    Szepessy, A., Tempone, R., Zouraris, G.E.: Adaptive weak approximation of stochastic differential equations. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 54(10), 1169–1214 (2001)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Teckentrup, A.: Multilevel Monte Carlo methods and uncertainty quantification. PhD thesis, University of Bath (2013)

  30. 30.

    Teckentrup, A., Scheichl, R., Giles, M., Ullmann, E.: Further analysis of multilevel Monte Carlo methods for elliptic PDEs with random coefficients. Numer. Math. 125(3), 569–600 (2013)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Xia, Y., Giles, M.: Multilevel path simulation for jump-diffusion SDEs. In: Plaskota, L., Woźniakowski, H. (eds.) Monte Carlo and Quasi-Monte Carlo Methods 2010, pp. 695–708. Springer, Berlin (2012)

Download references


Raúl Tempone is a member of the Strategic Research Initiative on Uncertainty Quantification in Computational Science and Engineering at KAUST (SRI-UQ). The authors would like to recognize the support of King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) AEA project “Predictability and Uncertainty Quantification for Models of Porous Media” and University of Texas at Austin AEA Round 3 “Uncertainty quantification for predictive modeling of the dissolution of porous and fractured media”. We would also like to acknowledge the use of the following open source software packages: PETSc [4], PetIGA [8], NumPy, matplotlib [21].

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abdul-Lateef Haji-Ali.

Additional information

Communicated by Desmond Higham.

Appendix: Normality of MLMC estimator

Appendix: Normality of MLMC estimator

Theorem 7.1

([10, LindebergspsFeller Theorem, p. 114]) For each \(n\), let \(X_{n,m}\), for \(1 \le n \le m\), be independent random variables (not necessarily identical). Denote

$$\begin{aligned} a_n&= \sum _{m=1}^n X_{n,m}, \\ Y_{n,m}&=X_{n,m} - \mathrm{E}\left[ {X_{n,m}}\right] , \\ s_n^2&= \sum _{m=1}^n \mathrm{E}\left[ {Y_{n,m}^2}\right] . \end{aligned}$$

Suppose the following Lindeberg condition is satisfied for all \(\epsilon >0\):

$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{n \rightarrow \infty } s_n^{-2}\sum _{m=1}^n \mathrm{E}\left[ {Y_{n,m}^2 \mathbf {1}_{|Y_{n,m} | > \epsilon s_n}}\right] = 0. \end{aligned}$$


$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{n \rightarrow \infty } {{\hbox {P}}\left[ \frac{a_n - \mathrm{E}\left[ {a_n}\right] }{s_n} \le z \right] } = \varPhi (z), \end{aligned}$$

where \(\varPhi (z)\) is the normal cumulative density function of a standard normal random variable.

Lemma 7.1

Consider the MLMC estimator \(\mathcal {A}\) given by

$$\begin{aligned} \mathcal {A} = \sum _{\ell =0}^L \sum _{m=1}^{M_\ell } \frac{G_{\ell }(\omega _{\ell , m})}{M_\ell }, \end{aligned}$$

where \(G_{\ell }(\omega _{\ell , m})\) denote as usual i.i.d. samples of the random variable \(G_\ell \). The family of random variables, \((G_\ell )_{\ell \ge 0}\), is also assumed independent. Denote \({Y_\ell = |G_\ell - {\hbox {E}\left[ G_\ell \right] }|}\) and assume the following

$$\begin{aligned} C_1 \beta ^{-q_3\ell }&\le \mathrm{E}\left[ {Y_\ell ^2}\right]&\text { for all } \ell \ge 0, \end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned} \mathrm{E}\left[ {Y_\ell ^{2+\delta }}\right]&\le C_2 \beta ^{-\tau \ell }&\text { for all } \ell \ge 0, \end{aligned}$$

for some \(\beta > 1\) and strictly positive constants \(C_1, C_2, q_3,\delta \) and \(\tau \). Choose the number of samples on each level \(M_\ell \) to satisfy, for \(q_2 > 0\) and a strictly positive sequence \(\{H_\ell \}_{\ell \ge 0}\)

$$\begin{aligned} M_\ell \ge \beta ^{-q_2\ell } \mathrm{\mathrm{{TOL}}}^{-2} H_\ell ^{-1} \left( \sum _{\ell =0}^L H_\ell \right)&\qquad \text {for all } \ell \ge 0. \end{aligned}$$

Moreover, choose the number of levels \(L\) to satisfy

$$\begin{aligned} L&\le \max \left( 0, \frac{c \log \left( \mathrm{{TOL}}^{-1}\right) }{\log {\beta }} + C\right) \end{aligned}$$

for some constants \(C\), and \(c>0\). Finally, denoting

$$\begin{aligned} p= (1+\delta /2) q_3 + (\delta /2)q_2 -\tau , \end{aligned}$$

if we have that either \(p>0\) or \(c < \delta /p\), then

$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{\mathrm{{TOL}}\rightarrow 0} {{\hbox {P}}\left[ \frac{\mathcal {A}- \mathrm{E}\left[ {\mathcal A}\right] }{\sqrt{{\mathrm{{Var}}\left[ \mathcal A\right] }}} \le z\right] } = \varPhi \left( z \right) . \end{aligned}$$


We prove this lemma by ensuring that the Lindeberg condition (7.1) is satisfied. The condition becomes in this case

$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{\mathrm{{TOL}}\rightarrow 0} \underbrace{\frac{1}{{\mathrm{{Var}}\left[ \mathcal A\right] }} \sum _{\ell =0}^L \sum _{m=1}^{M_\ell } {\hbox {E}\left[ \frac{Y_\ell ^2}{M_\ell ^2} \mathbf {1}_{\frac{Y_\ell }{M_\ell } > \epsilon \sqrt{{\mathrm{{Var}}\left[ \mathcal A\right] }}}\right] }}_{:= F} = 0, \end{aligned}$$

for all \(\epsilon > 0\). Below we make repeated use of the following identity for non-negative sequences \({\{a_\ell \}}\) and \({\{b_\ell \}}\) and \(q \ge 0\).

$$\begin{aligned} \sum _{\ell }{a_\ell ^q b_\ell } \le \left( \sum _\ell a_\ell \right) ^q \sum _\ell b_\ell . \end{aligned}$$

First we use the Markov inequality to bound

$$\begin{aligned} F&= \frac{1}{{\mathrm{{Var}}\left[ \mathcal A\right] }} \sum _{\ell =0}^L \sum _{m=1}^{M_\ell } {\hbox {E}\left[ \frac{Y_\ell ^2}{M_\ell ^2} \mathbf {1}_{Y_\ell > \epsilon \sqrt{{\mathrm{{Var}}\left[ \mathcal A\right] }} M_\ell }\right] } \\&\le \frac{\epsilon ^{-\delta }}{{\mathrm{{Var}}\left[ \mathcal A\right] }^{1+\delta /2}} \sum _{\ell =0}^L M_\ell ^{-1-\delta } {\hbox {E}\left[ Y_\ell ^{2+\delta }\right] }. \end{aligned}$$

Using (7.5) and substituting for the variance \({\mathrm{{Var}}\left[ \mathcal A\right] }\) where we denote \({\mathrm{{Var}}\left[ G_\ell \right] } = {\hbox {E}\left[ \left( G_\ell - {\hbox {E}\left[ G_\ell \right] } \right) ^{2}\right] }\) by \(V_\ell \), we find

$$\begin{aligned} F&\le \frac{\epsilon ^{-\delta } \left( \sum _{\ell =0}^L M_\ell ^{-1} V_\ell \right) ^{1+\delta /2}}{\left( \sum _{\ell =0}^L V_\ell M_\ell ^{-1} \right) ^{1+\delta /2}} \sum _{\ell =0}^L V_\ell ^{-1-\delta /2} M_\ell ^{-\delta /2} {\hbox {E}\left[ Y_\ell ^{2+\delta }\right] } \\&\le \epsilon ^{-\delta } \sum _{\ell =0}^L V_\ell ^{-1-{\delta }/{2}} M_\ell ^{-{\delta }/{2}} {\hbox {E}\left[ Y_\ell ^{2+\delta }\right] }. \end{aligned}$$

Using the lower bound on the number of samples \(M_\ell \) (7.3) and (7.5) again yields

$$\begin{aligned} F&\le \epsilon ^{-\delta } \mathrm{{TOL}}^\delta \left( \sum _{\ell =0}^L V_\ell ^{-1-{\delta }/{2}} \beta ^{\frac{\delta q_2 \ell }{2}} H_\ell ^{\delta /2} {\hbox {E}\left[ Y_\ell ^{2+\delta }\right] } \right) \left( \sum _{\ell =0}^L H_\ell \right) ^{-\delta /2} \\&\le \epsilon ^{-\delta } \mathrm{{TOL}}^\delta \left( \sum _{\ell =0}^L V_\ell ^{-1-{\delta }/{2}} \beta ^{(\delta /2)q_2 \ell } {\hbox {E}\left[ Y_\ell ^{2+\delta }\right] } \right) . \end{aligned}$$

Finally using the bounds (7.2a) and (7.2b)

$$\begin{aligned} F&\le \epsilon ^{-\delta } \mathrm{{TOL}}^\delta \left( C_1^{-1-{\delta }/{2}} C_2 \sum _{\ell =0}^L \beta ^{(1+\delta /2) q_3\ell } \beta ^{(\delta /2)q_2 \ell } \beta ^{-\tau \ell } \right) \\&= \epsilon ^{-\delta }\mathrm{{TOL}}^{\delta } C_1^{-1-{\delta }/{2}} C_2 \frac{\beta ^{(L+1)p} - 1}{\beta ^p-1} , \end{aligned}$$

We distinguish two cases here, namely:

  • If \(p>0\) is satisfied then \(\lim _{\mathrm{{TOL}}\rightarrow 0} F= 0\) for any \(c>0\).

  • Otherwise, substituting (7.4) gives

    $$\begin{aligned} F&\le \epsilon ^{-\delta } \mathrm{{TOL}}^{\delta } C_1^{-1-{\delta }/{2}} C_2 \frac{\mathrm{{TOL}}^{-cp } \beta ^{(C+1)p} - 1}{\beta ^p-1} = {\mathcal {O}(\mathrm{{TOL}}^{\delta - cp})} , \end{aligned}$$

    and since in this case \(cp < \delta \) then \(\lim _{\mathrm{{TOL}}\rightarrow 0} F = 0\). \(\square \)

Remark 7.1

The choice (7.3) mirrors the choice (2.7), the latter being the optimal number of samples to bound the statistical error of the estimator by \(\mathrm{{TOL}}\). Specifically, \(H_\ell \propto \sqrt{V_\ell W_\ell }\) where \(W_\ell \) is the work per sample on level \(\ell \). Moreover, the choice (2.7) uses the variances \(\{ V_\ell \}_{\ell =0}^L\) or an estimate of it in the actual implementation. On the other hand, the choice (7.3) uses the upper bound of \(V_\ell \) instead, if \(q_2\) is the rate of variance convergence therein. Furthermore, if we assume the weak error model (2.9a) holds and \(h_L = h_0 \beta ^{-L}\) then we must have

$$\begin{aligned} Q_W h_L^{q_1} = Q_W h_0^{q_1} \beta ^{-L q_1} \le (1-\theta )\mathrm{{TOL}}, \end{aligned}$$

which gives a lower bound on the number of levels \(L\), namely

$$\begin{aligned} L \ge \frac{\log (\mathrm{{TOL}}^{-1})}{q_1\log (\beta )} + \frac{-\log (1-\theta ) +\log (Q_W) + q_1\log (h_0)}{q_1\log (\beta )}, \end{aligned}$$

to bound the bias by \(\mathrm{{TOL}}\).

Finally, in Example 2.1 the conditions (7.2) are satisfied for \(q_3=2\) and, assuming \(p^*> 3\), for \(\delta =1\) and \(\tau =6\). Similarly, Example 2.2 satisfies the conditions (7.2) are for \(q_3=1\) and \(\delta =2\) and \(\tau =2\), cf. [20].

Remark 7.2

The assumption (7.2a) can be relaxed. For instance, one can assume instead that

$$\begin{aligned} V_{\ell +1}&\le V_{\ell } \qquad \text { for all }\ell \ge 1,\\ 0&< \lim _{\ell \rightarrow \infty } {\mathrm{{Var}}\left[ Y_\ell \right] } \beta ^{q_3 \ell } < \infty , \end{aligned}$$

and slightly different conditions on \(L\).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Collier, N., Haji-Ali, AL., Nobile, F. et al. A continuation multilevel Monte Carlo algorithm. Bit Numer Math 55, 399–432 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10543-014-0511-3

Download citation


  • Multilevel Monte Carlo
  • Monte Carlo
  • Partial differential equations with random data
  • Stochastic differential equations
  • Bayesian inference

Mathematics Subject Classification

  • 65C05
  • 65N22