arxiv: 2605.10507 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-11 · 🧮 math.NA · cond-mat.stat-mech· cs.NA· math.PR

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Mathematical analysis and numerical methods for the computation of transport coefficients in molecular dynamics

Alessandra Iacobucci, Elisa Marini, Gabriel Stoltz, Louis Carillo, Noe Blassel, Raphael Gastaldello, Regis Santet, Shiva Darshan, Urbain Vaes, Xiaocheng Shang

Pith reviewed 2026-05-12 05:16 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.NA cond-mat.stat-mechcs.NAmath.PR

keywords molecular dynamicstransport coefficientsGreen-Kubo formulasnonequilibrium methodstime correlation functionsnumerical error analysistransient techniquesvariance reduction

0 comments

The pith

Transport coefficients in molecular dynamics are computed through nonequilibrium driving, equilibrium time correlations, or transient relaxation, each with accompanying numerical error analysis.

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

The paper reviews approaches to calculating transport coefficients such as diffusion or viscosity from molecular dynamics simulations. It organizes these methods into three groups: applying an external field and measuring the linear response, reformulating the coefficient as an equilibrium time correlation like the Green-Kubo or Einstein formula, and tracking the relaxation back to steady state after an initial perturbation. For each group it supplies elements of numerical analysis to estimate or bound the errors that arise in the computed estimator. These error tools matter because transport coefficients determine key material behaviors yet remain expensive and noisy to extract from simulation data. The review also notes recent variance reduction ideas such as control variates and coupling that aim to lower the computational cost.

Core claim

The central claim is that numerical methods for transport coefficients in molecular dynamics fall into three broad classes—nonequilibrium response to an external field, equilibrium time-correlation formulas, and transient return to stationarity—and that each class admits dedicated numerical analysis sufficient to quantify the error in the resulting estimator of the coefficient.

What carries the argument

The three-group classification of computation methods (nonequilibrium driving, time-correlation functions, transient relaxation) that organizes the literature and supports per-class error quantification.

If this is right

Researchers gain a systematic way to select or combine methods according to the error characteristics that matter for their target accuracy.
Variance reduction techniques can be applied within each class to reduce the number of simulation steps needed for a given precision.
Error bounds make it possible to certify that computed transport values are reliable enough for downstream use in predicting macroscopic properties.
The classification highlights which open computational challenges remain specific to each class rather than generic to all methods.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same three-class organization and error analysis could be tested on transport problems outside classical molecular dynamics, for instance in coarse-grained or quantum molecular models.
Hybrid algorithms that switch between classes depending on the current statistical error could be designed and benchmarked using the paper's framework.
The emphasis on quantifiable errors suggests that future work might incorporate these estimators directly into adaptive simulation schemes that stop once a target precision is reached.

Load-bearing premise

All practically relevant methods fit inside the three proposed groups and the supplied numerical analysis tools are sufficient to quantify the errors that actually occur in simulations.

What would settle it

A published or new method for extracting a transport coefficient that cannot be placed in any of the three groups or whose estimator error cannot be bounded or estimated by the numerical analysis techniques described for its group.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.10507 by Alessandra Iacobucci, Elisa Marini, Gabriel Stoltz, Louis Carillo, Noe Blassel, Raphael Gastaldello, Regis Santet, Shiva Darshan, Urbain Vaes, Xiaocheng Shang.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: An example of oscillator chain, with fixed boundary conditions on the left, free [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: An example of rotor chain, with free boundary conditions, heat baths with temper [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Lennard-Jones potential vLJ with ε = 1 and σ = 1. The Lennard-Jones potential vLJ has value 0 at r = σ and is minimal at r = 21/6σ, where it has value −ε. A graphical illustration of this potential is presented in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Comparison of the sampled x-component px of the momenta distribution for two time steps ∆t with the analytical distribution. The dynamics are run with the BAOAB scheme (18) with γ = 1 and β = 1, integrating up to T = 100,000. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Comparison of the sampled positions in a similar setting as in Figure 5. The 2D [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Estimates of Eν [φ] with φ = V defined in (4) as a function of ∆t. Each estimate is obtained by averaging 100 independent estimates obtained by integrating the Langevin dynamics with the BAOAB scheme (18) with γ = 1 and β = 1, integrating up to T = 1,000,000. A linear fit is performed in log scale (right panel) on the data points shown in red, which illustrates that the BAOAB scheme leads to a second-order… view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Histogram of 10,000 estimates of Eν[φ] with φ = V defined in (4), obtained by integrating the Langevin dynamics using independent initial configurations under µ, with ∆t = 0.01, the BAOAB scheme defined in (18) with γ = 1 and β = 1.0 and integrating the dynamics up to time T = 1000. where Π is the centering operator defined in (28) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: The NEMD fitting procedure used to compute the shear-viscosity (see Section 3.3) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_9.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Schematic representation of the sinusoidal transverse field method in a two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_10.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: Response of the energy current for a chain of rotors obtained with different forcings: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_11.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: Illustration of the Norton-NEMD duality for the liquid Argon system considered [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_12.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 13.** Figure 13: Numerical illustration of the Green–Kubo formula and its associated statistical and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_13.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We review various numerical approaches to compute transport coefficients in molecular dynamics. These approaches can be broadly classified into three groups: (i) nonequilibrium methods based on applying an external driving field to the system, measuring the average response in the system, and evaluating the related linear response coefficient; (ii) approaches reformulating the transport coefficient of interest through a time correlation function for the equilibrium dynamics (the most popular instances being Green--Kubo and Einstein formulas); (iii) transient techniques, where the transport coefficient can be computed by monitoring the return to the steady state of a dynamics perturbed off its stationary distribution. For all three classes of methods, we provide elements of numerical analysis, allowing to estimate or at least quantify the level of numerical errors in the estimator of the transport coefficient; and also briefly present recent attempts to more efficiently compute transport coefficients with variance reduction approaches such as control variates, importance sampling and coupling methods. The computation of transport coefficients remains nonetheless challenging and will continue requiring research efforts in the foreseeable future.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

A review that organizes existing MD methods for transport coefficients into three classes and sketches error analysis, with no new results.

read the letter

This paper is basically a review that groups ways to get transport coefficients out of molecular dynamics simulations into three classes and adds some discussion of how to control the numerical errors in those computations. Nothing fundamentally new comes out of it. It organizes the material well. The first group covers nonequilibrium simulations where you drive the system with a field and watch the response. The second uses equilibrium correlations, the classic Green-Kubo and Einstein formulas. The third looks at transient behavior as the system returns to steady state after a kick. For each, the authors outline the estimator and give some numerical analysis to help gauge the error from things like finite time or sample size. They also cover variance reduction methods such as control variates, importance sampling, and coupling to make the calculations more efficient. The limitation is that the error analysis stays at the level of elements and at least quantify, which means it is mostly pointing to known results rather than providing fresh, detailed bounds or comparisons. As a review, it does not derive new formulas or test them on new data. The three-group split seems reasonable and covers the main ideas in the literature, but readers will still turn to the original papers for the full proofs and practical implementation details. This work is aimed at people who actually run molecular dynamics codes and need to decide which technique to use for a given transport property while having some sense of the accuracy they can expect. It could be handy for a methods course or as a reference when writing up results. Someone deep in one particular approach might not learn much new here. I think it is worth sending for peer review. The synthesis and the error pointers address a real need in computational statistical mechanics, where choosing and validating a method matters. Referees can check the coverage and the accuracy of the analysis sections.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reviews numerical methods for computing transport coefficients in molecular dynamics. It classifies approaches into three groups: (i) nonequilibrium methods that apply an external driving field and measure linear response; (ii) equilibrium methods reformulating the coefficient via time-correlation functions (Green-Kubo and Einstein formulas); and (iii) transient techniques that monitor relaxation to steady state after perturbation. For each class the paper supplies elements of numerical analysis to estimate or quantify errors in the resulting estimators and briefly discusses variance-reduction techniques such as control variates, importance sampling, and coupling methods.

Significance. If the error-analysis elements are sound, the review would be useful to the computational-physics and numerical-analysis communities by organizing a scattered literature and providing concrete guidance on error quantification for a practically important class of observables. The cautious phrasing in the abstract and the explicit mention of ongoing challenges are appropriate for a survey paper.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: the phrase 'elements of numerical analysis' is appropriately cautious, yet the main text should supply at least one concrete error bound or convergence rate per class (with a reference to the relevant theorem or proposition) so that readers can judge the depth of the analysis without consulting the cited literature.
[Introduction] The three-group taxonomy is presented as comprehensive; a short paragraph discussing methods that straddle categories (e.g., hybrid nonequilibrium-equilibrium schemes) would strengthen the claim of broad coverage.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of our manuscript and the recommendation for minor revision. The review correctly identifies the three classes of methods we cover and notes the value of the numerical analysis elements and variance-reduction discussion for the computational-physics and numerical-analysis communities. We appreciate the recognition that the cautious phrasing and mention of ongoing challenges are appropriate for a survey paper.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: review paper with no new derivations

full rationale

This manuscript is explicitly a review that organizes existing numerical methods for transport coefficients into three standard classes (nonequilibrium driving, equilibrium time correlations, and transient relaxation) and summarizes associated error analysis from the literature. No original derivations, theorems, parameter fits, or quantitative predictions are claimed. The abstract and structure use cautious language such as 'elements of numerical analysis' and 'briefly present recent attempts,' with all content drawn from prior work rather than self-referential definitions or fitted inputs renamed as results. The classification is descriptive and does not reduce to any of the enumerated circularity patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a review paper that introduces no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; all content draws from prior literature on molecular dynamics methods.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5519 in / 1120 out tokens · 49256 ms · 2026-05-12T05:16:51.465346+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
We review various numerical approaches to compute transport coefficients in molecular dynamics... Green–Kubo and Einstein formulas... elements of numerical analysis, allowing to estimate or at least quantify the level of numerical errors
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/ArithmeticFromLogic.lean embed_add unclear
Green–Kubo formula α = ∫ E[R(xt)S(x0)] dt

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

173 extracted references · 173 canonical work pages

[1]

Abdulle, G

A. Abdulle, G. A. Pavliotis, and U. Vaes. Spectral methods for multiscale stochastic differential equations.SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantif., 5(1):720–761, 2017

work page 2017
[2]

D. H. Ackley, G. E. Hinton, and T. J. Sejnowski. A learning algorithm for Boltzmann machines.Cognitive Science, 9(1):147–169, 1985

work page 1985
[3]

M. S. Albergo, N. M. Boffi, and E. Vanden-Eijnden. Stochastic interpolants: A unifying framework for flows and diffusions.Journal of Machine Learning Research, 26(209):1– 80, 2025

work page 2025
[4]

B. J. Alder, D. M. Gass, and T. E. Wainwright. Studies in molecular dynamics. VIII. The transport coefficients for a hard-sphere fluid.The Journal of Chemical Physics, 53(10):3813–3826, 1970

work page 1970
[5]

M. P. Allen and D. J. Tildesley.Computer Simulation of Liquids, 2nd ed.Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2017

work page 2017
[6]

H. C. Andersen. RATTLE: A ”velocity” version of the SHAKE algorithm for molecular dynamics calculations.Journal of Computational Physics, 52(1):24–34, 1983. 51

work page 1983
[7]

Andrad´ ottir, D

S. Andrad´ ottir, D. P. Heyman, and T. J. Ott. Variance reduction through smoothing and control variates for Markov chain simulations.ACM Trans. Model. Comput. Simul., 3(3):167–189, 1993

work page 1993
[8]

Assaraf and M

R. Assaraf and M. Caffarel. Zero-variance principle for Monte Carlo algorithms.Phys. Rev. Lett., 83:4682–4685, 1999

work page 1999
[9]

Bakry, I

D. Bakry, I. Gentil, and M. Ledoux.Analysis and Geometry of Markov Diffusion Operators. Springer, 2014

work page 2014
[10]

Balian.From Microphysics to Macrophysics

R. Balian.From Microphysics to Macrophysics. Methods and Applications of Statistical Physics, volume I - II. Springer, 2007

work page 2007
[11]

J. A. Barker, R. A. Fisher, and R. O. Watts. Liquid Argon: Monte Carlo and molecular dynamics calculations.Molecular Physics, 21(4):657–673, 1971

work page 1971
[12]

Battimelli, G

G. Battimelli, G. Ciccotti, and P. Greco.Computer Meets Theoretical Physics. The New Frontier of Molecular Simulation. The Frontiers Collection. Springer, 2020

work page 2020
[13]

C. H. Bennett. Mass tensor molecular dynamics.Journal of Computational Physics, 19(3):267–279, 1975

work page 1975
[14]

C. H. Bennett. Efficient estimation of free energy differences from Monte Carlo data. Journal of Computational Physics, 22(2):245–268, 1976

work page 1976
[15]

Bernard, M

E. Bernard, M. Fathi, A. Levitt, and G. Stoltz. Hypocoercivity with Schur complements. Annales Henri Lebesgue, 5:523–557, 2022

work page 2022
[16]

R. N. Bhattacharya. On the functional central limit theorem and the law of the it- erated logarithm for Markov processes.Zeitschrift f¨ ur Wahrscheinlichkeitstheorie und Verwandte Gebiete, 60(2):185–201, 1982

work page 1982
[17]

N. Blassel. GitHub code repository implementing the Norton method for mobility and shear viscosity computations :https://github.com/noeblassel/NortonMethod, 2024

work page 2024
[18]

Sampling high-dimensional probability measures with applications in (non)equilibrium molecular dynamics and statistics

N. Blassel, L. Carillo, S. Darshan, R. Gastaldello, J. Greener, A. Ia- cobucci, and E. Marini. GitHub code repository for the CECAM sum- mer school: “Sampling high-dimensional probability measures with applications in (non)equilibrium molecular dynamics and statistics”:https://github.com/ shiva-darshan/CECAMSummerSchool2025, 2025

work page 2025
[19]

Blassel and G

N. Blassel and G. Stoltz. Fixing the flux: A dual approach to computing transport coefficients.Journal of Statistical Physics, 191:17, 2024

work page 2024
[20]

Bonetto, J

F. Bonetto, J. L. Lebowitz, and L. Rey-Bellet. Fourier’s law: A challenge for theorists. In A. Fokas, A. Grigoryan, T. Kibble, and B. Zegarlinsky, editors,Mathematical Physics 2000, pages 128–151. Imperial College Press, 2000

work page 2000
[21]

Bou-Rabee and H

N. Bou-Rabee and H. Owhadi. Long-run accuracy of variational integrators in the stochastic context.SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 48:278–297, 2010. 52

work page 2010
[22]

Brooks, A

S. Brooks, A. Gelman, G. Jones, and X-L. Meng.Handbook of Markov Chain Monte Carlo. CRC press, 2011

work page 2011
[23]

R. E. Caflisch. Monte Carlo and quasi-Monte Carlo methods.Acta Numerica, 7:1–49, 1998

work page 1998
[24]

Canc` es, M

E. Canc` es, M. Defranceschi, W. Kutzelnigg, C. Le Bris, and Y. Maday. Computational quantum chemistry: A primer. In P. G. Ciarlet and C. Le Bris, editors,Handbook of Numerical Analysis (Special Volume on Computational Chemistry), volume X, pages 3–270. Elsevier, 2003

work page 2003
[25]

Cancrini and S

N. Cancrini and S. Olla. Ensemble dependence of fluctuations: Canoni- cal/microcanonical equivalence of ensembles.Journal of Statistical Physics, 168:707– 730, 2017

work page 2017
[26]

P. Carmona. Existence and uniqueness of an invariant measure for a chain of oscillators in contact with two heat baths.Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 117:1076– 1092, 2007

work page 2007
[27]

E. A. Carter, G. Ciccotti, J. T. Hynes, and R. Kapral. Constrained reaction coordinate dynamics for the simulation of rare events.Chemical Physics Letters, 156(5):472–477, 1989

work page 1989
[28]

Casas, J

F. Casas, J. M. Sanz-Serna, and L. Shaw. Split Hamiltonian Monte Carlo revisited. Statistics and Computing, 32(5):86, 2022

work page 2022
[29]

C´ erou, A

F. C´ erou, A. Guyader, T. Leli` evre, and D. Pommier. A multiple replica approach to simulate reactive trajectories.The Journal of Chemical Physics, 134(5):054108, 2011

work page 2011
[30]

Chen and Q.-M

M.-H. Chen and Q.-M. Shao. On Monte Carlo methods for estimating ratios of normal- izing constants.The Annals of Statistics, 25(4):1563–1594, 1997

work page 1997
[31]

J. D. Chodera, W. C. Swope, F. Noe, J.-H. Prinz, M. R. Shirts, and V. S. Pande. Dynamical reweighting: Improved estimates of dynamical properties from simulations at multiple temperatures.Journal of Chemical Physics, 134(24):244107, 2011

work page 2011
[32]

Ciccotti and M

G. Ciccotti and M. Ferrario. Non-equilibrium by molecular dynamics: A dynamical approach.Molecular Simulation, 42(16):1385–1400, 2016

work page 2016
[33]

Ciccotti and G

G. Ciccotti and G. Jacucci. Direct computation of dynamical response by molecular dynamics: The mobility of a charged Lennard–Jones particle.Physical Review Letters, 35(12):789, 1975

work page 1975
[34]

Ciccotti, G

G. Ciccotti, G. Jacucci, and I. R. McDonald. ”Thought-experiments” by molecular dynamics.Journal of Statistical Physics, 21:1–22, 1979

work page 1979
[35]

Ciccotti, G

G. Ciccotti, G. Jacucci, and I.R. McDonald. Transport properties of molten alkali halides.Physical Review A, 13(1):426, 1976

work page 1976
[36]

Ciccotti, R

G. Ciccotti, R. Kapral, and A. Sergi. Non-equilibrium molecular dynamics. In S. Yip, editor,Handbook of Materials Modeling: Methods, pages 745–761. Springer, 2005. 53

work page 2005
[37]

T. Cui, X. Tong, and O. Zahm. Optimal Riemannian metric for Poincar´ e inequalities and how to ideally precondition Langevin dynamics.arXiv preprint, 2404.02554, 2025

work page arXiv 2025
[38]

Darshan, A

S. Darshan, A. Eberle, and G. Stoltz. Sticky coupling as a control variate for sensitivity analysis.arXiv preprint, 2409.15500, 2024

work page arXiv 2024
[39]

Darshan and G

S. Darshan and G. Stoltz. Equivalence of Norton and Th´ evenin ensembles for mean-field interacting particle systems.In preparation, 2025

work page 2025
[40]

M. H. A. Davis. Piecewise-deterministic Markov processes: A general class of non- diffusion stochastic models.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Method- ological), 46(3):353–376, 1984

work page 1984
[41]

de Sousa Oliveira and P

L. de Sousa Oliveira and P. A. Greaney. Method to manage integration error in the Green-Kubo method.Phys. Rev. E, 95:023308, 2017

work page 2017
[42]

A. Dhar. Heat transport in low-dimensional systems.Advances in Physics, 57(5):457– 537, 2008

work page 2008
[43]

Dobson and A

M. Dobson and A. K. A. Geraldo. Convergence of nonequilibrium Langevin dynamics for planar flows.J. Stat. Phys., 190:91, 2023

work page 2023
[44]

Donati, C

L. Donati, C. Hartmann, and B. G. Keller. Girsanov reweighting for path ensembles and Markov state models.Journal of Chemical Physics, 146(24):244112, 2017

work page 2017
[45]

Donati and B

L. Donati and B. G. Keller. Girsanov reweighting for metadynamics simulations.The Journal of Chemical Physics, 149(7):072335, 2018

work page 2018
[46]

Durmus, A

A. Durmus, A. Enfroy, E. Moulines, and G. Stoltz. Uniform minorization condition and convergence bounds for discretizations of kinetic Langevin dynamics.Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e Probab. Statist., 61(1):629–664, 2025

work page 2025
[47]

Dus and V

M. Dus and V. Ehrlacher. Numerical solution of Poisson partial differential equation in high dimension using two-layer neural networks.Math. Comp., 94(351):159–208, 2025

work page 2025
[48]

Espa˜ nol and P

P. Espa˜ nol and P. Warren. Statistical mechanics of dissipative particle dynamics.Eu- rophysics Letters, 30(4):191, 1995

work page 1995
[49]

S. N. Ethier and T. G. Kurtz.Markov Processes. Probability and Mathematical Statis- tics. John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1986

work page 1986
[50]

D. J. Evans. The equivalence of Norton and Th´ evenin ensembles.Molecular Physics, 80:221–224, 1993

work page 1993
[51]

D. J. Evans and J. F. Ely. Viscous flow in the stress ensemble.Molecular Physics, 59(5):1043–1048, 1986

work page 1986
[52]

D. J. Evans, W. G. Hoover, B. H. Failor, B. Moran, and A. J. C. Ladd. Nonequilib- rium molecular dynamics via Gauss’s principle of least constraint.Physical Review A, 28(2):1016–1021, 1983

work page 1983
[53]

D. J. Evans and G. P. Morriss. The isothermal/isobaric molecular dynamics ensemble. Physics Letters A, 98(8):433–436, 1983. 54

work page 1983
[54]

D. J. Evans and G. P. Morriss. Equilibrium-fluctuation expression for the resistance of a Norton circuit.Physical Review A, 31(6):3817–3819, 1985

work page 1985
[55]

D. J. Evans and G. P. Morriss. Transient-time-correlation functions and the rheology of fluids.Phys. Rev. A, 38(8):4142, 1988

work page 1988
[56]

D. J. Evans and G. P. Morriss.Statistical Mechanics of Nonequilibrium Liquids. Cam- bridge University Press, 2008

work page 2008
[57]

Fathi and G

M. Fathi and G. Stoltz. Improving dynamical properties of metropolized discretizations of overdamped Langevin dynamics.Numerische Mathematik, 136:545–602, 2017

work page 2017
[58]

Fermi, J

E. Fermi, J. Pasta, and S. M. Ulam. Studies of nonlinear problems, I.Los-Alamos Internal Report, 1955

work page 1955
[59]

Fischer and M

J. Fischer and M. Wendland. On the history of key empirical intermolecular potentials. Fluid Phase Equilibria, 573:113876, 2023

work page 2023
[60]

G. S. Fishman.Monte Carlo: Concepts, Algorithms, and Applications. Springer New York, NY, 1996

work page 1996
[61]

Frenkel and B

D. Frenkel and B. Smit.Understanding Molecular Simulation: From Algorithms to Applications, 2nd edition. Academic Press, 2001

work page 2001
[62]

Gallavotti, editor.The Fermi-Pasta-Ulam Problem: A Status Report

G. Gallavotti, editor.The Fermi-Pasta-Ulam Problem: A Status Report. Number 728 in Lecture Notes in Physics. Springer, 2008

work page 2008
[63]

Gastaldello, G

R. Gastaldello, G. Stoltz, and U. Vaes. Dynamical reweighting for estimation of fluctu- ation formulas.arXiv preprint, 2504.11968, 2025

work page arXiv 2025
[64]

O. V. Gendelman and A. V. Savin. Normal heat conductivity of the one-dimensional lattice with periodic potential of nearest-neighbor interaction.Phys. Rev. Lett., 84:2381– 2384, 2000

work page 2000
[65]

Giardin` a, R

C. Giardin` a, R. Livi, A. Politi, and M. Vassalli. Finite thermal conductivity in 1D lattices.Phys. Rev. Lett., 84:2144–2147, 2000

work page 2000
[66]

Girolami and B

M. Girolami and B. Calderhead. Riemann manifold Langevin and Hamiltonian Monte Carlo methods.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Method- ology), 73(2):123–214, 2011

work page 2011
[67]

P. W. Glynn and M. Olvera-Cravioto. Likelihood ratio gradient estimation for steady- state parameters.Stochastic Systems, 9(2):83–100, 2019

work page 2019
[68]

Goodfellow, J

I. Goodfellow, J. Pouget-Abadie, M. Mirza, B. Xu, D. Warde-Farley, S. Ozair, A. Courville, and Y. Bengio. Generative Adversarial Nets. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pages 2672–2680, 2014

work page 2014
[69]

Goodman and J

J. Goodman and J. Weare. Ensemble samplers with affine invariance.Communications in Applied Mathematics and Computational Science, 5(1):65–80, 2010

work page 2010
[70]

E. M. Gosling, I. R. McDonald, and K. Singer. On the calculation by molecular dynamics of the shear viscosity of a simple fluid.Molecular Physics, 26:1475–1484, 1973. 55

work page 1973
[71]

M. S. Green. Markoff random processes and the statistical mechanics of time-dependent phenomena. II. Irreversible processes in fluids.The Journal of Chemical Physics, 22(3):398–413, 1954

work page 1954
[72]

Haario, E

H. Haario, E. Saksman, and J. Tamminen. Adaptive proposal distribution for random walk Metropolis algorithm.Computational Statistics, 14(3):375–395, 1999

work page 1999
[73]

Haario, E

H. Haario, E. Saksman, and J. Tamminen. An adaptive Metropolis algorithm.Bernoulli, 7(2):223–242, 2001

work page 2001
[74]

Hairer, C

E. Hairer, C. Lubich, and G. Wanner.Geometric Numerical Integration, volume 31 of Springer Series in Computational Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, second edition, 2006

work page 2006
[75]

Hairer and A

M. Hairer and A. J. Majda. A simple framework to justify linear response theory. Nonlinearity, 23(4):909, 2010

work page 2010
[76]

Hairer and J

M. Hairer and J. C. Mattingly. Yet another look at Harris’ ergodic theorem for Markov chains. InSeminar on Stochastic Analysis, Random Fields and Applications VI, vol- ume 63 ofProgr. Probab., pages 109–117. Birkh¨ auser/Springer, 2011

work page 2011
[77]

J. M. Hammersley and D. C. Handscomb.Monte Carlo Methods. Springer Dordrecht, 1964

work page 1964
[78]

W. K. Hastings. Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their appli- cations.Biometrika, 57(1):97–109, 1970

work page 1970
[79]

S. G. Henderson.Approximating martingales for variance reduction in Markov process simulation. PhD thesis. Stanford University, 1997

work page 1997
[80]

S. G. Henderson and P. W. Glynn. Approximating martingales for variance reduction in Markov process simulation.Mathematics of Operations Research, 27(2):253–271, 2002

work page 2002

Showing first 80 references.