<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>A Markov Jump Process for More Efficient Hamiltonian Monte Carlo · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1509.03808/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1509.03808/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>A Markov Jump Process for More Efficient Hamiltonian Monte Carlo — mentioned by kgwgk</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23664731</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1509.03808:23664731</guid><pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2020 21:13:32 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Btw, I looked at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1509.03808.pdf and I don’t understand this paragraph at the end of the first page: “To simulate the system, waiting times w_kj are generated for all candidate states k, and the shortest waiting time i = argmin_k w_kj is chosen. We call this shortest waiting time the holding time. A transition is then performed to state i after a delay of length w_ij.” Say there are three states A, B, C and the transition rate to C from A or B is low. Wouldn’t your “simulation” jump endlessly between A and B without ever (or never again) visiting C? I may be missing…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1509.03808/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>stat.ML</category></item></channel></rss>
