[HN Gopher] Finding paths of least action with gradient descent ...
___________________________________________________________________
Finding paths of least action with gradient descent (2023)
Author : E-Reverance
Score : 27 points
Date : 2025-04-26 06:24 UTC (3 days ago)
(HTM) web link (greydanus.github.io)
(TXT) w3m dump (greydanus.github.io)
| constantcrying wrote:
| >Some, like the double pendulum or the three-body problem, are
| deterministic but chaotic. In other words, their dynamics are
| predictable but we can't know their state at some time in the
| future without simulating all the intervening states.
|
| Literal nonsense. Everything in the second sentence is false.
|
| Deterministic means that the state at some point in time fixes
| the state at all future points in time. Nevertheless in a
| deterministic system you can know a future state without
| calculating intermediary states.
|
| Chaotic means that future states are discontinuous in regards to
| the initial state. Nevertheless a chaotic system can be known at
| future states without calculating intermediary states, you can
| even have an _analytic_ solution to a chaotic system. Furthermore
| chaotic can mean that you _can 't_ calculate future states from
| initial states. Numerical ODE solvers in particularly have errors
| which grow exponential in time. So simulating intermediate states
| does not give you the solution to the problem.
| imtringued wrote:
| While the idea is obviously correct, the paper itself suffers
| from extremely sloppy writing.
|
| They discretize the integral with a discrete sum, but then forget
| to discretize the variables by substituting x with x(t_i) or at
| least x_i, same for dot x. They put the objective function x hat
| = argmin S(X) last, when it is the most important aspect.
|
| In the equation where x hat must fulfill the Euler lagrange
| equation for all t, they butchered the application of the
| derivative with respect to a constant point.
|
| It should look more like this:
|
| https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/6efe...
|
| You need to explicitly pass in the x(t), dot x (t) and t as
| arguments into the derivative. Their notation implies that you
| have to take the derivative with respect to a constant (not at a
| point) which always returns zero (a blatantly banal property) or
| that the function (=the laws of physics) behind x(t) varies over
| time (shudder).
|
| Overall this was extremely unpleasant to read even though the
| approach is neat.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-04-29 23:00 UTC)