Physics – Condensed Matter – Statistical Mechanics
Scientific paper
2000-02-11
Physics
Condensed Matter
Statistical Mechanics
23 pages, 4 figures. To appear in "J. Stat. Physics" March 2000
Scientific paper
We discuss the conceptual differences between the Broad Histogram (BHM) and reweighting methods in general, and particularly the so-called Multicanonical (MUCA) approaches. The main difference is that BHM is based on microcanonical, fixed-energy averages which depends only on the good statistics taken {\bf inside} each energy level. The detailed distribution of visits among different energy levels, determined by the particular dynamic rule one adopts, is irrelevant. Contrary to MUCA, where the results are extracted from the dynamic rule itself, within BHM any microcanonical dynamics could be adopted. As a numerical test, we have used both BHM and MUCA in order to obtain the spectral energy degeneracy of the Ising model in $4 \times 4 \times 4$ and $32 \times 32$ lattices, for which exact results are known. We discuss why BHM gives more accurate results than MUCA, even using {\bf the same} Markovian sequence of states. In addition, such advantage increases for larger systems.
de Oliveira Paulo Murilo Castro
Lima A. R.
Penna Thadeu J. P.
No associations
LandOfFree
A comparison between broad histogram and multicanonical methods does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with A comparison between broad histogram and multicanonical methods, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and A comparison between broad histogram and multicanonical methods will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-411427