Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 5, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
We study deterministic and randomized midpoint discretizations of Langevin dynamics for a target $π\propto e^{-V}$, where $0 \prec αI\preceq\nabla^2V\preceqβI$ and $κ=β/α$. To achieve $\sqrtα\,W_2\leqslant\varepsilon$, we show that deterministic Heun uses at most $\widetilde O(κ^{4/3}d^{1/3}\varepsilon^{-2/3})$ gradient queries, and underdamped exponential midpoint uses $\widetilde O(κ^{5/4}d^{1/4}\varepsilon^{-1/2})$. The proofs exploit cancellation at stationarity and smoothing using techniques from Malliavin calculus, outperforming previous upper bounds based on standard couplings. At bounded condition number, a lower bound matches the $d$ and $\varepsilon$ powers of both deterministic methods. To contrast, for the randomized midpoint methods and Poisson midpoint with at least two grid points (both overdamped and underdamped variants), a simple Gaussian calculation yields a lower bound $d^{1/3}\varepsilon^{-1/3}$ to get an $\varepsilon$-close sample despite starting at a benign initialization. This shows surprisingly that in high dimensions, deterministic discretizations can outperform their random counterparts.