ArticleThe Journal of chemical physics2024
Avoiding matrix exponentials for large transition rate matrices.
Article in The Journal of chemical physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stochastic colonization and host-to-host transmission shape gut bacterial variability.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Simulation-based inference captures non-Markovian effects as exemplified in protein production kinetics through cell division.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Article
- Mamba time series forecasting with uncertainty quantification.Machine learning: science and technology · 2025Article
- Article
- Distilling dynamical knowledge from stochastic reaction networks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Exact methods for the exponentiation of matrices of dimension N can be computationally expensive in terms of execution time (N3) and memory requirements (N2), not to mention numerical precision issues. A matrix often exponentiated in the natural sciences is the rate matrix. Here, we explore five methods to exponentiate rate matrices, some of which apply more broadly to other matrix types. Three of the methods leverage a mathematical analogy between computing matrix elements of a matrix exponential process and computing transition probabilities of a dynamical process (technically a Markov jump process, MJP, typically simulated using Gillespie). In doing so, we identify a novel MJP-based method relying on restricting the number of "trajectory" jumps that incurs improved computational scaling. We then discuss this method's downstream implications on mixing properties of Monte Carlo posterior samplers. We also benchmark two other methods of matrix exponentiation valid for any matrix (beyond rate matrices and, more generally, positive definite matrices) related to solving differential equations: Runge-Kutta integrators and Krylov subspace methods. Under conditions where both the largest matrix element and the number of non-vanishing elements scale linearly with N-reasonable conditions for rate matrices often exponentiated-computational time scaling with the most competitive methods (Krylov and one of the MJP-based methods) reduces to N2 with total memory requirements of N.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.