MCMC Can See Can't See
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
It is folklore that passing "convergence" diagnostics does not guarantee that a Markov chain has converged. We prove this as an impossibility for any finite checklist of diagnostics. Running more chains, longer chains, and smarter diagnostics does not avoid this impossibility in certifying convergence. Under regularity assumptions, we determine how the worst-case undetected non-convergence decays as more diagnostics are added, and how to choose diagnostics optimally. Folklore suggests that the sampler's slowest mixing modes are the "dangerous" ones that must be monitored; we prove that the slow modes yield nearly optimal diagnostics as sampling proceeds. Given a source class, we also give an anytime-valid bound on the remaining discrepancy and show how undetected bias caps the effective sample size that a finite checklist can certify.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Oct 2026.
Builds on
4 of 37 references.
References · 4
- 2019Rank-normalization, folding, and localization: An improved widehatR for assessing convergence of MCMCcited by 93
- 2020Kernel Autocovariance Operators of Stationary Processes: Estimation and Convergencecited by 4
- 2014Hypothesis testing for Markov chain Monte Carlocited by 2
- 2026Measuring and Decomposing Mode Separation via the Canonical Diffusioncited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.