Agent-almanac analyze-diffusion-dynamics
git clone https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/i18n/wenyan-lite/skills/analyze-diffusion-dynamics" ~/.claude/skills/pjt222-agent-almanac-analyze-diffusion-dynamics-d9405d && rm -rf "$T"
i18n/wenyan-lite/skills/analyze-diffusion-dynamics/SKILL.md析擴散動力學
藉指定隨機微分方程、推導 Fokker-Planck 方程、解析或數值計算首達時分佈、行參數敏感度分析、並對蒙地卡羅模擬驗證解析結果,以刻劃擴散過程之行為。
適用時機
- 推導連續時間擴散過程之機率密度演化
- 計算有界擴散之平均首達時或完整首達時分佈
- 分析漂移、擴散係數與邊界參數如何影響過程行為
- 對隨機模擬驗證閉式解
- 為漂移擴散模型或生成式擴散過程之底層動力學建立直覺
輸入
- 必要:SDE 規格(漂移函式、擴散係數、定義域/邊界)
- 必要:漂移與擴散函式之參數值或範圍
- 必要:邊界條件(吸收、反射或混合)
- 選擇性:暫態分析之時間範圍(預設:自動由動力學偵測)
- 選擇性:數值 PDE 解算器之空間離散解析度(預設:dx=0.001)
- 選擇性:模擬驗證之蒙地卡羅軌跡數(預設:10000)
步驟
步驟一:指定 SDE 模型
定義過程之漂移函式、擴散係數與邊界條件。
- 以標準 Ito 形式撰 SDE:
dX(t) = mu(X, t) dt + sigma(X, t) dW(t)
其中
mu 為漂移函式,sigma 為擴散係數,W(t) 為標準維納過程。
- 於碼中實作 SDE 元件:
import numpy as np class DiffusionProcess: """A one-dimensional diffusion process specified by drift and diffusion functions.""" def __init__(self, drift_fn, diffusion_fn, lower_bound=None, upper_bound=None, boundary_type="absorbing"): self.drift = drift_fn self.diffusion = diffusion_fn self.lower_bound = lower_bound self.upper_bound = upper_bound self.boundary_type = boundary_type # Example: Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process on [0, a] ou_process = DiffusionProcess( drift_fn=lambda x, t: 2.0 * (0.5 - x), # mean-reverting drift diffusion_fn=lambda x, t: 0.1, # constant diffusion lower_bound=0.0, upper_bound=1.0, boundary_type="absorbing" ) # Example: Standard DDM (constant drift and diffusion) ddm_process = DiffusionProcess( drift_fn=lambda x, t: 0.5, # drift rate v diffusion_fn=lambda x, t: 1.0, # unit diffusion (s=1, convention) lower_bound=0.0, # lower absorbing boundary upper_bound=1.5, # upper absorbing boundary (a) boundary_type="absorbing" )
- 定義初始條件:
# Point source at x0 x0 = 0.75 # starting point (e.g., midpoint between boundaries for DDM with z=a/2) # Or a distribution initial_distribution = lambda x: np.exp(-50 * (x - 0.75)**2) # narrow Gaussian
- 驗證參數一致性:
def validate_process(process, x0): """Check that the SDE specification is self-consistent.""" assert process.lower_bound < process.upper_bound, "Lower bound must be less than upper bound" assert process.lower_bound <= x0 <= process.upper_bound, \ f"Initial position {x0} outside bounds [{process.lower_bound}, {process.upper_bound}]" test_drift = process.drift(x0, 0) test_diff = process.diffusion(x0, 0) assert np.isfinite(test_drift), f"Drift is not finite at x0={x0}" assert test_diff > 0, f"Diffusion coefficient must be positive, got {test_diff}" print(f"Process validated: drift={test_drift:.4f}, diffusion={test_diff:.4f} at x0={x0}") validate_process(ddm_process, x0=0.75)
預期: SDE 全規定,漂移值有限、擴散係數嚴格為正、初始條件於定義域邊界內。
失敗時: 若擴散係數於定義域中任點為零或負,過程退化——查函式形式。若漂移於邊界處無窮,考反射邊界是否更宜。
步驟二:推 Fokker-Planck 方程
將 SDE 轉為機率密度之等價偏微分方程。
- 撰過渡密度 p(x, t) 之 Fokker-Planck 方程(FPE):
dp/dt = -d/dx [mu(x,t) * p(x,t)] + (1/2) * d^2/dx^2 [sigma(x,t)^2 * p(x,t)]
- 對常係數(標準 DDM 情況),化簡為:
dp/dt = -v * dp/dx + (s^2 / 2) * d^2p/dx^2
- 以有限差分實作 FPE 之數值解:
from scipy.sparse import diags from scipy.sparse.linalg import spsolve def solve_fokker_planck(process, x0, t_max, dx=0.001, dt=None): """Solve the FPE numerically using Crank-Nicolson scheme.""" x_grid = np.arange(process.lower_bound, process.upper_bound + dx, dx) N = len(x_grid) if dt is None: max_sigma = max(process.diffusion(x, 0) for x in x_grid) dt = 0.4 * dx**2 / max_sigma**2 # CFL-like stability condition # Initial condition: narrow Gaussian centered at x0 p = np.exp(-((x_grid - x0)**2) / (2 * (2*dx)**2)) p[0] = 0 # absorbing boundary p[-1] = 0 # absorbing boundary p = p / (np.sum(p) * dx) t_steps = int(t_max / dt) survival = np.zeros(t_steps) density_snapshots = [] for step in range(t_steps): mu_vals = np.array([process.drift(x, step*dt) for x in x_grid]) sigma_vals = np.array([process.diffusion(x, step*dt) for x in x_grid]) D = 0.5 * sigma_vals**2 # Finite difference operators (interior points) advection = -mu_vals[1:-1] / (2 * dx) diffusion_coeff = D[1:-1] / dx**2 main_diag = 1 + dt * 2 * diffusion_coeff upper_diag = dt * (-diffusion_coeff[:-1] - advection[:-1]) lower_diag = dt * (-diffusion_coeff[1:] + advection[1:]) A = diags([lower_diag, main_diag, upper_diag], [-1, 0, 1], format="csc") p[1:-1] = spsolve(A, p[1:-1]) p[0] = 0 p[-1] = 0 survival[step] = np.sum(p[1:-1]) * dx if step % (t_steps // 10) == 0: density_snapshots.append((step * dt, p.copy())) return x_grid, survival, density_snapshots
- 行並繪演化中之密度:
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt x_grid, survival, snapshots = solve_fokker_planck(ddm_process, x0=0.75, t_max=5.0) fig, (ax1, ax2) = plt.subplots(1, 2, figsize=(14, 5)) for t_val, density in snapshots: ax1.plot(x_grid, density, label=f"t={t_val:.2f}") ax1.set_xlabel("x") ax1.set_ylabel("p(x, t)") ax1.set_title("Fokker-Planck Density Evolution") ax1.legend() t_vals = np.linspace(0, 5.0, len(survival)) ax2.plot(t_vals, survival) ax2.set_xlabel("Time") ax2.set_ylabel("Survival probability") ax2.set_title("Survival Probability S(t)") fig.tight_layout() fig.savefig("fokker_planck_solution.png", dpi=150)
預期: 密度始為 x0 處之窄峰,依 SDE 係數展與漂移,並隨機率於邊界被吸收而漸衰。存活機率自 1 單調降至 0。
失敗時: 若密度生振盪或負值,時間步過大——減 dt。若密度不衰(存活近 1),邊界或離 x0 過遠或漂移由二邊界皆推開。查解算器之邊界條件。
步驟三:計算首達時分佈
推過程首達邊界之時間分佈。
- 自存活函式計算首達時密度:
def first_passage_time_density(survival, dt): """FPT density is the negative derivative of survival probability.""" fpt_density = -np.gradient(survival, dt) fpt_density = np.maximum(fpt_density, 0) # enforce non-negativity return fpt_density
- 對常漂移之標準 DDM,用已知解析解:
def ddm_fpt_upper(t, v, a, z, s=1.0, n_terms=50): """Analytic FPT density at the upper boundary for constant-drift DDM. Uses the infinite series representation (large-time expansion). """ if t <= 0: return 0.0 density = 0.0 for k in range(1, n_terms + 1): density += (k * np.pi * s**2 / a**2) * \ np.exp(-v * (a - z) / s**2 - 0.5 * v**2 * t / s**2) * \ np.sin(k * np.pi * z / a) * \ np.exp(-0.5 * (k * np.pi * s / a)**2 * t) return density
- 計算 FPT 分佈之摘要統計量:
def fpt_statistics(fpt_density, dt): """Compute mean, variance, and quantiles of the FPT distribution.""" t_vals = np.arange(len(fpt_density)) * dt total_mass = np.sum(fpt_density) * dt # Normalize fpt_normed = fpt_density / total_mass if total_mass > 0 else fpt_density mean_fpt = np.sum(t_vals * fpt_normed) * dt var_fpt = np.sum((t_vals - mean_fpt)**2 * fpt_normed) * dt # Quantiles via CDF cdf = np.cumsum(fpt_normed) * dt quantile_10 = t_vals[np.searchsorted(cdf, 0.1)] quantile_50 = t_vals[np.searchsorted(cdf, 0.5)] quantile_90 = t_vals[np.searchsorted(cdf, 0.9)] return { "mean": mean_fpt, "std": np.sqrt(var_fpt), "q10": quantile_10, "q50": quantile_50, "q90": quantile_90, "total_probability": total_mass }
- 對二邊界問題,依各吸收壁之機率通量(邊界格點密度之有限差分)分離 FPT。
預期: FPT 密度為右偏單峰分佈。對正漂移之 DDM,上邊界 FPT 較下邊界 FPT 質量更多且模較短。典型 DDM 參數(v=1, a=1.5, z=0.75)之平均 FPT 約 0.5-2.0 秒。
失敗時: 若 FPT 密度有負值,數值微分有噪——施小高斯平滑核。若二邊界總機率不近 1.0,或時間範圍過短(增 t_max),或解算器中有機率洩漏。
步驟四:分析參數敏感度
量化各參數變動如何影響首達時分佈。
- 為敏感度分析定參數網格:
param_ranges = { "v": np.linspace(0.2, 3.0, 15), # drift rate "a": np.linspace(0.5, 2.5, 15), # boundary separation "z_ratio": np.linspace(0.3, 0.7, 9) # starting point as fraction of a } base_params = {"v": 1.0, "a": 1.5, "z_ratio": 0.5}
- 掃各參數而保他者於基線:
sensitivity_results = {} for param_name, param_values in param_ranges.items(): means = [] accuracies = [] for val in param_values: params = base_params.copy() params[param_name] = val z = params["z_ratio"] * params["a"] process = DiffusionProcess( drift_fn=lambda x, t, v=params["v"]: v, diffusion_fn=lambda x, t: 1.0, lower_bound=0.0, upper_bound=params["a"], boundary_type="absorbing" ) _, survival, _ = solve_fokker_planck(process, x0=z, t_max=10.0) fpt = first_passage_time_density(survival, dt=10.0/len(survival)) stats = fpt_statistics(fpt, dt=10.0/len(survival)) means.append(stats["mean"]) accuracies.append(stats["total_probability"]) # proxy for upper boundary sensitivity_results[param_name] = { "values": param_values, "mean_fpt": np.array(means), "accuracy": np.array(accuracies) }
- 繪敏感度曲線:
fig, axes = plt.subplots(1, 3, figsize=(18, 5)) for idx, (param_name, result) in enumerate(sensitivity_results.items()): ax = axes[idx] ax.plot(result["values"], result["mean_fpt"], "b-o", label="Mean FPT") ax.set_xlabel(param_name) ax.set_ylabel("Mean FPT") ax.set_title(f"Sensitivity to {param_name}") ax2 = ax.twinx() ax2.plot(result["values"], result["accuracy"], "r--s", label="P(upper)") ax2.set_ylabel("P(upper boundary)") ax.legend(loc="upper left") ax2.legend(loc="upper right") fig.tight_layout() fig.savefig("parameter_sensitivity.png", dpi=150)
- 計算偏導(基線之局部敏感度):
for param_name, result in sensitivity_results.items(): idx_base = np.argmin(np.abs(result["values"] - base_params[param_name])) if idx_base > 0 and idx_base < len(result["values"]) - 1: d_mean = (result["mean_fpt"][idx_base+1] - result["mean_fpt"][idx_base-1]) / \ (result["values"][idx_base+1] - result["values"][idx_base-1]) print(f"d(mean_FPT)/d({param_name}) at baseline: {d_mean:.4f}")
預期: 漂移率 (v) 對平均 FPT 有強負效應,對準確率有強正效應。邊界距 (a) 對平均 FPT 有強正效應(速準權衡)。起點 (z) 移準確率而對平均 FPT 影響較小。
失敗時: 若敏感度曲線平或非單調,查參數範圍是否夠廣、解算器時間範圍是否捕全 FPT 分佈。對漂移率非單調之平均 FPT 表示解算器有缺陷。
步驟五:對數值模擬驗證解析
行 SDE 之蒙地卡羅模擬以確認解析與數值 PDE 結果。
- 實作 SDE 之 Euler-Maruyama 模擬:
def simulate_sde(process, x0, dt_sim=0.0001, t_max=10.0, n_trajectories=10000): """Simulate SDE paths and record first-passage times.""" n_steps = int(t_max / dt_sim) fpt_upper = np.full(n_trajectories, np.nan) fpt_lower = np.full(n_trajectories, np.nan) x = np.full(n_trajectories, x0) sqrt_dt = np.sqrt(dt_sim) for step in range(n_steps): t = step * dt_sim active = np.isnan(fpt_upper) & np.isnan(fpt_lower) if not active.any(): break mu = np.array([process.drift(xi, t) for xi in x[active]]) sigma = np.array([process.diffusion(xi, t) for xi in x[active]]) dW = np.random.randn(active.sum()) * sqrt_dt x[active] += mu * dt_sim + sigma * dW # Check boundary crossings hit_upper = active & (x >= process.upper_bound) hit_lower = active & (x <= process.lower_bound) fpt_upper[hit_upper] = (step + 1) * dt_sim fpt_lower[hit_lower] = (step + 1) * dt_sim return fpt_upper, fpt_lower
- 行模擬並計算經驗 FPT 分佈:
fpt_upper_sim, fpt_lower_sim = simulate_sde(ddm_process, x0=0.75, n_trajectories=50000) # Empirical statistics valid_upper = fpt_upper_sim[~np.isnan(fpt_upper_sim)] valid_lower = fpt_lower_sim[~np.isnan(fpt_lower_sim)] total_absorbed = len(valid_upper) + len(valid_lower) accuracy_sim = len(valid_upper) / total_absorbed print(f"Simulated accuracy: {accuracy_sim:.4f}") print(f"Mean FPT (upper): {valid_upper.mean():.4f} +/- {valid_upper.std()/np.sqrt(len(valid_upper)):.4f}") print(f"Mean FPT (lower): {valid_lower.mean():.4f} +/- {valid_lower.std()/np.sqrt(len(valid_lower)):.4f}")
- 比對模擬與解析或數值 PDE 解:
fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(10, 6)) # Empirical histogram ax.hist(valid_upper, bins=100, density=True, alpha=0.5, label="Simulation (upper)") ax.hist(valid_lower, bins=100, density=True, alpha=0.5, label="Simulation (lower)") # Analytical solution overlay t_vals_analytic = np.linspace(0.01, 5.0, 500) v, a, z = 0.5, 1.5, 0.75 fpt_analytic = [ddm_fpt_upper(t, v, a, z) for t in t_vals_analytic] ax.plot(t_vals_analytic, fpt_analytic, "k-", linewidth=2, label="Analytic (upper)") ax.set_xlabel("First-passage time") ax.set_ylabel("Density") ax.set_title("FPT Distribution: Simulation vs. Analytic") ax.legend() fig.savefig("fpt_validation.png", dpi=150)
- 量化二法之一致:
from scipy.stats import ks_2samp # Kolmogorov-Smirnov test between simulated and analytically-derived samples analytic_cdf = np.cumsum(fpt_analytic) * (t_vals_analytic[1] - t_vals_analytic[0]) sim_sorted = np.sort(valid_upper) sim_cdf = np.arange(1, len(sim_sorted)+1) / len(sim_sorted) # Interpolate analytic CDF at simulation quantiles from scipy.interpolate import interp1d analytic_interp = interp1d(t_vals_analytic, analytic_cdf, bounds_error=False, fill_value=(0, 1)) max_diff = np.max(np.abs(sim_cdf - analytic_interp(sim_sorted))) print(f"Max CDF difference (simulation vs. analytic): {max_diff:.4f}") assert max_diff < 0.05, f"Simulation and analytic FPT differ by {max_diff:.4f} (threshold: 0.05)"
預期: 模擬直方圖與解析 FPT 曲線密切吻合。50,000 軌跡之 KS 檢定最大 CDF 差小於 0.05。模擬之平均 FPT 在解析值之 2 標準誤內。
失敗時: 若模擬與解析不合,先查 Euler-Maruyama 步長——dt_sim 須夠小以免漏邊界穿越(試 dt_sim=0.00001)。若解析級數不收斂,增 n_terms。對無解析解之非常數係數,比對二數值法(PDE 解算器與模擬)。
驗證
- SDE 規格通過一致性檢查(漂移有限、擴散為正、x0 於定義域)
- Fokker-Planck 密度積分為隨時單調降之值(存活函式)
- Fokker-Planck 解無數值產物(振盪、負值)
- FPT 密度非負,二邊界積分近 1.0
- 敏感度分析呈預期之單調關係(v 對準確率、a 對平均 FPT)
- 蒙地卡羅模擬之平均 FPT 於 PDE/解析解之 2 標準誤內
- 模擬與解析間 KS 檢定最大 CDF 差小於 0.05
常見陷阱
- Euler-Maruyama 步長過大:大 dt_sim 致軌跡越過邊界,使 FPT 估計有偏。dt_sim 至多取預期平均 FPT 之 1/10,或用邊界校正之方法
- FPT 級數截太早:解析 DDM FPT 密度用無窮級數。項過少(< 20)致可見產物,特於短時。用至少 50 項並查收斂
- 忽 PDE 解算器中之數值擴散:一階有限差分產人工擴散,使 FPT 分佈展寬。為精度用 Crank-Nicolson 或更高階方法
- 混 Ito 與 Stratonovich 形式:Fokker-Planck 方程隨 SDE 慣例而異。上之標準形假設 Ito 演算。若 SDE 為 Stratonovich,加噪聲誘導之漂移修正項
- 未計二邊界:二邊界問題中,總吸收機率須和為 1.0。僅報上邊界 FPT 而不計下邊界,統計失真
相關技能
— 將此動力學用於自行為資料估參fit-drift-diffusion-model
— 生成式擴散模型離散同一 SDE 框架implement-diffusion-network
— 測試數值解算器與解析實作write-testthat-tests
— 文件化擴散分析結果create-technical-report