Abstract
The asymmetry in the flow of events that is expressed by the phrase ‘time’s arrow’ traces back to the second law of thermodynamics. In the microscopic regime, fluctuations prevent us from discerning the direction of time’s arrow with certainty. Here, we find that a machine learning algorithm that is trained to infer the direction of time’s arrow identifies entropy production as the relevant physical quantity in its decision-making process. Effectively, the algorithm rediscovers the fluctuation theorem as the underlying thermodynamic principle. Our results indicate that machine learning techniques can be used to study systems that are out of equilibrium, and ultimately to answer open questions and uncover physical principles in thermodynamics.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Code availability
All relevant codes or algorithms are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
Eddington, A. S. The Nature of the Physical World (Macmillan, 1928).
Feng, E. H. & Crooks, G. E. Length of time’s arrow. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 090602 (2008).
Jarzynski, C. Equalities and inequalities: irreversibility and the second law of thermodynamics at the nanoscale. Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 2, 329–351 (2011).
Roldán, É., Neri, I., Dörpinghaus, M., Meyr, H. & Jülicher, F. Decision making in the arrow of time. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 250602 (2015).
Hofmann, A. et al. Heat dissipation and fluctuations in a driven quantum dot. Phys. Status Solidi B 254, 1600546 (2017).
Crooks, G. E. Nonequilibrium measurements of free energy differences for microscopically reversible Markovian systems. J. Stat. Phys. 90, 1481–1487 (1998).
Crooks, G. E. Entropy production fluctuation theorem and the nonequilibrium work relation for free energy differences. Phys. Rev. E 60, 2721–2726 (1999).
Seifert, U. Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation theorems and molecular machines. Rep. Prog. Phys. 75, 126001 (2012).
Carleo, G. et al. Machine learning and the physical sciences. Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 045002 (2019).
Senior, A. W. et al. Improved protein structure prediction using potentials from deep learning. Nature 577, 706–710 (2020).
Torlai, G. & Melko, R. G. Learning thermodynamics with Boltzmann machines. Phys. Rev. B 94, 165134 (2016).
Carrasquilla, J. & Melko, R. G. Machine learning phases of matter. Nat. Phys. 13, 431–434 (2017).
van Nieuwenburg, E. P. L., Liu, Y.-H. & Huber, S. D. Learning phase transitions by confusion. Nat. Phys. 13, 435–439 (2017).
Deng, D.-L., Li, X. & Das Sarma, S. Machine learning topological states. Phys. Rev. B 96, 195145 (2017).
Wetzel, S. J. & Scherzer, M. Machine learning of explicit order parameters: from the Ising model to SU(2) lattice gauge theory. Phys. Rev. B 96, 184410 (2017).
Wetzel, S. J. Unsupervised learning of phase transitions: from principal component analysis to variational autoencoders. Phys. Rev. E 96, 022140 (2017).
Ch’ng, K., Carrasquilla, J., Melko, R. G. & Khatami, E. Machine learning phases of strongly correlated fermions. Phys. Rev. X 7, 031038 (2017).
Ch’ng, K., Vazquez, N. & Khatami, E. Unsupervised machine learning account of magnetic transitions in the Hubbard model. Phys. Rev. E 97, 013306 (2018).
Liu, Y.-H. & van Nieuwenburg, E. P. L. Discriminative cooperative networks for detecting phase transitions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 176401 (2018).
Schindler, F., Regnault, N. & Neupert, T. Probing many-body localization with neural networks. Phys. Rev. B 95, 245134 (2017).
Arsenault, L.-F., Lopez-Bezanilla, A., von Lilienfeld, O. A. & Millis, A. J. Machine learning for many-body physics: the case of the Anderson impurity model. Phys. Rev. B 90, 155136 (2014).
Beach, M. J. S., Golubeva, A. & Melko, R. G. Machine learning vortices at the Kosterlitz–Thouless transition. Phys. Rev. B 97, 045207 (2018).
van Nieuwenburg, E., Bairey, E. & Refael, G. Learning phase transitions from dynamics. Phys. Rev. B 98, 060301 (2018).
Ponte, P. & Melko, R. G. Kernel methods for interpretable machine learning of order parameters. Phys. Rev. B 96, 205146 (2017).
Schmidt, M. & Lipson, H. Distilling free-form natural laws from experimental data. Science 324, 81–85 (2009).
Rudy, S. H., Brunton, S. L., Proctor, J. L. & Kutz, J. N. Data-driven discovery of partial differential equations. Sci. Adv. 3, e1602614 (2017).
Iten, R., Metger, T., Wilming, H., del Rio, L. & Renner, R. Discovering physical concepts with neural networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 010508 (2020).
Berkson, J. Application of the logistic function to bio-assay. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 39, 357–365 (1944).
Day, N. E. & Kerridge, D. F. A general maximum likelihood discriminant. Biometrics 23, 313–323 (1967).
Jarzynski, C. Nonequilibrium equality for free energy differences. Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 2690–2693 (1997).
Jarzynski, C. Equilibrium free-energy differences from nonequilibrium measurements: a master-equation approach. Phys. Rev. E 56, 5018–5035 (1997).
Hummer, G. & Szabo, A. Free energy reconstruction from nonequilibrium single-molecule pulling experiments. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 98, 3658–3661 (2001).
Shirts, M. R., Bair, E., Hooker, G. & Pande, V. S. Equilibrium free energies from nonequilibrium measurements using maximum-likelihood methods. Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 140601 (2003).
Maragakis, P., Ritort, F., Bustamante, C., Karplus, M. & Crooks, G. E. Bayesian estimates of free energies from nonequilibrium work data in the presence of instrument noise. J. Chem. Phys. 129, 024102 (2008).
Jarzynski, C. Rare events and the convergence of exponentially averaged work values. Phys. Rev. E 73, 046105 (2006).
Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y. & Courville, A. Deep Learning (MIT Press, 2016).
Caruana, R. Multitask learning. Mach. Learn. 28, 41–75 (1997).
Mordvintsev, A., Olah, C. & Tyka, M. Inceptionism: going deeper into neural networks. Google AI Blog https://ai.googleblog.com/2015/06/inceptionism-going-deeper-into-neural.html (2015).
Schindler, F., Regnault, N. & Neupert, T. Probing many-body localization with neural networks. Phys. Rev. B 95, 245134 (2017).
Nowlan, S. J. & Hinton, G. E. in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 1st edn, Vol. 3 (eds Lippmann, R. P. et al.) 774–780 (Morgan Kaufmann, 1991).
Wächtler, C. W., Strasberg, P., Klapp, S. H. L., Schaller, G. & Jarzynski, C. Stochastic thermodynamics of self-oscillations: the electron shuttle. New J. Phys. 21, 073009 (2019).
Young, J. T., Gorshkov, A. V., Foss-Feig, M. & Maghrebi, M. F. Nonequilibrium fixed points of coupled Ising models. Phys. Rev. X 10, 011039 (2020).
Pickup, L. C. et al. Seeing the arrow of time. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2035–2042 (IEEE Computer Society, 2014).
Wei, D., Lim, J. J., Zisserman, A. & Freeman, W. T. Learning and using the arrow of time. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 8052–8060 (IEEE Computer Society, 2018).
Kingma, D. P. & Ba, J. Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. In Proc. 3rd International Conference for Learning Representations (2015). Preprint of v.9 at https://arXiv.org/abs/1412.6980v9 (2017).
Srivastava, N., Hinton, G., Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I. & Salakhutdinov, R. Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 15, 1929–1958 (2014).
Acknowledgements
A.S. thanks E. van Nieuwenburg, G. Rostkoff and A. Izadi Rad for helpful discussions. We gratefully acknowledge support from the Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative of the Army Research Office (grant no. ARO W911NF-15-1-0397) and the Physics Frontiers Centers of the National Science Foundation at the Joint Quantum Institute (A.S. and M.H.), and from the National Science Foundation under grant no. DMR-1506969 (C.J.).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the design of the research, the analysis of the data, and the writing of the manuscript. A.S. performed the numerical simulations and implemented the machine learning algorithms.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
Supplementary Figs. 1–5, Table 1 and Discussions 1–4.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Seif, A., Hafezi, M. & Jarzynski, C. Machine learning the thermodynamic arrow of time. Nat. Phys. 17, 105–113 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-020-1018-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-020-1018-2
This article is cited by
-
Time reversibility during the ageing of materials
Nature Physics (2024)
-
Frenetic Steering in a Nonequilibrium Graph
Journal of Statistical Physics (2023)
-
On scientific understanding with artificial intelligence
Nature Reviews Physics (2022)
-
The INSIDEOUT framework provides precise signatures of the balance of intrinsic and extrinsic dynamics in brain states
Communications Biology (2022)
-
Entropic singularities give rise to quantum transmission
Nature Communications (2021)