analyze-diffusion-dynamics
정보
이 Claude Skill은 확률 밀도 함수의 변화를 모델링하기 위해 확률 미분 방정식과 포커-플랑크 방정식을 사용하여 확산 과정을 분석합니다. 첫 도달 시간 분포를 계산하며, 드리프트 및 확산 매개변수에 대한 민감도 분석을 수행합니다. 폐쇄형 해석적 해를 시뮬레이션 결과와 비교 검증하거나, 연속 시간 확산 역학을 분석해야 할 때 활용하세요.
빠른 설치
Claude Code
추천npx skills add pjt222/agent-almanac -a claude-code/plugin add https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanacgit clone https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac.git ~/.claude/skills/analyze-diffusion-dynamicsClaude Code에서 이 명령을 복사하여 붙여넣어 스킬을 설치하세요
문서
Analyze Diffusion Dynamics
Characterize diffusion process behavior → SDEs, Fokker-Planck, FPT distributions, param sensitivity, MC simulation valid.
Use When
- Derive prob density evolution → continuous-time diffusion
- Compute mean FPT or full FPT distributions → bounded diffusion
- Analyze drift/diffusion/boundary param effects
- Validate closed-form vs stochastic sim
- Build intuition for drift-diffusion or generative diffusion
In
- Required: SDE spec (drift fn, diffusion coeff, domain/boundaries)
- Required: Param values/ranges
- Required: Boundary conditions (absorbing, reflecting, mixed)
- Optional: Time horizon (default: auto-detect)
- Optional: Spatial discretization resolution (default: dx=0.001)
- Optional: MC trajectories (default: 10000)
Do
Step 1: Specify SDE Model
Define drift, diffusion coeff, boundaries.
- SDE in Ito form:
dX(t) = mu(X, t) dt + sigma(X, t) dW(t)
where mu = drift, sigma = diffusion coeff, W(t) = Wiener proc.
- Impl SDE:
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"
)
- Define initial condition:
# 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
- Validate param consistency:
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)
→ Fully spec'd SDE, finite drift, strictly pos diffusion, x0 in domain.
If err: Diffusion zero/neg anywhere → degenerate → check form. Drift infinite at boundary → reflecting may be better.
Step 2: Derive Fokker-Planck
SDE → PDE for prob density.
- FPE for transition density p(x, t):
dp/dt = -d/dx [mu(x,t) * p(x,t)] + (1/2) * d^2/dx^2 [sigma(x,t)^2 * p(x,t)]
- Constant coeffs (standard DDM) simplifies:
dp/dt = -v * dp/dx + (s^2 / 2) * d^2p/dx^2
- Numerical solution via finite diffs:
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
- Run + plot evolving density:
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)
→ Density starts narrow peak at x0, spreads + drifts per SDE coeffs, decays as absorbed at boundaries. Survival monotonic 1 → 0.
If err: Oscillations/neg values → dt too large → reduce. Survival stays near 1 → boundaries too far or drift pushes away. Check solver boundary conditions.
Step 3: FPT Distributions
Derive distribution of times first reaching boundary.
- FPT density from survival:
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
- Standard DDM constant drift → known analytic:
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
- Summary stats of FPT:
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
}
- Two-boundary → separate FPT by boundary via prob flux at each absorbing wall (finite diff of density at boundary grid pts).
→ FPT density right-skewed unimodal. DDM pos drift → upper boundary FPT more mass + shorter mode than lower. Typical DDM (v=1, a=1.5, z=0.75) → mean FPT ~0.5-2.0s.
If err: Neg values → numerical diff noisy → apply small Gaussian smoothing. Total prob not ~1.0 → horizon too short (increase t_max) or prob leakage in solver.
Step 4: Param Sensitivity
Quantify param change effects on FPT.
- Define param grid:
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}
- Sweep each param, others at baseline:
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)
}
- Plot sensitivity curves:
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)
- Partial derivatives (local sensitivity at baseline):
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}")
→ Drift (v) strong neg effect mean FPT + strong pos accuracy. Boundary sep (a) strong pos mean FPT (speed-accuracy tradeoff). Start (z) shifts accuracy, smaller effect on mean FPT.
If err: Flat or non-monotonic → check range wide + solver horizon captures full FPT. Non-monotonic mean FPT vs drift → solver bug.
Step 5: Validate vs Sim
MC sim of SDE → confirm analytic + numerical PDE.
- Euler-Maruyama sim:
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
- Run sim + compute empirical FPT:
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}")
- Compare sim vs analytic or PDE:
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)
- Quantify agreement:
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)"
→ Sim histograms closely match analytic FPT. KS max CDF diff <0.05 for 50K trajectories. Mean FPT sim within 2 SE of analytic.
If err: Disagree → check Euler-Maruyama step → dt_sim small enough (try dt_sim=0.00001) → boundary crossings not missed. Series no converge → increase n_terms. Non-constant coeffs no analytic → compare 2 numerical methods (PDE vs sim).
Check
- SDE spec passes consistency (finite drift, pos diffusion, x0 in domain)
- FPE density integrates → decreases monotonic (survival)
- FPE solution no artifacts (oscillations, neg)
- FPT density non-neg + integrates ~1.0 across boundaries
- Sensitivity monotonic expected (v vs accuracy, a vs mean FPT)
- MC mean FPT within 2 SE of PDE/analytic
- KS max CDF diff sim vs analytic <0.05
Traps
- Euler-Maruyama step too large: Large dt_sim → trajectories overshoot boundaries → biased FPT. Use dt_sim ≤1/10 expected mean FPT or boundary-corrected scheme.
- Truncate FPT series too early: Analytic DDM FPT uses infinite series. <20 terms → visible artifacts at short times. ≥50 + check convergence.
- Ignore numerical diffusion in PDE: 1st-order finite diff → artificial diffusion broadens FPT. Use Crank-Nicolson or higher-order.
- Confuse Ito + Stratonovich: FPE differs by SDE convention. Above assumes Ito. Stratonovich → add noise-induced drift correction.
- Not accounting both boundaries: Two-boundary → total absorption prob = 1.0. Only upper → incorrect stats.
→
fit-drift-diffusion-model— applies dynamics → estimate params from behavioral dataimplement-diffusion-network— generative diffusion models discretize same SDE frameworkwrite-testthat-tests— testing numerical solvers + analytic implscreate-technical-report— document diffusion analysis results
GitHub 저장소
연관 스킬
llamaguard
기타LlamaGuard는 폭력 및 혐오 발언 등 6가지 안전 범주에서 LLM 입력과 출력을 조정하기 위한 Meta의 70-80억 파라미터 모델입니다. 94-95% 정확도를 제공하며 vLLM, Hugging Face 또는 Amazon SageMaker를 사용해 배포할 수 있습니다. 이 기술을 사용하여 AI 애플리케이션에 콘텐츠 필터링 및 안전 가드레일을 손쉽게 통합하세요.
cost-optimization
기타이 Claude Skill은 리소스 적정화, 태깅 전략, 지출 분석을 통해 개발자들이 클라우드 비용을 최적화할 수 있도록 지원합니다. AWS, Azure, GCP에서 클라우드 비용을 절감하고 비용 거버넌스를 구현하기 위한 프레임워크를 제공합니다. 인프라 비용을 분석하거나, 리소스를 적정화하거나, 예산 제약을 충족해야 할 때 사용하세요.
quantizing-models-bitsandbytes
기타이 스킬은 bitsandbytes를 사용하여 LLM을 8비트 또는 4비트 정밀도로 양자화하며, 최소한의 정확도 손실로 50-75%의 메모리 감소를 달성합니다. 제한된 GPU 메모리에서 더 큰 모델을 실행하거나 추론을 가속화하는 데 이상적이며, INT8, NF4, FP4와 같은 형식을 지원합니다. 이 스킬은 HuggingFace Transformers와 통합되어 QLoRA 학습 및 8비트 옵티마이저를 가능하게 합니다.
dispatching-parallel-agents
기타이 Claude Skill은 3개 이상의 독립적인 문제를 동시에 조사하고 해결하기 위해 다중 에이전트를 배치합니다. 공유 상태나 의존성 없이 해결 가능한 무관련 장애 시나리오에 맞게 설계되었습니다. 핵심 기능은 병렬 문제 해결로, 각 독립 문제 영역마다 하나의 에이전트를 할당하여 효율성을 극대화합니다.
