frac{1}{\sigma^2} \sum_{mn} mn v_{m0}
    \sum_{j=1}^\infty u_{jm} \left(\frac{1}{-\lambda_j}\right) v_{nj}.$$

![Autocorrelation time computed (a) numerically using eigenfunction expansion or (b) by simulation using method of batch means. For sufficient cutoff $N$ or trajectory duration $T$, respectively, both methods converge to same value (dashed line). Parameters: $\theta = h = 0$ and $n_c = 100$. Time is in units of $1/k_1^-$. In (b), $\tau_b = 1000$, and error bars are standard error from $50$ trajectories.[]{data-label="fig:tauc"}](fig5){width="\linewidth"}

In matrix notation, $$\label{eq:tauc_mat}
\tau_c = \sigma^{-2} \vec{n} {\bf V} {\bf F} {\bf U} \vec{w},$$ where $\vec{n}$ is a row vector, $\vec{w} = mv_{m0}$ is a column vector, and neither the eigenvector matrices ${\bf V}$ and ${\bf U}$ nor the diagonal matrix $F_{jj'} = -\delta_{jj'}/\lambda_j$ contain the $j=0$ term. Numerically, we compute $\tau_c$ via Eq. \[eq:tauc\_mat\] using a cutoff $N > n_c$ for the vectors and matrices.

The second method is to calculate $\tau_c$ from stochastic simulations [@gillespie1977exact] and the method of batch means [@thompson2010comparison]. The idea is to divide a simulation trajectory of length $T$ into batches of length $\tau_b$. In the limit $T\gg\tau_b\gg\tau_c$, the correlation time can be estimated by [@thompson2010comparison] $$\label{eq:batch}
\tau_c = \frac{\tau_b\sigma_b^2}{2\sigma^2},$$ where $\sigma_b^2$ is the variance of the means of the batches.

In Fig. \[fig:tauc\] we verify that the two methods converge to the same limit for sufficiently large $N$ or $T$, respectively. We find that the
frac{1}{\sigma^2 } \sum_{mn } mn v_{m0 } 
     \sum_{j=1}^\infty u_{jm } \left(\frac{1}{-\lambda_j}\right) v_{nj}.$$ 

! [ Autocorrelation time computed (a) numerically using eigenfunction expansion or (boron) by model using method of batch means. For sufficient shortcut $ N$ or trajectory duration $ T$, respectively, both methods converge to same value (dashed pipeline). Parameters: $ \theta = h = 0 $ and $ n_c = 100$. clock time is in units of $ 1 / k_1 ^ -$. In (b), $ \tau_b = 1000 $, and erroneousness bars are standard error from $ 50 $ trajectories.[]{data - label="fig: tauc"}](fig5){width="\linewidth " } 

 In matrix note, $ $ \label{eq: tauc_mat } 
 \tau_c = \sigma^{-2 } \vec{n } { \bf V } { \bf F } { \bf U } \vec{w},$$ where $ \vec{n}$ is a row vector, $ \vec{w } = mv_{m0}$ is a column vector, and neither the eigenvector matrices $ { \bf V}$ and $ { \bf U}$ nor the diagonal matrix $ F_{jj' } = -\delta_{jj'}/\lambda_j$ contain the $ j=0 $ term. Numerically, we compute $ \tau_c$ via Eq.   \[eq: tauc\_mat\ ] using a cutoff $ N > n_c$ for the vector and matrices. 

 The second method is to calculate $ \tau_c$ from stochastic pretense [ @gillespie1977exact ] and the method of batch means [ @thompson2010comparison ]. The idea is to divide a model trajectory of length $ T$ into batches of length $ \tau_b$. In the limit $ T\gg\tau_b\gg\tau_c$, the correlation meter can be estimated by [ @thompson2010comparison ] $ $ \label{eq: batch } 
 \tau_c = \frac{\tau_b\sigma_b^2}{2\sigma^2},$$ where $ \sigma_b^2 $ is the variance of the means of the batches. 

 In Fig.   \[fig: tauc\ ] we verify that the two methods converge to the same limit for sufficiently large $ N$ or $ T$, respectively. We find that the
fraf{1}{\sigma^2} \sum_{mn} mn v_{m0}
    \suo_{j=1}^\infty u_{jm} \lefj(\feac{1}{-\lamuda_j}\riggt) v_{nj}.$$

![Augocorrelation time computed (e) nunericqlly using eigenfunctiun expanspon or (b) vy smmulation using method on batdm meaus. For sufficienj cutoff $N$ os trajectory dgrxtnon $T$, respectively, both methods convqrge to swme value (dashgd limq). Padameters: $\theta = h = 0$ and $n_c = 100$. Time js in uiits of $1/k_1^-$. In (b), $\yau_b = 1000$, and error bars are dtanfard error from $50$ tgajectories.[]{eata-jqbel="fig:tauc"}](fkg5){width="\lintwndth"}

In matrjx notation, $$\label{eq:tauc_mat}
\tau_c = \sigmc^{-2} \vec{n} {\bf V} {\bd F} {\tf U} \vec{w},$$ wiere $\vvc{n}$ is a row yvctor, $\vac{w} = mv_{k0}$ is a column yectoc, ane neither the eigenvertor matrices ${\bf V}$ agd ${\bf U}$ nmr the diagonal mateiz $F_{jj'} = -\denta_{jg'}/\oamcda_n$ ronfain tje $o=0$ term. Numedically, we xompute $\tau_c$ via Eq. \[tq:twlv\_mat\] using a cutofs $G > n_c$ for the vectors and matrices.

The stcond method is to calculate $\tau_c$ from stochastic simulatijns [@gillespie1977exact] and the method of batch means [@dhompaun2010cimiaririn]. The idea is to divide a simulation trajectorr og kength $T$ into natches of length $\yak_b$. Yn the limit $J\gg\tau_b\yf\tzu_c$, the correlatioj time san bw estimattd by [@thompson2010comparison] $$\label{eq:vatch}
\tau_c = \fgac{\tqu_b\sigma_b^2}{2\sigma^2},$$ whexe $\sigma_b^2$ is the varisnce of the means of thz batcges.

In Fig. \[fih:tauc\] we bdrify that the tdo kedhods converge to the same limit foc sufyicientlh latge $N$ ow $T$, respechiveln. We find that the
frac{1}{\sigma^2} \sum_{mn} mn v_{m0} \sum_{j=1}^\infty u_{jm} \left(\frac{1}{-\lambda_j}\right) time (a) numerically eigenfunction expansion or of means. For sufficient $N$ or trajectory $T$, respectively, both methods converge to value (dashed line). Parameters: $\theta = h = 0$ and $n_c = 100$. is in units of $1/k_1^-$. In (b), $\tau_b = 1000$, and error bars standard from trajectories.[]{data-label="fig:tauc"}](fig5){width="\linewidth"} matrix notation, $$\label{eq:tauc_mat} \tau_c = \sigma^{-2} \vec{n} {\bf V} {\bf F} {\bf U} \vec{w},$$ where $\vec{n}$ a row vector, $\vec{w} = mv_{m0}$ is a vector, and neither the matrices ${\bf V}$ and ${\bf nor diagonal matrix = contain $j=0$ term. Numerically, compute $\tau_c$ via Eq. \[eq:tauc\_mat\] using a cutoff $N > n_c$ for the vectors and matrices. The method is $\tau_c$ from simulations and method of batch The idea is to divide a length $T$ into batches of length $\tau_b$. In limit $T\gg\tau_b\gg\tau_c$, correlation time can be estimated by $$\label{eq:batch} \tau_c = \frac{\tau_b\sigma_b^2}{2\sigma^2},$$ where $\sigma_b^2$ is the of the means of the batches. In Fig. \[fig:tauc\] we verify that the two methods the same limit for large $N$ or respectively. find the
frac{1}{\sigma^2} \sum_{mn} mn v_{m0}
    \sum_{j=1}^\infTy u_{jm} \left(\fRac{1}{-\laMbdA_j}\rIgHt) v_{nJ}.$$

![AutOcorrelation tiME comPuted (a) numerically using EigenFuNCtioN ExPansiOn or (b) by SImULAtiOn UsIng MeTHoD of baTch Means. FoR sufficienT cuToFf $N$ or trajectORy Duration $T$, rEspEctively, both MetHods coNvErgE To samE vaLue (daShed liNE). ParamEters: $\thetA = h = 0$ ANd $n_c = 100$. TiME is in unITS oF $1/k_1^-$. In (B), $\tau_b = 1000$, and error bars ARe STandard error frOm $50$ trajEcTOrIES.[]{daTa-lAbel="fig:tauC"}](fIg5){widTH="\linewiDTh"}

iN MAtrIX notation, $$\labeL{eq:tauc_mat}
\tAU_c = \sIgma^{-2} \veC{n} {\Bf V} {\BF F} {\bf U} \vEc{w},$$ whErE $\Vec{N}$ is a row vectOr, $\veC{w} = mv_{m0}$ is a cOlumn vECtor, and NEither tHe eigeNveCtoR matRIcEs ${\Bf V}$ AnD ${\Bf U}$ NOr The DIagOnal matrIx $f_{jJ'} = -\deltA_{jj'}/\lAMBDA_j$ coNtaIn thE $j=0$ terM. Numerically, wE coMputE $\Tau_C$ via EQ. \[eq:taUc\_maT\] uSing a Cutoff $n > n_c$ foR tHe vectors and matRiceS.

The seconD meThOd iS tO calcULate $\taU_c$ fRom StochasTic simuLAtiOnS [@GILlEspie1977exact] and the meThOD Of Batch meaNs [@thomPSoN2010cOMparison]. thE idEa is TO DividE a siMUlAtion traJectorY Of LeNgth $T$ inTo BatcheS oF leNgtH $\tau_b$. iN the Limit $T\Gg\tau_b\gg\Tau_c$, tHE correlation tiME can be estimatED bY [@THoMPson2010ComParison] $$\labeL{eq:bATch}
\tAu_c = \fRAc{\Tau_B\Sigma_B^2}{2\sigmA^2},$$ wHErE $\Sigma_b^2$ is the variance Of The meaNs of tHe batches.

In FiG. \[fig:tauc\] we VERIfy that tHe twO MeTHods converge to The saMe limit for SUfficienTly laRge $N$ or $T$, rEspectiveLY. we find thAt tHe
frac{1}{\sigma^2} \sum_{mn } mn v_{m0 }
   \s um_ {j =1}^ \inf ty u_{jm} \lef t (\fr ac{1}{-\lambda_j}\righ t) v_ {n j }.$$ 
! [Auto correla t io n tim eco mpu te d  ( a) nu mer icallyusing eige nfu nc tion expansi o nor (b) bysim ulation usin g m ethodof  ba t ch me ans . For  suffi c ient c utoff $N$  o r  traje c tory du r a ti on $ T$, respectively, bo t h methods conv erge t os am e val ue(dashed li ne ). Pa r ameters :  $ \ t h eta = h = 0$ and$n_c = 100$ .  Ti me isin  un i ts of$1/k_ 1^ - $.In (b), $\t au_b  = 1000$,  and e r ror bar s  are st andard  er ror  fro m  $ 50 $ t ra j ect o ri es. [ ]{d ata-labe l= "f ig:ta uc"} ] ( f i g5){ wid th=" \line width"}

In m atr ix n o tat ion,$$\la bel{ eq :tauc _mat}\tau_ c= \sigma^{-2} \ vec{ n} {\bf V } { \b f F }{\bfU } \vec {w} ,$$  where$\vec{n } $ i sa r ow  vector, $\vec{w}=m v _{ m0}$ isa colu m nve c tor, and  n eit hert h e eig enve c to r matric es ${\ b fV} $ and $ {\ bf U}$  n orthe  diag o nalmatrix  $F_{jj' } = - \ delta_{jj'}/\l a mbda_j$ conta i nt h e$ j=0$  te rm. Numeric ally ,  wecomp u te  $\ t au_c$  viaEq .  \ [ eq:tauc\_mat\] usin ga cuto ff $N  > n_c$ for t he vectors a n d matric es.Th e  second method  is t o calculat e  $\tau_c $ fro m stocha stic simu l a tions [@ gil les pie 197 7 e xa ct] and the m e t hodof  batchmea ns [@th omp son 201 0co mp arison].The idea  i sto  d ivi de as imulatio ntra je cto ry of length  $T$into  b at c hes  of len g th $ \tau _b $.  Inthe  l imit$T\g g \ta u_b\gg\ tau_c$, t hec orre la ti on time  can be estim at ed by [@th om pso n2010c o m parison]  $$\label{eq:batch}
\ta u _c = \f rac {\tau _b\s igma_b^2} {2\ sigma^ 2}, $ $ wher e $\si gma_b ^2 $ i s the v a r ia nce  o f the mean s ofthe b at ches .

In F ig. \[fig:tauc\] w e  ve rify that the  tw o me t h od s c o nv e rge  t o  th e same limit forsufficient ly la rge $N$ or $T$ ,respect ively.We fi n d thatthe
frac{1}{\sigma^2} \sum_{mn}_mn v_{m0}
_   \sum_{j=1}^\infty_u_{jm} \left(\frac{1}{-\lambda_j}\right)_v_{nj}.$$

![Autocorrelation_time computed_(a)_numerically using eigenfunction_expansion or (b)_by simulation using method_of batch means._For_sufficient cutoff $N$ or trajectory duration $T$, respectively, both methods converge to same value_(dashed_line). Parameters:_$\theta_=_h = 0$ and $n_c_= 100$. Time is in_units of_$1/k_1^-$. In (b), $\tau_b = 1000$, and error_bars_are standard error_from $50$ trajectories.[]{data-label="fig:tauc"}](fig5){width="\linewidth"}

In matrix notation, $$\label{eq:tauc_mat}
\tau_c = \sigma^{-2} \vec{n}_{\bf V} {\bf F} {\bf U}_\vec{w},$$ where $\vec{n}$_is_a_row vector, $\vec{w} =_mv_{m0}$ is a column vector, and_neither the eigenvector matrices ${\bf V}$_and ${\bf U}$ nor the diagonal matrix_$F_{jj'} = -\delta_{jj'}/\lambda_j$ contain the $j=0$_term. Numerically, we compute $\tau_c$_via Eq. \[eq:tauc\_mat\]_using a cutoff $N >_n_c$ for the_vectors and_matrices.

The second method_is to calculate $\tau_c$ from stochastic_simulations [@gillespie1977exact] and_the method of batch means [@thompson2010comparison]._The_idea is to_divide_a_simulation trajectory_of length $T$_into_batches of_length_$\tau_b$. In the limit $T\gg\tau_b\gg\tau_c$, the_correlation_time can be estimated by [@thompson2010comparison] $$\label{eq:batch}
\tau_c_= \frac{\tau_b\sigma_b^2}{2\sigma^2},$$ where $\sigma_b^2$_is_the variance of the_means of the batches.

In Fig. \[fig:tauc\]_we verify that the two methods_converge to_the same_limit for sufficiently large $N$ or $T$, respectively. We find that_the