Comparison of canonical and microcanonical definitions of entropy
Michael Matty, Lachlan Lancaster, William Griffin, Robert H., Swendsen

TL;DR
This paper compares different microcanonical entropy definitions and introduces a canonical approach, arguing that the canonical entropy better predicts thermodynamic properties across various models, including those with negative temperatures.
Contribution
It challenges the traditional microcanonical definitions of entropy by proposing and validating a canonical entropy framework that aligns better with thermodynamic behavior.
Findings
Canonical entropy predicts thermodynamic properties accurately.
Microcanonical definitions are limited to simple models.
Negative temperatures are valid in certain models.
Abstract
For more than 100 years, one of the central concepts in statistical mechanics has been the microcanonical ensemble, which provides a way of calculating the thermodynamic entropy for a specified energy. A controversy has recently emerged between two distinct definitions of the entropy based on the microcanonical ensemble: (1) The Boltzmann entropy, defined by the density of states at a specified energy, and (2) The Gibbs entropy, defined by the sum or integral of the density of states below a specified energy. A critical difference between the consequences of these definitions pertains to the concept of negative temperatures, which by the Gibbs definition, cannot exist. In this paper, we call into question the fundamental assumption that the microcanonical ensemble should be used to define the entropy. Our argument is based on a recently proposed canonical definition of the entropy as a…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
