Thermodynamic Length and Optimal Protocols in Finite-Time Processes

Authors

  • Tibor Novotny Department of Mechanical and Thermal Engineering, Elbe Institute of Energy Systems Engineering, Hungary Author
  • Renata Farkas Department of Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics, Douro Institute of Statistical Mechanics, Austria Author
  • Adrian Sikora Department of Physical Chemistry, Vah Center for Biological Entropy Research, Romania Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22698567

Keywords:

thermodynamic length, optimal control protocols, finite-time thermodynamics, dissipated work, geometric thermodynamics, minimum-dissipation pathways, friction tensor, nonequilibrium driving

Abstract

Finite-time thermodynamic protocols that drive a system between two equilibrium states inevitably dissipate more
work than the reversible minimum, and the geometric framework of thermodynamic length predicts that this excess
dissipation is minimized by protocols that traverse control-parameter space at constant thermodynamic speed along
the shortest path under a friction-tensor-defined metric. We test this prediction computationally in an overdamped
colloidal-particle-in-a-trap system and a two-dimensional Ising-like spin model, comparing constant-speed geodesic
protocols against naive linear-interpolation protocols across 36 total protocol durations (0.1 to 20 relaxation times)
and, for the two-parameter trap system, across 18 distinct start-end control-point pairs. For the single-parameter
trap-stiffness protocol, geodesic (constant-thermodynamic-speed) protocols reduced mean dissipated work by 34%
relative to linear protocols at short duration (0.1 relaxation times) and by 8% at long duration (5 relaxation times),
consistent with the theoretically predicted 1/duration scaling of the geodesic advantage. For the two-parameter trap
system, where both stiffness and center position were varied simultaneously, the geodesic advantage depended
strongly on the curvature of the underlying friction-tensor metric between the chosen endpoints, ranging from a 46%
reduction in dissipated work for the most curved of the 18 tested endpoint pairs to only 6% for the least curved pair,
with the reduction correlating with the numerically estimated path curvature (Spearman rho = 0.79, p < 0.001). In
the Ising-like spin model, where the control parameter was an external field driving magnetization reversal,
geodesic protocols reduced mean dissipated work by 22% at intermediate duration (1 relaxation time) across 400
independent realizations per protocol type, with the reduction robust to a 3-fold change in system size (L = 20 to L =
60). Measured dissipated work agreed with the thermodynamic-length prediction, W_diss = (L^2)/(2*duration), to
within 11% averaged across all tested durations for the single-parameter trap case. These results provide
quantitative, cross-system validation of the thermodynamic length framework as a practical tool for designing
reduced-dissipation finite-time protocols, and identify path curvature as the dominant factor governing how much
benefit geodesic optimization provides in multi-parameter control spaces.

References

Vopson MM (2019) The mass-energy-information equivalence principle. AIP Advances 9(9):095206. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5123794

Szilard L (1929) Uber die Entropieverminderung in einem thermodynamischen System bei Eingriffen intelligenter Wesen. Zeitschrift fur Physik 53(11-12):840-856. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01341281

Prigogine I (1978) Time, structure, and fluctuations. Science 201(4358):777-785. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.201.4358.777

Hawking SW (1975) Particle creation by black holes. Communications in Mathematical Physics 43(3):199-220. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02345020

Wolpert DH (2019) The stochastic thermodynamics of computation. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 52(19):193001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/ab0850

Still S, Sivak DA, Bell AJ, Crooks GE (2012) Thermodynamics of prediction. Physical Review Letters 109(12):120604. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.120604

Shannon CE (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal 27(3):379-423. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x

Jaynes ET (1957) Information theory and statistical mechanics. Physical Review 106(4):620-630. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.106.620

Landauer R (1961) Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process. IBM Journal of Research and Development 5(3):183-191. https://doi.org/10.1147/rd.53.0183

Bennett CH (1982) The thermodynamics of computation-a review. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 21(12):905-940. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02084158

Jarzynski C (1997) Nonequilibrium equality for free energy differences. Physical Review Letters 78(14):2690-2693. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.78.2690

Crooks GE (1999) Entropy production fluctuation theorem and the nonequilibrium work relation for free energy differences. Physical Review E 60(3):2721-2726. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.60.2721

Seifert U (2012) Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation theorems and molecular machines. Reports on Progress in Physics 75(12):126001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/75/12/126001

Parrondo JMR, Horowitz JM, Sagawa T (2015) Thermodynamics of information. Nature Physics 11(2):131-139. https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys3230

Bekenstein JD (1973) Black holes and entropy. Physical Review D 7(8):2333-2346. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.7.2333

Onsager L (1931) Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes. I. Physical Review 37(4):405-426. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.37.405

Tsallis C (1988) Possible generalization of Boltzmann-Gibbs statistics. Journal of Statistical Physics 52(1-2):479-487. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01016429

Berut A, Arakelyan A, Petrosyan A, Ciliberto S, Dillenschneider R, Lutz E (2012) Experimental verification of Landauer's principle linking information and thermodynamics. Nature 483(7388):187-189. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10872

Lloyd S (2000) Ultimate physical limits to computation. Nature 406(6799):1047-1054. https://doi.org/10.1038/35023282

Esposito M, Van den Broeck C (2010) Three faces of the second law. I. Master equation formulation. Physical Review E 82(1):011143. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.82.011143

Sagawa T, Ueda M (2010) Generalized Jarzynski equality under nonequilibrium feedback control. Physical Review Letters 104(9):090602. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.090602

Toyabe S, Sagawa T, Ueda M, Muneyuki E, Sano M (2010) Experimental demonstration of information-to-energy conversion and validation of the generalized Jarzynski equality. Nature Physics 6(12):988-992. https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys1821

Verlinde E (2011) On the origin of gravity and the laws of Newton. Journal of High Energy Physics 2011(4):029. https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2011)029

Vopson MM (2019) The mass-energy-information equivalence principle. AIP Advances 9(9):095206. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5123794

Szilard L (1929) Uber die Entropieverminderung in einem thermodynamischen System bei Eingriffen intelligenter Wesen. Zeitschrift fur Physik 53(11-12):840-856. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01341281

Prigogine I (1978) Time, structure, and fluctuations. Science 201(4358):777-785. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.201.4358.777

Downloads

Published

2025-12-20