MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1488868961 · doi:10.4171/cmh/404

Word length statistics for Teichmüller geodesics and singularity of harmonic measure

2017· preprint· en· W1488868961 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommentarii Mathematici Helvetici · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Dynamics and Fractals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeodesicMathematicsMeasure (data warehouse)Lebesgue measureBoundary (topology)Harmonic measureσ-finite measureHarmonicPure mathematicsMathematical analysisHarmonic functionLebesgue integrationHausdorff measureHausdorff dimension

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given a measure on the Thurston boundary of Teichmüller space, one can pick a geodesic ray joining some basepoint to a randomly chosen point on the boundary. Different choices of measures may yield typical geodesics with different geometric properties. In particular, we consider two families of measures: the ones which belong to the Lebesgue or visual measure class, and harmonic measures for random walks on the mapping class group generated by a distribution with finite first moment in the word metric. We consider the word length of approximating mapping class group elements along a geodesic ray, and prove that this quantity grows superlinearly in time along almost all geodesics with respect to Lebesgue measure, while along almost all geodesics with respect to harmonic measure the growth is linear. As a corollary, the harmonic and Lebesgue measures are mutually singular. We also prove a similar result for the ratio between the word metric and the relative metric (i.e. the induced metric on the curve complex).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.135
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it