MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1834934550 · doi:10.1002/cpa.21685

Approximate Ultrametricity for Random Measures and Applications to Spin Glasses

2017· article· en· W1834934550 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications on Pure and Applied Mathematics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
Topicadvanced mathematical theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUltrametric spaceHilbert spaceSpin glassSequence (biology)ConjectureProbability measureRandom fieldUnit sphereSeparable spaceLaw of large numbers

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this documentname, we introduce a notion called “approximate ultrametricity,” which encapsulates the phenomenology of a sequence of random probability measures having supports that behave like ultrametric spaces insofar as they decompose into nested balls. We provide a sufficient condition for a sequence of random probability measures on the unit ball of an infinite‐dimensional separable Hilbert space to admit such a decomposition, whose elements we call clusters. We also characterize the laws of the measures of the clusters by showing that they converge in law to the weights of a Ruelle probability cascade. These results apply to a large class of classical models in mean field spin glasses. We illustrate the notion of approximate ultrametricity by proving a conjecture of Talagrand regarding mixed p ‐spin glasses that is known to imply a prediction of Dotsenko‐Franz‐Mézard. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications on Pure and Applied MathematicsSame topicadvanced mathematical theoriesFrench-language works237,207