MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1958800402 · doi:10.1214/154957806000000078

Determinantal Processes and Independence

2006· article· en· W1958800402 on OpenAlexafffund
J. Hough, Manjunath Krishnapur, Yuval Peres, Bálint Virág

Bibliographic record

VenueProbability Surveys · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRandom Matrices and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsDeterminantal point processPoint processBernoulli's principleEigenvalues and eigenvectorsRandom variableSimple (philosophy)Random matrixMathematical proofCombinatoricsProjection (relational algebra)Bernoulli distributionBernoulli processCentral limit theoremProbability theoryPure mathematicsGeometryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We give a probabilistic introduction to determinantal and permanental point processes. Determinantal processes arise in physics (fermions, eigenvalues of random matrices) and in combinatorics (nonintersecting paths, random spanning trees). They have the striking property that the number of points in a region D is a sum of independent Bernoulli random variables, with parameters which are eigenvalues of the relevant operator on L2(D). Moreover, any determinantal process can be represented as a mixture of determinantal projection processes. We give a simple explanation for these known facts, and establish analogous representations for permanental processes, with geometric variables replacing the Bernoulli variables. These representations lead to simple proofs of existence criteria and central limit theorems, and unify known results on the distribution of absolute values in certain processes with radially symmetric distributions.

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)0.011
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations514
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProbability SurveysSame topicRandom Matrices and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207