MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992366116 · doi:10.1214/aop/1019160499

The genealogy of a cluster in the multitype voter model

2000· article· en· W1992366116 on OpenAlexaff
J. Theodore Cox, Jochen Geiger

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Probability · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOpinion Dynamics and Social Influence
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsPoint processCluster (spacecraft)Voter modelRandom walkCombinatoricsPoisson point processStatistical physicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genealogy of a cluster in the multitype voter model can be defined in terms of a family of dual coalescing random walks. We represent the genealogy of a cluster as a point process in a size-time plane and show that in high dimensions the genealogy of the cluster at the origin has a weak Poisson limit. The limiting point process is the same as for the genealogy of the size-biased Galton-Watson tree. Moreover, our results show that the branching mechanism and the spatial e#ects of the voter model can be separated on a macroscopic scale. Our proofs are based on a probabilistic construction of the genealogy of the cluster at the origin derived from Harris' graphical representation of the voter model. # Research supported in part by the National Science Foundation + Mathematics Department, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA # Research supported by the German Research Foundation DFG Fachbereich Mathematik, Postfach 11 19 32, 60054 Frankfurt, Germany 1 Introduction Consi...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations6
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annals of ProbabilitySame topicOpinion Dynamics and Social InfluenceFrench-language works237,207