GENERALIZED ATMOSPHERIC SAMPLING OF KNOTTED POLYGONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-avoiding polygons in the cubic lattice are models of ring polymers in dilute solution. The conformational entropy of a ring polymer is a dominant factor in its physical and chemical properties, and this is modeled by the large number of conformations of lattice polygons. Cubic lattice polygons are embeddings of the circle in three space and may be used as a model of knotting in ring polymers. In this paper we study the effects of knotting on the conformational entropy of lattice polygons and so determine the relative fraction of polygons of different knot types at large lengths. More precisely, we consider the number of cubic lattice polygons of n edges with knot type K, pn(K). Numerical evidence strongly suggests that [Formula: see text] as n → ∞, where μ0is the growth constant of unknotted lattice polygons, α is the entropic exponent of lattice polygons, and NKis the number of prime knot components in the knot type K (see the paper [Asymptotics of knotted lattice polygons, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.31 (1998) 5953–5967]). Determining the exact value of pn(K) is far beyond current techniques for all but very small values of n. Instead we use the GAS algorithm (see the paper [Generalised atmospheric sampling of self-avoiding walks, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.42 (2009) 335001–335030]) to enumerate pn(K) approximately. We then extrapolate ratios [pn(K)/pn(L)] to larger values of n for a number of given knot types. We give evidence that for the unknot 01and the trefoil knot 31, there exists a number M01, 31≈170000 such that pn(01) > pn(31) if n < M01, 31and pn(01) ≤pn(31) if n ≥M01, 31. In addition, the asymptotic relative frequencies for a variety of knot types are determined. For example, we find that [pn(31)/pn(41)] → 27.0 ± 2.2, implying that there are approximately 27 polygons of the trefoil knot type for every polygon of knot of type 41(the figure eight knot), in the asymptotic limit. Finally, we examine the dominant knot types at moderate values of n and conjecture that the most frequent knot types in polygons of any given length n are of the form [Formula: see text] (or its chiral partner), where [Formula: see text] are right- and left-handed trefoils, and N increases with n.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".