Distribution of distances in random binary search trees
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate random distances in a random binary search tree. Two types of random distance are considered: the depth of a node randomly selected from the tree, and distance between randomly selected pairs of nodes. By a combination of classical methods and modern contraction techniques we arrive at a Gaussian limit law for normed random distances between pairs. The exact forms of the mean and variance of this latter distance are first derived by classical methods to determine the scaling properties, then used for norming, and the normed random variable is then shown by the contraction method to have a normal limit arising as the fixed-point solution of a distributional equation. We identify the rate of convergence in the limit law to be of the order $\Theta(1/\sqrt{\ln n})$ in the Zolotarev metric $\zeta_3$. In the analysis we need the rate of convergence in the central limit law for the depth of a node, as well. This limit law was derived before by various techniques. We establish the rate $\Theta(1/\sqrt{\ln n})$ in $\zeta_3$.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it