MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134810677 · doi:10.1214/09-aop456

The oriented swap process

2009· article· en· W2134810677 on OpenAlexafffund
Omer Angel, Alexander E. Holroyd, Dan Romik

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Probability · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRandom Matrices and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMicrosoft Research
KeywordsMathematicsDifferentiable functionPoint processAbsolute continuitySwap (finance)Permutation (music)Random permutationMathematical analysisStatistical physicsCombinatoricsStatisticsBlock (permutation group theory)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Particles labelled 1, …, n are initially arranged in increasing order. Subsequently, each pair of neighboring particles that is currently in increasing order swaps according to a Poisson process of rate 1. We analyze the asymptotic behavior of this process as n→∞. We prove that the space–time trajectories of individual particles converge (when suitably scaled) to a certain family of random curves with two points of non-differentiability, and that the permutation matrix at a given time converges to a certain deterministic measure with absolutely continuous and singular parts. The absorbing state (where all particles are in decreasing order) is reached at time (2+o(1))n. The finishing times of individual particles converge to deterministic limits, with fluctuations asymptotically governed by the Tracy–Widom distribution.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations42
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annals of ProbabilitySame topicRandom Matrices and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207