Scaling Limit for the Ant in High‐Dimensional Labyrinths
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We study here a detailed conjecture regarding one of the most important cases of anomalous diffusion, i.e., the behavior of the “ant in the labyrinth.” It is natural to conjecture that the scaling limit for random walks on large critical random graphs exists in high dimensions and is universal. This scaling limit is simply the natural Brownian motion on the integrated super‐Brownian excursion. We give here a set of four natural, sufficient conditions on the critical graphs and prove that this set of assumptions ensures the validity of this conjecture. The remaining future task is to prove that these sufficient conditions hold for the various classical cases of critical random structures, like the usual Bernoulli bond percolation, oriented percolation, and spread‐out percolation in high enough dimension. In a companion paper, we do precisely that in a first case, the random walk on the trace of a large critical branching random walk. We verify the validity of these sufficient conditions and thus obtain the scaling limit mentioned above in dimensions larger than 14. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".