Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work aims to extend the existing results on the Hausdorff dimension of the classical thick point sets of a Gaussian free field (GFF) to a more general class of exceptional sets. We adopt the circle or sphere averaging regularization to treat a singular GFF in any dimension, and introduce the notion of "$f-$steep point" of the GFF for certain test function $f$. Roughly speaking, the $f-$steep points of a generic element of the GFF are locations where, when weighted by the function $f$, the "steepness", or in other words, the "rate of change" of the regularized field element becomes unusually large. Different choices of $f$ lead to the study of various exceptional behaviors of the GFF. We investigate the Hausdorff dimension of the set consisting of $f-$steep points, from which we can recover the existing results on thick point sets for both log-correlated and polynomial-correlated GFFs, and also obtain new results on exceptional sets that, to our best knowledge, have not been previously studied. Our method is inspired by the one used to study the thick point sets of the classical 2D log-correlated GFF.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".