Finitary codings for the random-cluster model and other infinite-range monotone models
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
A random field X=(Xv)v∈G on a quasi-transitive graph G is a factor of an i.i.d. process if it can be written as X=φ(Y) for some i.i.d. process Y=(Yv)v∈G and equivariant map φ. Such a map, also called a coding, is finitary if, for every vertex v∈G, there exists a finite (but random) set U⊂G such that Xv is determined by {Yu}u∈U. We construct a coding for the random-cluster model on G, and show that the coding is finitary whenever the free and wired measures coincide. This strengthens a result of Häggström–Jonasson–Lyons [18]. We also prove that the coding radius has exponential tails in the subcritical regime. As a corollary, we obtain a similar coding for the subcritical Potts model. Our methods are probabilistic in nature, and at their heart lies the use of coupling-from-the-past for the Glauber dynamics. These methods apply to any monotone model satisfying mild technical (but natural) requirements. Beyond the random-cluster and Potts models, we describe two further applications – the loop O(n) model and long-range Ising models. In the case of G= Zd, we also construct finitary, translation-equivariant codings using a finite-valued i.i.d. process Y. To do this, we extend a mixing-time result of Martinelli–Olivieri [22] to infinite-range monotone models on quasi-transitive graphs of sub-exponential growth.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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