Bijections between Łukasiewicz Walks and Generalized Tandem Walks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we study the enumeration by length of several walk models on the square lattice. We obtain bijections between walks in the upper half-plane returning to the $x$-axis and walks in the quarter plane. A recent work by Bostan, Chyzak, and Mahboubi has given a bijection for models using small north, west, and south-east steps. We adapt and generalize it to a bijection between half-plane walks using those three steps in two colours and a quarter-plane model over the symmetrized step set consisting of north, north-west, west, south, south-east, and east. We then generalize our bijections to certain models with large steps: for given $p\geq1$, a bijection is given between the half-plane and quarter-plane models obtained by keeping the small south-east step and replacing the two steps north and west of length 1 by the $p+1$ steps of length $p$ in directions between north and west. This model is close to, but distinct from, the model of generalized tandem walks studied by Bousquet-Mélou, Fusy, and Raschel.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".