HIGHER CORRELATIONS AND THE ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS
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
Abstract The Alternative Hypothesis (AH) concerns a hypothetical and unlikely picture of how zeros of the Riemann zeta function are spaced, which one would like to rule out. In the Alternative Hypothesis, the renormalized distance between non-trivial zeros is supposed to always lie at a half integer. It is known that the Alternative Hypothesis is compatible with what is known about the pair correlation function of zeta zeros. We ask whether what is currently known about higher correlation functions of the zeros is sufficient to rule out the Alternative Hypothesis and show by construction of an explicit counterexample point process that it is not. A similar result was recently independently obtained by Tao, using slightly different methods. We also apply the ergodic theorem to this point process to show there exists a deterministic collection of points lying in $\tfrac{1}{2}\mathbb{Z}$, which satisfy the Alternative Hypothesis spacing, but mimic the local statistics that are currently known about zeros of the zeta function.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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