MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3100620321

3 LAST PASSAGE PERCOLATION AND TRAVELING FRONTS

2013· article· en· W3100620321 on OpenAlexaff
Francis Comets, Jeremy Quastel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStochastic processes and statistical mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGumbel distributionStatistical physicsPercolation (cognitive psychology)ScalingDiscretizationFront (military)Noise (video)MathematicsLimit (mathematics)Bounded functionDirected percolationScaling limitScaling lawPhysicsMathematical analysisExtreme value theoryCritical exponentGeometryStatisticsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We consider a system of N particles with a stochastic dynamics introduced by Brunet and Derrida [7]. The particles can be interpreted as last passage times in directed percolation on {1,...,N} of mean-field type. The particles remain grouped and move like a traveling front, subject to discretization and driven by a random noise. As N increases, we obtain estimates for the speed of the front and its profile, for different laws of the driving noise. As shown in [7], the model with Gumbel distributed jumps has a simple structure. We establish that the scaling limit is a Lévy process in this case. We study other jump distributions. We prove a result showing that the limit for large N is stable under small perturbations of the Gumbel. In the opposite case of bounded jumps, a completely different behavior is found, where finite-size corrections are extremely small. hal-00677712, version 3- 30 Jan 2013 1. Definition of the model We consider the following stochastic process introduced by Brunet and Derrida [7]. It consists in a fixed number N ≥ 1 of particles on the real line, initially at the positions X1(0),...,XN(0). With {ξi,j(s) : 1 ≤ i,j ≤ N,s ≥ 1} an i.i.d. family of real random variables, the positions evolve as Xi(t+1) = max Xj(t)+ξi,j(t+1)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.686

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStochastic processes and statistical mechanicsFrench-language works237,207