Universal height and width bounds for random trees
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
We prove non-asymptotic stretched exponential tail bounds on the height of a randomly sampled node in a random combinatorial tree, which we use to prove bounds on the heights and widths of random trees from a variety of models. Our results allow us to prove a conjecture and settle an open problem of Janson [13], and nearly prove another conjecture and settle another open problem from the same work (up to a polylogarithmic factor). The key tool for our work is an equivalence in law between the degrees along the path to a random node in a random tree with given degree statistics, and a random truncation of a size-biased ordering of the degrees of such a tree. We also exploit a Poissonization trick introduced by Camarri and Pitman [9] in the context of inhomogeneous continuum random trees, which we adapt to the setting of random trees with fixed degrees. Finally, we propose and justify a change to the conventions of branching process nomenclature: the name “Galton–Watson trees” should be permanently retired by the community, and replaced with the name “Bienaymé trees”.
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 | 0.000 | 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