MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170570420 · doi:10.1080/00029890.2022.2128615

Freely Independent Coin Tosses, Standard Young Tableaux, and the Kesten–McKay Law

2022· article· en· W3170570420 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Mathematical Monthly · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRandom Matrices and Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandom walkYoung tableauCombinatoricsMathematicsGraphRowTree (set theory)StatisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we shall start with a closed walk on a regular tree of degree d. These walks are described by the Kesten–McKay law which arises as the asymptotic distribution of a random d-regular graph on n vertices. We will show that the moments of the Kesten–McKay law are given by counting standard Young tableaux with at most two rows, and how some properties of the walk make sense even when d is not an integer. We will use free probability to instruct us about how to build an explicit model in random matrix theory.

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 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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.257 · 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