MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177562575 · doi:10.1007/s00440-021-01074-0

Mapping TASEP back in time

2021· article· en· W3177562575 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Leonid Petrov, Axel Saenz

Bibliographic record

VenueProbability Theory and Related Fields · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStochastic processes and statistical mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesBanff International Research Station for Mathematical Innovation and DiscoveryNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAlgorithmComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We obtain a new relation between the distributions $$\upmu _t$$ μt at different times $$t\ge 0$$ t≥0 of the continuous-time totally asymmetric simple exclusion process (TASEP) started from the step initial configuration. Namely, we present a continuous-time Markov process with local interactions and particle-dependent rates which maps the TASEP distributions $$\upmu _t$$ μt backwards in time. Under the backwards process, particles jump to the left, and the dynamics can be viewed as a version of the discrete-space Hammersley process. Combined with the forward TASEP evolution, this leads to a stationary Markov dynamics preserving $$\upmu _t$$ μt which in turn brings new identities for expectations with respect to $$\upmu _t$$ μt . The construction of the backwards dynamics is based on Markov maps interchanging parameters of Schur processes, and is motivated by bijectivizations of the Yang–Baxter equation. We also present a number of corollaries, extensions, and open questions arising from our constructions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProbability Theory and Related FieldsSame topicStochastic processes and statistical mechanicsFrench-language works237,207