MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321503317 · doi:10.1214/22-aap1823

Strong approximation of Gaussian β ensemble characteristic polynomials: The hyperbolic regime

2023· article· en· W4321503317 on OpenAlexaff
Gaultier Lambert, Elliot Paquette

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Applied Probability · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRandom Matrices and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsGaussianScalingGaussian free fieldLimit (mathematics)PolynomialProbabilistic logicMathematical analysisFunction (biology)Orthogonal polynomialsMatrix (chemical analysis)Gaussian random fieldApplied mathematicsGaussian functionGeometryStatisticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the characteristic polynomials φN of the Gaussian β-ensemble for general β>0 through its transfer matrix recurrence. Our motivation is to obtain a (probabilistic) approximation for φN in terms of a Gaussian log-correlated field. We distinguish between different types of transfer matrices and analyze completely the hyperbolic part of the recurrence. As a result, we obtain a new coupling between φN and a Gaussian analytic function with an error which is uniform away from the support of the semicircle law. We use this as input to give the almost sure scaling limit of the characteristic polynomial at the edge in (Lambert and Paquette (2020)). This is also required to obtain analogous strong approximations inside of the bulk of the semicircle law. Our analysis relies on moderate deviation estimates for the product of transfer matrices and this approach might also be useful in different contexts.

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)0.007
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annals of Applied ProbabilitySame topicRandom Matrices and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207