MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388617908 · doi:10.1214/23-aop1641

Multisource invasion percolation on the complete graph

2023· article· en· W4388617908 on OpenAlexaff
Louigi Addario‐Berry, Jordan Barrett

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Probability · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStochastic processes and statistical mechanics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsPercolation (cognitive psychology)CombinatoricsPercolation thresholdTree (set theory)GraphRandom graphDiscrete mathematicsStatistical physicsPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider invasion percolation on the complete graph Kn, started from some number k(n) of distinct source vertices. The outcome of the process is a forest consisting of k(n) trees, each containing exactly one source. Let Mn be the size of the largest tree in this forest. Logan, Molloy and Pralat (2018) proved that if k(n)/n1/3→0 then Mn/n→1 in probability. In this paper, we prove a complementary result: if k(n)/n1/3→∞, then Mn/n→0 in probability. This establishes the existence of a phase transition in the structure of the invasion percolation forest around k(n)≍n1/3. Our arguments rely on the connection between invasion percolation and critical percolation, and on a coupling between multisource invasion percolation with differently-sized source sets. A substantial part of the proof is devoted to showing that, with high probability, a certain fragmentation process on large random binary trees leaves no components of macroscopic size.

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.447
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.044 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annals of ProbabilitySame topicStochastic processes and statistical mechanicsFrench-language works237,207