MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399131228 · doi:10.1112/jlms.12919

Branching random walk with non‐local competition

2024· article· en· W4399131228 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Pascal Maillard, Sarah Penington

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the London Mathematical Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStochastic processes and statistical mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Nationale de la RechercheRoyal SocietyCentre de Recherches MathématiquesSimons Foundation
KeywordsStatistical physicsRandom walkPopulationRange (aeronautics)MathematicsCompetition (biology)Kernel (algebra)Monotone polygonScalar (mathematics)Contrast (vision)Particle systemSpace (punctuation)Branching (polymer chemistry)Pure mathematicsPhysicsComputer scienceStatisticsEcologyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study the Bolker–Pacala–Dieckmann–Law (BPDL) model of population dynamics in the regime of large population density. The BPDL model is a particle system in which particles reproduce, move randomly in space and compete with each other locally. We rigorously prove global survival as well as a shape theorem describing the asymptotic spread of the population, when the population density is sufficiently large. In contrast to most previous studies, we allow the competition kernel to have an arbitrary, even infinite range, whence the term non‐local competition . This makes the particle system non‐monotone and of infinite‐range dependence, meaning that the usual comparison arguments break down and have to be replaced by a more hands‐on approach. Some ideas in the proof are inspired by works on the non‐local Fisher‐KPP equation, but the stochasticity of the model creates new difficulties.

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 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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the London Mathematical SocietySame topicStochastic processes and statistical mechanicsFrench-language works237,207