{"id":"eace898d-8bd6-413c-8bfc-0f55a017b044","arxiv_id":"2604.01820","paper_version":2,"verdict":"UNVERDICTED","confidence":"LOW","novelty_score":6.0,"correctness_risk":"unknown","formal_verification":"none","parameter_count":1,"one_line_summary":"Power-law blob deposition yields τ-dependent growth exponents and a second length scale that breaks Family–Vicsek scaling for τ<3.","lead":"A surface-growth model with power-law blob sizes has critical exponents that change with the size exponent, recovering KPZ only above a threshold. This suggests rare large deposits can break the usual single-scale Family–Vicsek picture of roughening.","discovery_kind":"extension","skeptic_critique":{"model":"grok-4.5","headline":"Correct full text still missing; second-length-scale claim about ζ cannot be audited, so UNVERDICTED stands.","rationale":"The reader correctly treated the submission as abstract-only because the provided full text is the wrong paper. That mismatch is unchanged in this pass, so the strongest claim (continuous exponents, KPZ recovery only for τ≥3, and breakdown via a second length ζ) still cannot be checked against methods, figures, or scaling analysis. The load-bearing assumption remains exactly the one the reader named: that the phenomenology is controlled by a genuine second relevant scale from the largest cluster rather than artifacts. No independent support (code, collapses, proofs) is present in the supplied material. Therefore the verdict stays UNVERDICTED with low confidence; a re-review on the correct PDF is required before any ACCEPT/CONDITIONAL/REJECT. Agreement with the reader is full on both the concern and the disposition.","tokens_in":3783,"tokens_out":578,"duration_ms":14986,"concrete_test":"Replace the FRB manuscript with the actual PDF of arXiv:2604.01820; extract the operational definitions of ξ(t) and ζ(t) and the collapses used for τ<3. If ζ/ξ does not approach a nontrivial constant (or a clear power of system size) while roughness fails single-scale Family–Vicsek collapse, the second-scale claim is supported; if collapses work with one length or ζ tracks ξ, the mechanism fails.","verdict_should_be":"UNCHANGED","load_bearing_attack":"The central claim requires that continuous τ-dependence and Family–Vicsek breakdown for τ<3 are controlled by a genuine second dynamical length ζ (linear size of the largest deposited cluster) coexisting with the usual correlation length ξ. That mechanism is only asserted in the abstract. The CACHEABLE full-text block is still a different manuscript (FRB 20220912A on DM_real vs DM_pseudo), so definitions of ζ and ξ, measurement protocols, finite-size scaling, data collapses, and any derivation that ζ is relevant and independent of ξ remain unavailable. Without those, one cannot distinguish a true second relevant scale from finite-size effects, rare-event sampling bias, or an incomplete single-scale ansatz. This is the same soft spot the reader identified; nothing in the supplied body closes it.","agreement_with_reader":"agree"},"referee_report":{"model":"grok-4.5","summary":"Based solely on the supplied abstract, the manuscript claims that surface growth by deposition of blobs with size distribution P(s)∼s^{-τ} yields critical exponents that vary continuously with τ, recovering Kardar–Parisi–Zhang (KPZ) scaling only for τ≥3. For τ<3 the authors assert strong corrections to roughness scaling and a breakdown of scale invariance, attributed to a second dynamical length ζ (linear size of the largest cluster) coexisting with the usual correlation length ξ, thereby violating Family–Vicsek scaling and pointing to a phenomenology beyond standard dynamic scaling. The body text provided for review, however, is an unrelated astrophysics manuscript on real versus pseudo dispersion measures of FRB 20220912A and contains none of the model definition, simulations, scaling analyses, or definitions of ζ and ξ required to evaluate those claims.","tokens_in":3966,"tokens_out":714,"duration_ms":13544,"significance":"If the abstract’s claims were substantiated—continuous non-universal exponents controlled by τ, recovery of KPZ only for τ≥3, and a genuine second relevant length ζ that breaks Family–Vicsek scaling—the work would be a significant contribution to non-equilibrium surface growth, showing that rare large deposition events can destroy the usual single-scale paradigm. That significance cannot be assessed from the materials supplied, because the full text does not belong to this paper.","major_comments":[{"comment":"The full manuscript text supplied for arXiv:2604.01820 is a completely different paper (FRB 20220912A, real vs. pseudo DM). No model definition, deposition rule, measurement of roughness or correlation length, definition of ζ, finite-size scaling, data collapses, or exponent tables for the blob-deposition model appear. The central claim that a second dynamical length ζ coexists with ξ and breaks Family–Vicsek scaling for τ<3 is therefore unsupported by any inspectable evidence in this review package.","section":null},{"comment":"Abstract claim that critical exponents vary continuously with τ and recover KPZ only for τ≥3: without the (missing) methods, system sizes, error bars, and scaling collapses, it is impossible to distinguish a true continuous family of exponents from finite-size effects, rare-event sampling bias, or an incomplete single-scale ansatz. This is load-bearing for the paper’s main result and cannot be audited.","section":null},{"comment":"Abstract assertion that ζ is the linear size of the largest cluster and remains a relevant, independent dynamical scale for τ<3: no operational definition of ζ, no protocol for identifying the largest cluster, and no demonstration that ζ scales differently from ξ are present in the supplied text. The mechanism that is said to break universality is therefore unverifiable.","section":null}],"minor_comments":[],"recommendation":"uncertain","confidential_remarks":"The review package is corrupted: title/abstract/paper_id point to a cond-mat.stat-mech surface-growth paper (2604.01820), while the full-text block is an astrophysics FRB manuscript (apparently 2604.01825). I cannot produce a scientific accept/reject decision on 2604.01820 until the correct full text is supplied. Please re-serve the proper PDF/source and re-invite review; the present report is necessarily limited to documenting the mismatch and the un-auditable status of the abstract claims."},"author_rebuttal":null,"desk_editor":{"model":"grok-4.5","letter":"The abstract of 2604.01820 is the only usable piece we have. It claims that non-monomeric deposition with P(s)∼s^{-τ} produces continuously τ-dependent exponents, recovers KPZ only for τ≥3, and for τ<3 introduces a second dynamical length ζ (linear size of the largest cluster) that coexists with ξ and breaks Family–Vicsek scaling. That is a clean, non-trivial extension of a mature subfield if the simulations and scaling analysis actually support it.\n\nWhat is new, on the face of it, is the continuous family of exponents and the explicit second-scale mechanism rather than a one-off anomalous exponent. The abstract is also careful: it does not claim a new universality class in the usual sense, but a breakdown of the single-scale paradigm when rare large blobs dominate. That framing is useful.\n\nThe soft spot is decisive and not minor: the CACHEABLE full-text block is a completely different manuscript (FRB 20220912A on real vs pseudo DM). There are no equations, no definition of ζ or ξ, no system sizes, no data collapses, no finite-size protocol, and no check that ζ is independent of ξ rather than a finite-size or sampling artifact. The reader and the stress-test are right: without that body we cannot tell whether the continuous τ-dependence is genuine or an incomplete scaling ansatz. Circularity burden looks low from the abstract alone, but soundness is uncheckable.\n\nWho this is for: people who already work on kinetic roughening, KPZ, and anomalous deposition. A serious referee should see the correct PDF; the claim is important enough within the subfield to deserve that time once the real manuscript is attached. I would not cite or bring it to reading group on the present materials. Engage only after the right paper is in hand; until then treat the abstract as a promissory note, not a result.","headline":"Abstract promises a real extension of kinetic roughening via power-law blobs and a second length ζ, but the supplied body is the wrong paper, so the claim cannot be audited.","tokens_in":4607,"tokens_out":496,"would_cite":false,"duration_ms":4787,"reading_group":"no","serious_thinker":"unclear","would_accept_peer_review":true},"rs_alignment":null,"lean_confirmation":null,"pith_extraction":{"msc":[],"pacs":[],"model":"grok-4.5","headline":"Power-law blob deposition makes surface-growth exponents depend continuously on the size tail and recovers KPZ only for τ ≥ 3; below that, a second length from the largest cluster breaks Family–Vicsek scaling.","keywords":["surface growth","Kardar-Parisi-Zhang","Family-Vicsek scaling","power-law deposition","rare events","dynamic scaling","universality","blob deposition"],"falsifier":"For a fixed τ < 3, measure both ξ and ζ versus time (and system size) and test whether roughness collapses only when both lengths are retained; if a single-scale Family–Vicsek collapse works once finite-size corrections are controlled, the two-scale claim fails.","tokens_in":4634,"feed_emoji":"📈","tokens_out":659,"duration_ms":12152,"temperature":0.7,"pith_summary":"Most theories of rough surfaces assume monomers or fixed-size deposits and a single growing correlation length, which leads to universal exponents in the Kardar–Parisi–Zhang class. This paper studies deposition of blobs whose sizes follow a power law P(s) ∼ s^{-τ} and shows that the usual picture fails when large rare blobs matter. Critical exponents then change continuously with τ and only settle back to KPZ values for τ ≥ 3. For τ < 3 the roughness no longer obeys clean scale invariance: a second dynamical length ζ—the linear size of the largest deposited cluster—coexists with the ordinary correlation length ξ, so the Family–Vicsek collapse breaks down. The result matters because it shows that rare, heavy-tailed deposition events can push surface growth outside the standard scale-invariant paradigm and force a two-scale description.","feed_headline":"Rare blobs break surface-growth universality","feed_subtitle":"Power-law deposits add a second length scale; KPZ returns only for τ ≥ 3.","key_machinery":"The second dynamical length ζ, defined as the linear size of the largest deposited cluster, coexisting with the ordinary correlation length ξ; their joint relevance is what destroys single-scale Family–Vicsek collapse for τ < 3.","core_discovery":"In a surface-growth model driven by blob deposition with size distribution P(s) ∼ s^{-τ}, the critical exponents vary continuously with τ and recover Kardar–Parisi–Zhang behavior only for τ ≥ 3. For τ < 3, roughness scaling shows strong corrections and scale invariance breaks down because a second dynamical length ζ, the linear size of the largest cluster, becomes relevant alongside the usual correlation length ξ; the coexistence of these two scales signals the breakdown of Family–Vicsek scaling and points to a new phenomenology beyond ordinary dynamic scaling.","pith_inferences":[],"forward_implications":[],"fun_headline_variants":["Rare blobs shatter surface-growth universality","Power-law blobs add second scale, break Family-Vicsek","Largest-cluster size ends scale invariance for τ<3","Surface growth loses KPZ recovery under rare blobs","Two lengths emerge as power-law deposits break scaling"],"cache_read_input_tokens":128,"weakest_assumption_plain":"That the continuous change of exponents and the loss of scale invariance are truly controlled by a second relevant length from the largest cluster, rather than by finite-size effects, how roughness is measured, or an incomplete scaling form.","fun_headline_variants_meta":{"raw":{"variants":["Rare blobs shatter surface-growth universality","Power-law blobs add second scale, break Family-Vicsek","Largest-cluster size ends scale invariance for τ<3","Surface growth loses KPZ recovery under rare blobs","Two lengths emerge as power-law deposits break scaling"]},"model":"grok-4.5","effort":"low","cost_usd":0.00361,"raw_usage":{"total_tokens":1141,"prompt_tokens":713,"num_sources_used":0,"completion_tokens":59,"cost_in_usd_ticks":36100000,"prompt_tokens_details":{"text_tokens":713,"audio_tokens":0,"image_tokens":0,"cached_tokens":256},"completion_tokens_details":{"audio_tokens":0,"reasoning_tokens":369,"accepted_prediction_tokens":0,"rejected_prediction_tokens":0}},"tokens_in":713,"tokens_out":59,"duration_ms":3243,"temperature":1.0,"reasoning_tokens":369,"cache_read_input_tokens":256,"cache_creation_input_tokens":0},"cache_creation_input_tokens":0},"created_at":"2026-07-13T14:10:45.409153+00:00","model_set":{"reader":"grok-4.5"},"falsifier":"For a fixed τ < 3, measure both ξ and ζ versus time (and system size) and test whether roughness collapses only when both lengths are retained; if a single-scale Family–Vicsek collapse works once finite-size corrections are controlled, the two-scale claim fails.","supporting_citations":[],"review_version":1}