Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 41 references

Limit theorems for Bessel and Dunkl processes of large dimensions and free convolutions

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-27 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read For Bessel and Dunkl processes of large dimension, the empirical particle measure converges almost surely to a free-convolution limit independent of the finite coupling constant and equal to the frozen k=∞ limit.

desk verdict Worth engaging: genuinely new type-B and Dunkl limit theorems, but the R-transform PDE (4.13) has a load-bearing sign error that breaks the proof of Theorem 4.8 as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2009.13928 v1 pith:DMLC4ZXI submitted 2020-09-29 math.PR math-phmath.CAmath.MP

Michael Voit , Jeannette H.C. Woerner This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.PRmath-phmath.CAmath.MP MSC 60F0560F1560B2060J6060K3570F1082C22
keywords BesselprocessesDunklfreeconvolutionsemicirclelawMarchenko-PasturempiricalmeasuresinteractingparticlesystemsStieltjestransform
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper studies $N$-particle Bessel and Dunkl processes on $\mathbb{R}^N$ for root systems of types A and B, with an interaction strength $k$. It proves that as $N$ grows, the empirical measure of the particle positions, scaled by $1/\sqrt{N}$, converges almost surely to a deterministic limit that depends on the starting empirical measure and on time, but not on the finite value of $k$. For type A the limit is the free additive convolution of the starting law with a semicircle law of radius $2\sqrt{t}$; for type B it is the square root of the free convolution of a Marchenko-Pastur law with the square of that type-A limit. The same limits are obtained for the frozen case $k=\infty$, so the finite-coupling and frozen processes share their large-$N$ behavior. This matters because it makes the large-dimension evolution of these interacting particle systems universal and ties it to the classical semicircle and Marchenko-Pastur laws.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is a moment method. For the symmetric monomials $m_\lambda$ of the particle coordinates, Itô's formula and the Dunkl-process martingale representation show, by induction on the degree, that the normalized expectations converge to limits independent of the coupling $\beta$ or $k$ (Lemmas 3.1 and 8.1). The limit moments satisfy recurrences that translate into PDEs for the Stieltjes transforms $G_\mu(z)=\int (z-x)^{-1}\,d\mu(x)$—Burgers equation in the type-A case and a linear first-order PDE for the odd part in the type-B Dunkl case. The $R$-transform of free probability, defined implicitly by $z - 1/G_\mu(z) = R_\mu(G_\mu(z))$, turns these PDEs into linear equations and identifies the limiting measures as free additive convolutions.

What would settle it

Simulate the type-A Bessel SDE with fixed $k=1/2$ and an initial configuration whose empirical measure approximates a two-point mass $\mu$, then compare the empirical fourth moment at time $t>0$ with the fourth moment of $\mu_{\mathrm{sc},2\sqrt{t}} \boxplus \mu$; if the difference does not tend to zero almost surely as $N\to\infty$, Theorem 1.2 fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that, for Bessel processes of type A, the normalized empirical measures converge almost surely to $\mu_{\mathrm{sc},2\sqrt{t}} \boxplus \mu$ (Theorems 1.1 and 1.2), and for type B to $\sqrt{\mu_{\mathrm{MP},\nu_0,t} \boxplus (\mu_{\mathrm{sc},2\sqrt{t}} \boxplus \mu_{\mathrm{even}})^2}$ (Theorems 1.3 and 1.4), where $\mu_{\mathrm{even}}$ is the even part of the starting law and $\nu_0$ is the limiting ratio of the boundary-coupling parameter to $N$. The finite coupling constants $k$ and $\beta$ do not appear in these limits; they agree with the frozen $k=\infty$, $\beta=\infty$ limits. For Dunkl processes of type B with non-symmetric starting measure, the limit's even part is given by the same type-B formula, while the odd part has a Stieltjes transform governed by a linear first-order PDE, equation (7.17), solved explicitly in the frozen case. The frozen-case analysis also yields new proofs of the semicircle law for the zeroes of Hermite polynomials and the Marchenko-Pastur law for the zeroes of Laguerre polynomials.

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on the stochastic calculus for the singular Bessel and Dunkl processes being valid for unbounded polynomial test functions even when particles collide or a coordinate hits zero; if these tools fail on the boundary, the finite-coupling limit could differ from the frozen-process limit.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For type-A Bessel processes, the empirical measure converges almost surely to $\mu_{\mathrm{sc},2\sqrt{t}} \boxplus \mu$ for every $t\ge 0$, whenever the initial empirical measures converge to a measure satisfying the moment condition.
  • For type-B Bessel processes with $\nu(N)/N\to\nu_0$, the same almost-sure convergence holds with limit $\sqrt{\mu_{\mathrm{MP},\nu_0,t} \boxplus (\mu_{\mathrm{sc},2\sqrt{t}} \boxplus \mu_{\mathrm{even}})^2}$.
  • The finite coupling constants $k$ (type A) and $\beta$ (type B) do not appear in any of these limits, so the large-$N$ behavior is identical to the frozen case $k=\infty$.
  • For type-B Dunkl processes with symmetric initial measure, the limit is the symmetric Marchenko-Pastur-type law; with non-symmetric initial measure, a genuinely non-symmetric semicircle-type distribution appears, with odd part controlled by the linear PDE (7.17).
  • In the frozen case the arguments reprove the semicircle law for the zeroes of Hermite polynomials and the Marchenko-Pastur law for the zeroes of Laguerre polynomials.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same moment-recursion scheme should extend to root systems of type D, which the paper notes differ from type B only through one boundary particle; the paper does not carry out this extension.
  • In the explicit quarter-circle example, the non-symmetric correction to the limit decays as $O(1/\sqrt{t})$ as $t\to\infty$; this suggests that asymmetric initial data leaves a slowly decaying skewness in general type-B Dunkl limits, though the paper only computes this in the example.
  • The order-$O(1/N)$ estimates for expected moments (Remarks 3.2 and 8.2) indicate that quantitative finite-$N$ error bounds for the convergence could be extracted from the same recurrences; the paper does not pursue this.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Request a human review

A listed scientist reviews the paper for a fee and the review publishes here regardless of verdict. See the reviewers or get listed.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies Bessel and Dunkl processes of large dimension N for the root systems A_{N-1} and B_N, with coupling constants k (type A) or (β, νβ) (type B), and derives almost-sure weak limits for the normalized empirical measures of the particles at times t>0, starting from arbitrary initial empirical measures satisfying a moment condition. The type-A limits are identified as μ_sc,2√t ⊞ μ; the type-B Bessel limits as sqrt( μ_MP,ν0,t ⊞ (μ_sc,2√t ⊞ μ_even)^2 ); and the type-B Dunkl limits are described by the even part given by the same type-B formula together with an odd part governed by the linear PDE (7.17). The authors prove the deterministic ODE cases in Sections 2 and 4, then extend them to finite k and β by moment recursions and Borel-Cantelli arguments, and finally treat frozen and finite-β Dunkl processes in Sections 7 and 8. The main structural claim is that the N→∞ limits are determined by the frozen (k=∞ or β=∞) processes and are independent of the finite coupling constant.

Significance. If the results are correct, the paper gives a unified and largely self-contained moment-and-free-probability approach to dynamic Wigner and Marchenko-Pastur laws for Bessel and Dunkl processes with arbitrary initial data. The type-A deterministic section is clean and the recurrences are derived from the generators, not fitted to data; the use of external R-transform identities is appropriate. The genuinely new content is the non-symmetric type-B Dunkl limit, where the odd part is not a free convolution but is characterized by a linear PDE, and the explicit quarter-circle example in Example 7.6 is a useful falsifiable prediction. The paper also correctly emphasizes that the finite coupling constant drops out in the N→∞ limit. The claims are significant for the dynamic random matrix and interacting particle communities, provided the proof gaps identified below are fixed.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4, Eq. (4.13)] The printed R-transform PDE is incorrect. Starting from z = R(t,G) + 1/G and substituting G_t = -ν0 G_z - 2zG_zG - G^2 from Proposition 4.7 into the inverse-function formulas (2.22) and (2.23) gives R_t = ν0 + 1 + 2zR + z^2 R_z, not the printed ν0 + 1 − 2zR + z^2 R_z. The extra +2 appears when the relation z = R + 1/G is substituted into the term 2zG_zG. As a concrete check, for ν0 = 0 and μ = δ0 the relevant R-transform of the squared limit μ^2_t = MP_{1,t} is R(t,z) = t/(1 − tz); it satisfies the corrected equation, whereas the printed equation gives R_t = 1/(1−tz)^2 but a right-hand side of (1−2tz)^2/(1−tz)^2. Since the verification in Theorem 4.8 that R_MP,ν0,t + R_{(μ_sc,2√t ⊞ μ_even)^2} solves the PDE uses Eq. (4.13), the proof of Theorem 4.8 is invalid as written, and Theorems 1.3, 1.4, 5.2, and 8.5 inherit this gap. The final formulas appear to be correct once the sign is fixed and the verification is re-run.
  2. [§5, Theorem 5.1 and §8, Theorem 8.4] Theorem 5.1, the stochastic Marchenko-Pastur limit for Bessel processes of type B, is not proved in Section 5: the proof states 'We here skip the details' and refers to Section 8. However, the proof of Theorem 8.4 in Section 8 in turn says that the even moments follow from the results of Section 5. This creates a circular dependency: the finite-β almost-sure moment convergence for the even part is asserted in each place and proved in neither. The paper should give the full Burkholder-Davis-Gundy and Borel-Cantelli argument for Theorem 5.1, or restructure Section 8 so that the Bessel case is proved completely and the Dunkl case reduces to it.
  3. [§3, Lemma 3.1 and §8, Lemma 8.1] The moment recursions apply Itô's formula to unbounded symmetric monomials m_λ and use the martingale property of the resulting stochastic integrals. The proofs only sketch why the integrands are square-integrable and why the expectations of the drift terms converge after the combinatorial division by x_i − x_j; for instance, the text says 'with standard results on the Itô integral, this readily yields the claim' in Lemma 3.1. Given that the singular SDE coefficients are controlled only by the non-collision results of [GrM], a rigorous treatment should justify the passage from the algebraic identity (3.9) to the needed L^1 and L^2 bounds uniformly in N. This is likely fixable, but it is load-bearing for the identification of finite-k and finite-β limits with the frozen-process limits.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§7, after Eq. (7.13)] 'emirical' should be 'empirical' in the sentence following Eq. (7.13).
  2. [§8, Theorem 8.5] Theorem 8.5 restricts the initial measure to M^1([0,∞[) and the starting points to [0,∞[, whereas Section 7 and the non-symmetric Dunkl results require general initial measures on R; the statement should be aligned with Proposition 7.2.
  3. [Theorem 1.3 and Theorem 4.8] The displayed formula sqrt( μ_MP,ν0,t ⊞ (μ_sc,2√t ⊞ μ_even)^2 ) would benefit from explicit parentheses clarifying that the square-root is applied after the free convolution and the square.
  4. [Corollary 4.9] The text of Corollary 4.9 includes '(t≥0)' in the displayed empirical measures, but the statement concerns a limit as N→∞ at a fixed time; this annotation appears to be a typo.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: moment recurrences are derived from the generators and identified via external free-convolution R-transforms.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The type-A limit rests on moment recurrences obtained by differentiating empirical moments along the ODE (2.1), giving a Burgers PDE for Stieltjes transforms and then R_t = z, which identifies the limit as µ_sc,2√t ⊞ µ via the external R-transform additivity of [AGZ]. The type-B and frozen-type-B results follow the same acyclic pattern: recurrences (4.5), (7.12), and (7.13) are computed from the generators (4.1) and (6.4), then identified with Marchenko-Pastur and semicircle free convolutions using the known R-transform formulas from [AGZ]. No parameter is fitted to the target quantity, and no limit formula is assumed as an input. The self-citations ([VW2], [AV1], [VW1]) supply only existence/uniqueness of ODEs, scaling solutions, and freezing limits; none of these cited facts already contains the N-to-infinity free-convolution limit, so they are not load-bearing in a circular way. The skeptical concern about the sign in Eq. (4.13) is a correctness/computation issue rather than circularity, since that PDE is derived from the moment recurrences, not imposed by the claimed answer; similarly, the abbreviated proof of Theorem 5.1 is an omission, not a reduction of the claim to itself.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities are introduced. The limiting parameter nu0 is a scaled model parameter, not a number fitted to data. The load is carried by standard stochastic-analysis and free-probability tools cited from earlier work, plus the authors' own published ODE-flow results.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Strong existence, uniqueness and a.s. non-collision for Bessel SDEs with singular pair and boundary drifts on Weyl chambers (Graczyk-Malecki [GrM]).
    Invoked in Sections 3 and 5 to guarantee the moment recurrences via Ito's formula; failure at the boundary would invalidate the a.s. convergence statements.
  • domain assumption Feller property and Ito formula for Dunkl processes with generator (6.3) and jump martingales (Chybiryakov-Gallardo-Yor [CGY], Corollary 3.6).
    Basis for Lemma 8.1 and Theorem 8.4 moment recursions for type-B Dunkl processes.
  • standard math Carleman moment condition (2.12) and exponential moment growth condition (2.13) on the initial measure guarantee a unique moment sequence and weak convergence from moments.
    Used in Propositions 2.8, 4.6, and 7.2 to apply the moment convergence theorem.
  • standard math Free probability identities: free additive convolution, R-transform additivity, and the R-transforms of semicircle and Marchenko-Pastur laws from Anderson-Guionnet-Zeitouni.
    Used in Sections 2, 4, and 7 to convert the Burgers and recurrence equations into free-convolution formulas.
  • domain assumption Existence and uniqueness of solutions to the ODEs (2.1) and (4.1) on Weyl chambers, cited from Voit-Woerner [VW2].
    The frozen-case limits and the zero-polynomial identities start from these ODE flows; this is a self-cited but independent published existence result.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Limit theorems for Bessel and Dunkl processes of large dimensions and free convolutions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DMLC4ZXI

@misc{pith2026200913928,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Limit theorems for Bessel and Dunkl processes of large dimensions and free convolutions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DMLC4ZXI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2009.13928}
}
abstract

We study Bessel and Dunkl processes $(X_{t,k})_{t\ge0}$ on $\mathbb R^N$ with possibly multivariate coupling constants $k\ge0$. These processes describe interacting particle systems of Calogero-Moser-Sutherland type with $N$ particles. For the root systems $A_{N-1}$ and $B_N$ these Bessel processes are related with $\beta$-Hermite and $\beta$-Laguerre ensembles. Moreover, for the frozen case $k=\infty$, these processes degenerate to deterministic or pure jump processes. We use the generators for Bessel and Dunkl processes of types A and B and derive analogues of Wigner's semicircle and Marchenko-Pastur limit laws for $N\to\infty$ for the empirical distributions of the particles with arbitrary initial empirical distributions by using free convolutions. In particular, for Dunkl processes of type B new non-symmetric semicircle-type limit distributions on $\mathbb R$ appear. Our results imply that the form of the limiting measures is already completely determined by the frozen processes. Moreover, in the frozen cases, our approach leads to a new simple proof of the semicircle and Marchenko-Pastur limit laws for the empirical measures of the zeroes of Hermite and Laguerre polynomials respectively.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2009.13928 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. ˜ft(x) for t = 0, 0.1, 1, 10, 100 and t = ∞. 8. Limit theorems for Dunkl processes of type B In this section we proceed to the next step and study the empirical distributions of normalized Dunkl processes (X˜ t,ν,β)t≥0 of type B on R N with the generators L˜ ν,β = 1 2β ∆ + Lν with Lν as in (6.4); see Example 6.2. On some informal level, the processes (X˜ t,ν,β)t≥0 converge for β → ∞ to the frozen Dunkl processes. We… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Akhiezer, The Classical Moment Problems and Some Related Questions in Analysis

    N.I. Akhiezer, The Classical Moment Problems and Some Related Questions in Analysis. Engl. Translation, Hafner Publishing Co., New York, 1965

    work page 1965

  2. [2]

    Anderson, A

    G.W. Anderson, A. Guionnet, O. Zeitouni, An Introduction to Random Matrices. Cambridge University Press, 2010

    work page 2010

  3. [3]

    Limit theorems and soft edge of freezing random matrix models via dual orthogonal polynomials

    S. Andraus, K. Hermann, M. Voit, Limit theorems and soft edge of freezing random matrix models via dual orthogonal polynomials. Preprint, arXiv:2009.01418

    work page Pith review arXiv 2009

  4. [4]

    Andraus, M

    S. Andraus, M. Katori, S. Miyashita, Interacting particles on the line and Dunkl intertwining operator of type A : Application to the freezing regime. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 45 (2012) 395201

    2012

  5. [5]

    Andraus, M

    S. Andraus, M. Katori, S. Miyashita, Two limiting regimes of interacting Bessel processes. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 47 (2014) 235201

    2014

  6. [6]

    Andraus, M

    S. Andraus, M. Voit, Limit theorems for multivariate Bessel processes in the freezing regime. Stoch. Proc. Appl. 129 (2019), 4771-4790

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Andraus, M

    S. Andraus, M. Voit, Central limit theorems for multivariate Bessel processes in the freezing regime II: the covariance matrices of the limit. J. Approx. Theory 246 (2019), 65-84

    2019

  8. [8]

    Anker, An introduction to Dunkl theory and its analytic aspects

    J.-P. Anker, An introduction to Dunkl theory and its analytic aspects. In: G. Filipuk, Y. Haraoka, S. Michalik. Analytic, Algebraic and Geometric Aspects of Differential Equations, Birkh \"a user, Cham (Switzerland), pp.3-58, 2017

    work page 2017

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    Cabanal Duvillard, A

    T. Cabanal Duvillard, A. Guionnet, Large deviations upper bounds for the laws of matrix-valued processes and non-commutative entropies. Ann. Probab. 29 (2001), 1205-1261

    2001

  2. [10]

    Chybiryakov, L

    O. Chybiryakov, L. Gallardo, M. Yor, Dunkl processes and their radial parts relative to a root system. In: P. Graczyk et al. (eds.), Harmonic and stochastic analysis of Dunkl processes, pp. 113-198. Hermann, Paris 2008

    2008

  3. [11]

    Deift, Orthogonal Polynomials and Random Matrices: A Riemann-Hilbert Approach

    P. Deift, Orthogonal Polynomials and Random Matrices: A Riemann-Hilbert Approach. Amer. Math. Soc. 2000

    2000

  4. [12]

    van Diejen, L

    J.F. van Diejen, L. Vinet, Calogero-Sutherland-Moser Models. CRM Series in Mathematical Physics, Springer, Berlin, 2000

    2000

  5. [13]

    Dumitriu, A

    I. Dumitriu, A. Edelman, Matrix models for beta-ensembles. J. Math. Phys. 43 (2002), 5830-5847

    2002

  6. [14]

    Dumitriu, A

    I. Dumitriu, A. Edelman, Eigenvalues of Hermite and Laguerre ensembles: large beta asymptotics, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincare (B) 41 (2005), 1083-1099

    2005

  7. [15]

    Dunkl, Y

    C.F. Dunkl, Y. Xu, Orthogonal Polynomials of Several Variables. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001

    2001

  8. [16]

    Gallardo, M

    L. Gallardo, M. Yor, Some remarkable properties of the Dunkl martingale. In: Seminaire de Probabilites XXXIX, pp. 337-356, dedicated to P.A. Meyer, vol. 1874, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer, Berlin, 2006

    2006

  9. [17]

    Gawronski, On the asymptotic distribution of the zeros of Hermite, Laguerre, and Jonquiere polynomials

    W. Gawronski, On the asymptotic distribution of the zeros of Hermite, Laguerre, and Jonquiere polynomials. J. Approx. Theory 50 (1987), 214--231

    1987

  10. [18]

    Gorin, V

    V. Gorin, V. Kleptsyn, Universal objects of the infinite beta random matrix theory. Preprint, arXiv:2009.02006

    2009 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Gorin, A.W

    V. Gorin, A.W. Marcus, Crystallization of random matrix orbits. Int. Math. Res. Notices 2020(3), 883–913

    2020

  12. [20]

    Graczyk, J

    P. Graczyk, J. Malecki, Strong solutions of non-colliding particle systems. Electron. J. Probab. 19 (2014), 21 pp

    2014

  13. [21]

    Haagerup, S

    U. Haagerup, S. Thorbjornsen, Random matrices with complex gaussian entries, Expo. Math. 21 (2003), 293-337

    2003

  14. [22]

    Kornyik, Gy

    M. Kornyik, Gy. Michaletzky, Wigner matrices, the moments of Hermite polynomials and the semicircle law. J. Approx. Theory 211 (2016), 29-41

    2016

  15. [23]

    Kornyik, Gy

    M. Kornyik, Gy. Michaletzky, On the moments of roots of Laguerre-polynomials and the Marchenko-Pastur law. Ann. Univ. Sci. Budapest., Sect. Comp. 46 (2017), 137--151

    2017

  16. [24]

    Kornyik, M

    M. Kornyik, M. Voit, J. Woerner, Some martingales associated with multivariate Bessel processes. Acta Math. Hung., to appear, arXiv:1908.11189

    1908 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Mehta, Random matrices (3rd ed.), Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, 2004

    M. Mehta, Random matrices (3rd ed.), Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, 2004

    2004

  18. [26]

    Menon, Lesser known miracles of Burgers equation, Acta Math

    G. Menon, Lesser known miracles of Burgers equation, Acta Math. Sci. 32B (2012), 281-294

    2012

  19. [27]

    A. Nica, R. Speicher, Lectures on the Combinatorics of Free Probability Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006

    2006

  20. [28]

    Oravecz, D

    F. Oravecz, D. Petz, On the eigenvalue distribution of some symmetric random matrices, Acta Sci. Math. 63 (1997), 383-395

    1997

  21. [29]

    Protter, Stochastic Integration and Differential Equations

    P.E. Protter, Stochastic Integration and Differential Equations. A New Approach. Springer, Berlin, 2003

    2003

  22. [30]

    Rogers, Z

    L.C.G. Rogers, Z. Shi, Interacting Brownian particles and the Wigner law. Probab. Theory Rel. Fields 95 (1993), 555-570

    1993

  23. [31]

    Rogers, D

    L.C.G. Rogers, D. Williams, Diffusions, Markov Processes and Martingales, Vol. 1 Foundations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000

    2000

  24. [32]

    R\"osler, Generalized Hermite polynomials and the heat equation for Dunkl operators

    M. R\"osler, Generalized Hermite polynomials and the heat equation for Dunkl operators. Comm. Math. Phys. 192 (1998), 519-542

    1998

  25. [33]

    R\"osler, Dunkl operators: Theory and applications

    M. R\"osler, Dunkl operators: Theory and applications. In: Orthogonal polynomials and special functions, Leuven 2002, Lecture Notes in Math. 1817 (2003), pp. 93--135. Springer Verlag, Berlin

    2003

  26. [34]

    R\"osler, M

    M. R\"osler, M. Voit, Markov processes related with Dunkl operators. Adv. Appl. Math. 21 (1998), 575-643

    1998

  27. [35]

    R\"osler, M

    M. R\"osler, M. Voit, Dunkl theory, convolution algebras, and related Markov processes. In: P. Graczyk et al. (eds.), Harmonic and stochastic analysis of Dunkl processes. pp. 1-112. Hermann, Paris 2008

    2008

  28. [36]

    Schapira, The Heckman-Opdam Markov processes

    B. Schapira, The Heckman-Opdam Markov processes. Probab. Theory Rel. Fields 138 (2007), 495-519

    2007

  29. [37]

    Strauss, Partial Differential Equations: An Introduction

    W.A. Strauss, Partial Differential Equations: An Introduction. Wiley, 1992

    1992

  30. [38]

    Szeg \"o , Orthogonal Polynomials

    G. Szeg \"o , Orthogonal Polynomials. Colloquium Publications (American Mathematical Society), Providence, 1939

    1939

  31. [39]

    Voit, Central limit theorems for multivariate Bessel processes in the freezing regime

    M. Voit, Central limit theorems for multivariate Bessel processes in the freezing regime. J. Approx. Theory 239 (2019), 210--231

    2019

  32. [40]

    Voit, J.H.C

    M. Voit, J.H.C. Woerner, Functional central limit theorems for multivariate Bessel processes in the freezing regime. Stoch. Anal. Appl., https://doi.org/10.1080/07362994.2020.1786402, arXiv:1901.08390

    2020

  33. [41]

    Voit, J.H.C

    M. Voit, J.H.C. Woerner, The differential equations associated with Calogero-Moser-Sutherland particle models in the freezing regime. Preprint 2019, arXiv:1910.07888

    2019 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 27, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.