Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Reliable Programmatic Weak Supervision with Confidence Intervals for Label Probabilities

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper gives a computer-assisted proof that, in a two-parameter family of unimodal maps with Gaussian additive noise, increasing noise intensity changes the Lyapunov exponent from positive to negative—and, for a range of parameters…

desk verdict The real paper is a solid computer-assisted method for Gaussian-noise random maps, but the main theorem overreaches from a finite grid to an interval, and the submission's metadata, code link, and missing proofs need fixing. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.03896 v1 pith:WVAUXMX2 submitted 2025-08-05 stat.ML cs.LG

Verónica Álvarez , Santiago Mazuelas , Steven An , Sanjoy Dasgupta This is my paper · ORCID
classification stat.MLcs.LG MSC 37H1037M2565G2065T40
keywords Lyapunovexponentnoise-inducedorderrandomdynamicalsystemsannealedtransferoperatorFourier-Galerkinmethodvalidatednumericsintervalarithmeticstationarymeasures
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 establishes a rigorous, computer-assisted proof of noise-induced order in a family of random dynamical systems with Gaussian additive noise. The system is $X_{n+1}=\tau(T_{\alpha,\beta}(X_n)+\Omega_n)$, where $T_{\alpha,\beta}(x)=\beta-(1+\beta)|x|^\alpha$, $\tau$ is the periodic boundary condition, and $\Omega_n$ are i.i.d. Gaussian random variables. The paper proves that for $\beta=1$ and $\alpha\in[3,4]$ the Lyapunov exponent changes from positive to negative as the noise level $\sigma$ increases, and for $\alpha=3$, $\beta\in[0.8447,0.8694]$, it undergoes multiple sign changes. The argument is carried by a Fourier-Galerkin discretization of the annealed transfer operator, with interval-arithmetic enclosures that give certified bounds on the stationary density and on the Lyapunov exponent itself. The broader payoff is a validated, efficient method for exploring parameter space of noise-driven systems that would otherwise be studied only numerically.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the annealed Perron-Frobenius operator $P_\sigma=\tau_*(\rho_\sigma*\widehat{P}\,\cdot)$ acting on $L^1([-1,1])$: it is obtained by pushing the deterministic transfer operator $P$ through convolution with the Gaussian kernel $\rho_\sigma$ and the periodic boundary condition $\tau$, and its unique fixed point $f_\sigma$ is the stationary density. Gaussian smoothing makes $P_\sigma$ compact and regularizing ($L^1$ into $BV$), and a Doeblin-type argument gives exponential contraction on the zero-mean subspace $U_0$ of $L^2$. The finite-dimensional replacement is the Fourier-Galerkin truncation $P_{\sigma,k}=\pi_k P_\sigma\pi_k$; the main error theorem (Theorem 8.12) bounds $\|f_\sigma-g\|_{L^2}$ in terms of the computable norm $C_n=\|P_{\sigma,k}^n|_{U_0}\|_{L^2\to L^2}$, provided $C_n<1$, plus explicitly bounded truncation constants. Once $g$ is certified close to $f_\sigma$, the Lyapunov exponent is enclosed by integrating $\log|T'_{\alpha,\beta}|$ against $g$ with rigorous Fourier-coefficient bounds.

What would settle it

Recompute the enclosure at a claimed crossing, for instance $\alpha=3.5$ and $\sigma=0.4$ with $\beta=1$, using an independent interval-arithmetic implementation and a larger Fourier truncation; if the certified interval for $\lambda$ fails to contain $-0.095573727164159$ or if any computed $C_n$ reaches $1$, the transition proof fails, and a long-orbit simulation at that parameter point would be expected to disagree with the certified value.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is a certified chaos-to-order transition in the Gaussian-noise setting. For the random system $X_{n+1}=\tau(T_{\alpha,\beta}(X_n)+\Omega_n)$ with $T_{\alpha,\beta}(x)=\beta-(1+\beta)|x|^\alpha$ and $\Omega_n\sim\mathcal{N}(0,\sigma^2)$ i.i.d., the top Lyapunov exponent $\lambda(\alpha,\beta,\sigma)=\int\log|T'_{\alpha,\beta}|\,d\mu_\sigma$ is well defined for all $\alpha\geq1$, $\beta\in(-1,1]$, $\sigma>0$, where $\mu_\sigma$ is the unique stationary measure. Main Result 2 states that for $\beta=1$ the function $\alpha\mapsto\lambda(\alpha,1,\sigma)$ changes sign from positive to negative as $\sigma$ increases with $\alpha\in[3,4]$, and for $\alpha=3$ the function $\beta\mapsto\lambda(3,\beta,\sigma)$ shows multiple sign changes for $\beta\in[0.8447,0.8694]$. These are not heuristic simulations: each sign change is certified by rigorous enclosures, for example $\lambda(3.5,0.4)=-0.095573727164159\pm10^{-15}$, computed on dense grids of parameter points. The same framework also proves that the stationary density is analytic and that Birkhoff averages of $L^2$ observables can be enclosed to arbitrary precision.

Load-bearing premise

The whole result rests on the computer-assisted certificate that the finite-dimensional approximating operator contracts on zero-mean functions ($C_n<1$, computed in interval arithmetic); if that certificate is wrong, or if the proof of the underlying $L^2$ contraction is incomplete, the certified sign changes do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For the family $T_{\alpha,\beta}$, noise-induced order is no longer only a numerical observation: there are parameter regions where the sign of $\lambda$ is certified, so any dynamical explanation of the transition must be consistent with these rigorous data.
  • The same algorithm encloses the stationary density and Birkhoff averages to arbitrary precision for any non-singular interval map with Gaussian noise, so other observables and other one-dimensional families can be swept rigorously without new theory.
  • The certified zero-crossing data determine a hypersurface in parameter space where $\lambda=0$; along that hypersurface the paper presents numerical evidence of intermittent two-point dynamics, linking the transition to infinite-invariant-measure behavior.
  • Because the method reaches machine-precision enclosures in about half a second per parameter point on a single CPU core, rigorous parameter-space exploration becomes practical on ordinary hardware.
  • The coexistence of positive and negative sign regions, including multiple sign changes for fixed $\alpha=3$, shows that increasing Gaussian noise can both regularize and de-regularize dynamics in the same family, which is noise-induced chaos as well as noise-induced order.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An implication the authors leave implicit is that the certified data show existence of transitions but not uniqueness of the zero-Lyapunov hypersurface; a natural next step is to use the same validated machinery to enclose the entire crossing curve together with its linear-response derivative.
  • The method's key ingredient is the analytic smoothing of Gaussian convolution rather than the specific map family, which suggests it should transfer to other smooth-noise systems, such as stochastically forced circle maps or higher-dimensional tori, as long as the Fourier tails decay fast enough for the truncation constants to be controlled.
  • The rigor depends on a computer-assisted spectral-gap certificate, so an independent reimplementation in a different interval-arithmetic environment, or an exportable proof certificate from the code, would be the natural way to make the result checkable without trusting the supplied implementation.
  • Because the method computes explicit mixing-rate bounds on the discretized operator, it could supply the missing ingredient for certified computations of diffusion coefficients and linear response in this Gaussian-noise setting, along the lines the paper lists as future work.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The body of the submitted manuscript develops a validated Fourier–Galerkin method for enclosing stationary densities and Lyapunov exponents of one-dimensional random dynamical systems with additive Gaussian noise. The main theoretical result, Main Result 1, asserts existence, uniqueness and analyticity of the stationary density for every σ>0, together with computable enclosures of Birkhoff averages. The main numerical application, Main Result 2, claims rigorous detection of noise-induced order transitions in the family T_{α,β}(x)=β−(1+β)|x|^α: for β=1 a positive-to-negative sign change of the Lyapunov exponent for α∈[3,4], and for α=3 multiple sign changes for β∈[0.8447,0.8694]. The proof strategy is a posteriori: a finite-rank Fourier projection of the annealed transfer operator is shown to have a verified spectral gap (C_n<1), and explicit tail bounds are used to lift the enclosure to the infinite-dimensional operator. The submitted text also contains, before the actual paper, an unrelated title and abstract about programmatic weak supervision.

Significance. If the results are correct, the paper is a significant advance in computer-assisted proof for random dynamical systems: it gives explicit, efficient enclosures with validated error bounds, and the application provides rigorous Gaussian-noise evidence of noise-induced order for this family, complementing the BV-noise result in [24]. The claimed computational efficiency (about 0.5 seconds per parameter point with 15 certified digits) makes systematic parameter-space exploration feasible and is a genuine strength. However, the continuum formulation of Main Result 2 is not supported by the displayed grid computations, the proofs of two load-bearing propositions and Section 7 are missing, and the computer-assisted verification cannot currently be inspected because the code link is unreadable. These issues prevent acceptance as a complete rigorous proof.

major comments (5)
  1. [Main Result 2; Remark 2.1; Section 10.4] The theorem is stated for the continuum parameter ranges α∈[3,4] and β∈[0.8447,0.8694], but the supporting computations, as described in Remark 2.1 and Section 10.4, only enclose the Lyapunov exponent on finite grids (α=3+i/1024, i=0,...,1024 and β=51/64+i/8192, with σ=1/16+15/16·j/1024, j=0,...,1024). The text invokes smoothness and linear response [21,29] to justify the continuum statement, but no quantitative bound on ∂λ/∂α or ∂λ/∂β, and no certified margin separating the enclosures from zero between adjacent grid nodes, is provided. Smoothness alone does not prevent a sign change between arbitrarily close grid points, so the continuum formulation of Main Result 2 is not supported by the displayed computation; the theorem should either be restricted to the computed grid or supplemented with a validated Lipschitz or margin estimate.
  2. [Proposition 6.7; Proposition 6.8; Section 7] The uniqueness and computability results depend on the L^2 contraction of P_σ on U_0 (Proposition 6.7) and on uniqueness of the stationary measure (Proposition 6.8), as well as on the analyticity statement in Corollary 7.9. In the submitted text, Proposition 6.7 is stated without proof, Proposition 6.8 is only referenced, and Section 7 is absent. These results are load-bearing for Main Result 1 and Theorem 9.4, and for the definition of λ as an integral against the unique stationary measure. The submission is not self-contained without these proofs; the authors should include complete proofs or give precise references with theorem numbers.
  3. [Definition 8.11; proof of Theorem 8.12] The discretized operator is defined as P_{σ,k} := π_k N_σ π_k P π_k = π_k N_σ P π_k = π_k P_σ π_k. The first equality is not generally valid: π_k N_σ π_k P π_k differs from π_k N_σ P π_k by π_k N_σ(π_k−I)Pπ_k, which is not shown to vanish. The proof of Theorem 8.12 uses the expression π_k N_σ P π_k, while the Fourier–Galerkin implementation described in Section 8.1 appears to realize the operator with the additional projection π_k before P. This inconsistency affects the error bound in Theorem 8.12 and must be resolved by defining one operator and proving the estimate for that operator.
  4. [Theorem 8.12; Section 11; data at [23]] The rigorous conclusions are computer-assisted and rely on the verified spectral gap C_n<1 in Theorem 8.12. However, the code link in Section 11 is an unreadable string, and the data repository [23] is not given with a usable URL. A computer-assisted proof must be independently checkable; without accessible code, a description of the interval arithmetic routines, details of the verified linear algebra, and an explanation of how FFT round-off errors are bounded (e.g., via [12]), the computational part of the proof cannot be validated.
  5. [Title and first abstract] The manuscript body is preceded by a title and abstract for a different paper on programmatic weak supervision with confidence intervals for label probabilities; the body itself is a paper on stationary measures and Lyapunov exponents of random dynamical systems. The mismatch between the stated topic and the actual content must be corrected before the manuscript can be evaluated by the intended audience.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 1] The word 'phace' in 'in a compact phace space' should be 'phase'.
  2. [Table 3] The entry '256' appearing after each enclosure in Table 3 is not defined in the header or caption; if it is the Galerkin truncation dimension K, this should be stated explicitly.
  3. [Lemma 6.2] The periodization notation τ_*ρ_σ is introduced only inside the proof of Lemma 6.2; it would be clearer to define it before the lemma statement.
  4. [Remark 2.1] The β-grid is described as β=51/64+i/8192 for i=1,...,1024, so the endpoint 51/64 itself is not included; the caption and the theorem should clarify which endpoints are actually used and why this is consistent with the stated β-interval.
  5. [References] Several references contain garbled or unreadable text due to font encoding issues (e.g., [1], [5], [10], [13], [30], [42]); the bibliography should be cleaned so that all entries are legible.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the validated-numerics derivation of the Lyapunov exponent is self-contained and the observed sign changes are outputs, not fitted inputs; only a mild, non-definitional self-citation is used for the smoothness bridge from grid enclosures to interval statements.

full rationale

The paper's core derivation computes the stationary density and Lyapunov exponent via a Fourier–Galerkin discretization of the annealed transfer operator. The sign changes in Main Result 2 are produced by rigorous interval-arithmetic enclosures at a fixed grid (Remark 2.1, Tables 1–3), and the error bounds in Theorem 8.12 depend on computable constants (Gamma_{sigma,k}, C_i) derived from the discretized operator, not on parameters tuned to force the target transition. There is no fitted input renamed as a prediction: the Lyapunov exponent lambda is defined independently in Eq. (4) as the Birkhoff/space average of log|T'|, and the rigorous enclosures are outputs of that definition. The main self-citations ([24], [25], [29]) supply context, the coarse-fine methodology, and a regularity theorem, respectively; none of them assumes the conclusion that lambda changes sign for the Gaussian-noise family. The citation of [29] for smooth parameter dependence is load-bearing for the continuum wording of Main Result 2, but smoothness alone does not by construction imply the absence of sign changes between grid points, so this is at most a correctness/extrapolation gap rather than a circular reduction. Omitted proofs and the unreadable code link are reproducibility deficiencies, not circularity. Hence no circular step is exhibited, and the score reflects only the minor presence of a non-definitional self-citation in the interpretation step.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method introduces no new physical entities and fits no free parameters. The central claim depends on standard functional analysis, the specific Gaussian-noise model, and the correctness of a computer-assisted numerical verification whose code is not fully accessible from the submitted text.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The maps T_{alpha,beta}(x)=beta-(1+beta)|x|^alpha with alpha>=1, beta in (-1,1] are non-singular and differentiable almost everywhere.
    This is the class of systems studied; non-singularity is needed for the transfer operator and for the Lyapunov exponent integral. Stated in Section 3.
  • domain assumption Gaussian noise with sigma>0 provides analytic regularization, making the annealed transfer operator compact and the stationary density analytic (Lemma 6.3, Corollary 7.9).
    The main regularity estimates (L1 to BV smoothing, Doeblin lower bound) rely on the Gaussian kernel; some of these proofs are stated but missing from the provided excerpt.
  • ad hoc to paper The a posteriori error bound in Theorem 8.12 is valid, including the computer-verified condition C_n<1 for the discretized contraction.
    This is the computer-assisted step; it depends on the correctness of the implementation, and the code link in Section 11 is unreadable in the provided text.
  • domain assumption Linear response theory and the implicit function theorem imply the zero set of the Lyapunov exponent is a hypersurface (citing [29]).
    The hypersurface claim in the abstract and Section 2 is not proven in this paper; it is imported from external smoothness results.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Reliable Programmatic Weak Supervision with Confidence Intervals for Label Probabilities." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WVAUXMX2

@misc{pith2026250803896,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Reliable Programmatic Weak Supervision with Confidence Intervals for Label Probabilities},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WVAUXMX2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.03896}
}
read the original abstract

The accurate labeling of datasets is often both costly and time-consuming. Given an unlabeled dataset, programmatic weak supervision obtains probabilistic predictions for the labels by leveraging multiple weak labeling functions (LFs) that provide rough guesses for labels. Weak LFs commonly provide guesses with assorted types and unknown interdependences that can result in unreliable predictions. Furthermore, existing techniques for programmatic weak supervision cannot provide assessments for the reliability of the probabilistic predictions for labels. This paper presents a methodology for programmatic weak supervision that can provide confidence intervals for label probabilities and obtain more reliable predictions. In particular, the methods proposed use uncertainty sets of distributions that encapsulate the information provided by LFs with unrestricted behavior and typology. Experiments on multiple benchmark datasets show the improvement of the presented methods over the state-of-the-art and the practicality of the confidence intervals presented.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A note on real Heegaard Floer homology and localization

    math.GT 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    A localization spectral sequence exists for the hat variant of real Heegaard Floer homology, with applications to branched double covers and strongly invertible knots.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [24]

    Galatolo, M

    S. Galatolo, M. Monge, and I. Nisoli. Existence of noise induced order, a computer aided proof.������������, 33(9):4237, 2020

    work page 2020

  2. [23]

    Efficient computation of stationary measures and the Lyapunov Landscape for families random dynamical systems with smooth additive noise

    S. Galatolo, C. Lopez Vereau, L. Marangio, and I. Nisoli. Data for “Efficient computation of stationary measures and the Lyapunov Landscape for families random dynamical systems with smooth additive noise”.������� ��������� ����������������������, 2025

    work page 2025

  3. [12]

    Error analysis of some operations involved in the cooley-tukey fast fourier transform.��� ������������ �� ������������ ��������, 46(2):1–27, May 2020

    Nicolas Brisebarre, Mioara Jolde¸ s, Jean-Michel Muller, Ana-Maria Nane¸ s, and Joris Picot. Error analysis of some operations involved in the cooley-tukey fast fourier transform.��� ������������ �� ������������ ��������, 46(2):1–27, May 2020

    work page 2020

  4. [2]

    Bahsoun and C

    W. Bahsoun and C. Bose. Invariant densities and escape rates: Rigorous and computable approximations in the l infinity-norm.��������� ��������� ������� ������� � ������������, 74(13):4481–4495, 2011

    work page 2011

  5. [3]

    Bahsoun, S

    W. Bahsoun, S. Galatolo, I. Nisoli, and X. Niu. Rigorous approximation of diffusion coeffi- cients for expanding maps.������� �� ����������� �������, 163:1486–1503, 2016

    work page 2016

  6. [4]

    Bahsoun, S

    W. Bahsoun, S. Galatolo, I. Nisoli, and X. Niu. A rigorous computational approach to linear response.������������, 31(3):1073, 2018

    work page 2018

  7. [5]

    O. F. Bandtlow and J. Slipantschuk. Lagrange approximation of transfer operators associated with holomorphic data, 2020

    work page 2020

  8. [6]

    Blumenthal and I

    A. Blumenthal and I. Nisoli. Noise induced order for skew-products over a non-uniformly expanding base.������������, 35(10):5481–5504, 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 48 references
  1. [7]

    Blumenthal, I

    A. Blumenthal, I. Nisoli, and T. Taylor-Crush. A pseudospectral approach to rigorous numer- ical estimation of Ruelle resonances of transfer operators.����� �������� ����������������, 2025, 2507.09021

    2025 arXiv

  2. [8]

    Bose and R

    C. Bose and R. Murray. The exact rate of approximation in Ulam’s method.�������� ��� ���������� ��������� �������, 7(1):219–235, 2001

    2001

  3. [9]

    Braverman, A

    M. Braverman, A. Grigo, and C. Rojas. Noise vs computational intractability in dynamics. ���� ��� ����������� �� ��� ��� ����������� �� ����������� �������� ������� ����������, pages 128–141, 2012

    2012

  4. [10]

    Breden, H

    M. Breden, H. Chu, J. S. W. Lamb, and M. Rasmussen. Rigorous enclosure of Lyapunov exponents of stochastic flows.����� �������� ����������������, 2025

    2025

  5. [11]

    Breden and M

    M. Breden and M. Engel. Computer-assisted proof of shear-induced chaos in stochastically perturbed hopf systems.��� ������ �� ������� �����������, 33(2), April 2023. 38 S. GALATOLO, C. LOPEZ VEREAU, L. MARANGIO, I. NISOLI

    2023

  6. [13]

    Chen and Y

    H. Chen and Y. Sato. Noise-induced order in high dimensions.����� �������� ����������������, 2024

    2024

  7. [14]

    Chihara, Y

    T. Chihara, Y. Sato, I. Nisoli, and S. Galatolo. Existence of multiple noise-induced transitions in Lasota–Mackey maps.������ �� ����������������� ������� �� ��������� �������, 32(1), 2022

    2022

  8. [15]

    Crimmins and G

    H. Crimmins and G. Froyland. Fourier approximation of the statistical properties of Anosov maps on tori.������������, 33(11):6244–6296, oct 2020

    2020

  9. [16]

    Dellnitz and O

    M. Dellnitz and O. Junge. Chapter 5 - Set oriented numerical methods for dynamical sys- tems. In Bernold Fiedler, editor,�������� �� ��������� �������, volume 2 of�������� �� ��������� �������, pages 221–264. Elsevier Science, 2002

    2002

  10. [17]

    Fft accuracy benchmark comments.������������������������������ �������������

    FFTW Authors. Fft accuracy benchmark comments.������������������������������ �������������. Accessed: 2026-02-11

    2026

  11. [18]

    Fft accuracy benchmark methodology.������������������������������ �����������

    FFTW Authors. Fft accuracy benchmark methodology.������������������������������ �����������. Accessed: 2026-02-11

    2026

  12. [19]

    Stability and approximation of random invariant densities for lasota–yorke map cocycles.������������, 27(4):647, mar 2014

    Gary Froyland, Cecilia Gonz´ alez-Tokman, and Anthony Quas. Stability and approximation of random invariant densities for lasota–yorke map cocycles.������������, 27(4):647, mar 2014

    2014

  13. [20]

    Galatolo

    S. Galatolo. Statistical properties of dynamics. Introduction to the functional analytic ap- proach.����������������, 2022

    2022

  14. [21]

    Galatolo and P

    S. Galatolo and P. Giulietti. Linear response for dynamical systems with additive noise. ������������, 32(6), 2019

    2019

  15. [22]

    Galatolo, M

    S. Galatolo, M. Hoyrup, and C. Rojas. Dynamics and abstract computability: Computing invariant measures.�������� ��� ���������� ��������� �������, 14(29):193–212, 2011

    2011

  16. [25]

    Galatolo, M

    S. Galatolo, M. Monge, I. Nisoli, and F. Poloni. A general framework for the rigorous compu- tation of invariant densities and the coarse-fine strategy.����� �������� ��������, 170:Paper No. 113329, 21, 2023

    2023

  17. [26]

    Galatolo and I

    S. Galatolo and I. Nisoli. An elementary approach to rigorous approximation of invariant measures.���� �� ���� ��� ���, 13:958–985, 2014

    2014

  18. [27]

    Galatolo and I

    S. Galatolo and I. Nisoli. Rigorous computation of invariant measures and fractal dimen- sion for maps with contracting fibers: 2D Lorenz-like maps.������� ������ ��� ��������� �������, 36(6):1865–1891, 2016

    2016

  19. [28]

    Galatolo, I

    S. Galatolo, I. Nisoli, and B. Saussol. An elementary way to rigorously estimate convergence to equilibrium and escape rates.������� �� ������������� ��������, 2(1):51–64, 2015

    2015

  20. [29]

    Galatolo and J

    S. Galatolo and J. Sedro. Quadratic response of random and determin- istic dynamical systems.������ �� ����������������� ������� �� ������� ��� �������, 30(2):023113, 02 2020, https://pubs.aip.org/aip/cha/article- pdf/doi/10.1063/1.5122658/14624072/023113 1 online.pdf

    2020 doi

  21. [30]

    V. P. H. Goverse, A. J. Homburg, and J. S. W. Lamb. Intermittent two-point dynamics at the transition to chaos for random circle endomorphisms.����� �������� ����������������, 2025

    2025

  22. [31]

    Higham.�������� ��� ��������� �� ��������� ����������� ������ �������

    Nicholas J. Higham.�������� ��� ��������� �� ��������� ����������� ������ �������. Philadelphia, PA: SIAM, 1996

    1996

  23. [32]

    Johnson and Matteo Frigo

    Steven G. Johnson and Matteo Frigo. Implementing ffts in practice. In C. Sidney Burrus, editor,���� ������� ����������, chapter 11. Connexions, Rice University, Houston, TX, September 2008. Connexions module m16336 (versioned online text)

    2008

  24. [33]

    Keane, R

    M. Keane, R. Murray, and L. S. Young. Computing invariant measures for expanding circle maps.������������, 11(1):27–46, jan 1998

    1998

  25. [34]

    La Th´ eorie G´ en´ erale de la Mesure dans son appli- cation ` a l’´ etude des Syst´ emes Dynamiques de la M´ ecanique Non Lin´ eaire.������ �� ������ ������, 38(1):65–113, 1937

    Nicolas Kryloff and Nicolas Bogoliouboff. La Th´ eorie G´ en´ erale de la Mesure dans son appli- cation ` a l’´ etude des Syst´ emes Dynamiques de la M´ ecanique Non Lin´ eaire.������ �� ������ ������, 38(1):65–113, 1937. Accessed: 2025-12-20. RIGOROUS ENCLOSURE OF LYAPUNOV EX...

    1937

  26. [35]

    Generating verified llvm from isabelle/hol

    Peter Lammich. Generating verified llvm from isabelle/hol. In���� ������������� ���������� �� ����������� ������� ������� ���� �����, volume 141 of������� ������������� ����������� �� ����������� ��������, pages 22:1–22:19. Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum f¨ ur Informatik, 2019

    2019

  27. [36]

    Liverani

    C. Liverani. Rigorous numerical investigation of the statistical properties of piecewise ex- panding maps. A feasibility study.������������, 14(3):463–490, mar 2001

    2001

  28. [37]

    Liverani et al

    C. Liverani et al. Invariant measures and their properties. A functional analytic point of view. ��������� �������� ���� ��, pages 185–237, 2004

    2004

  29. [38]

    Marangio, J

    L. Marangio, J. Sedro, S. Galatolo, A. Di Garbo, and M. Ghil. Arnold maps with noise: Differentiability and non-monotonicity of the rotation number.������� �� ����������� �������, 2019

    2019

  30. [39]

    Matsumoto and I

    K. Matsumoto and I. Tsuda. Noise-induced order.������� �� ����������� �������, 31:87–106, 1983

    1983

  31. [40]

    I. Nisoli. How does noise induce order?������� �� ����������� �������, 190(1):22, Nov 2022

    2022

  32. [41]

    Pollicott and O

    M. Pollicott and O. Jenkinson. Computing invariant densities and metric entropy.������ ��������� �� ������������ �������, 211(3):687–703, May 2000

    2000

  33. [42]

    Rojas and M

    C. Rojas and M. Yampolsky. Ulam meets Turing: constructing quadratic maps with non- computable SRB measures.����� �������� ����������������, 2024

    2024

  34. [43]

    Rudin.���� ��� ������� ��������

    W. Rudin.���� ��� ������� ��������. McGraw-Hill International Editions, third edition, 1987

    1987

  35. [44]

    Y. Sato. Noise-induced phenomena in one-dimensional maps. Technical Report 1688, RIMS, 2009

    2009

  36. [45]

    E. M. Stein and R. Shakarchi.������� ��������. Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1st ed. edition, 2003. Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources

    2003

  37. [46]

    Random complex dynamics and semigroups of holomorphic maps.����� ����� ����� ���� ���, 102(1):50–112, 2011

    Hiroki Sumi. Random complex dynamics and semigroups of holomorphic maps.����� ����� ����� ���� ���, 102(1):50–112, 2011

    2011

  38. [47]

    S. M. Ulam.� ���������� �� ������������ ��������. Interscience Tracts in Pure and Applied Mathematics, no. 8. Interscience Publishers, New York-London, 1960

    1960

  39. [48]

    Viana.�������� �� �������� ���������, volume 145

    M. Viana.�������� �� �������� ���������, volume 145. Cambridge University Press, 2014

    2014

  40. [49]

    C.L. Wormell. Spectral Galerkin methods for transfer operators in uniformly expanding dy- namics.���������� ����������, 14:421–463, 2019

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.