Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Hyperpfaffian Correlations for Beta-Ensembles: Beta an Even Square Integer

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For beta equal to an even square, the correlation functions of beta-ensembles are hyperpfaffians of L-vectors built from Wronskian integrals, generalizing the beta=4 Pfaffian point process.

desk verdict The genuinely new correlation-function theorem (4.1) and the circular specialization look salvageable, but the monomial Wronskian lemma is misstated and several advertised hyperpfaffian evaluations fail as printed. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.05487 v2 pith:AKGILLV2 submitted 2025-09-05 math-ph math.COmath.MPmath.PR

Christopher D. Sinclair , Jonathan M. Wells This is my paper · ORCID
classification math-phmath.COmath.MPmath.PR MSC 15B5260B2060G5582B2315A15
keywords randommatricesbetaensemblesexterioralgebracorrelationfunctionspfaffianshyperpfaffianshyperpfaffianevaluationsWronskians
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

The paper studies beta-ensembles, random point processes whose joint density is proportional to the product of pairwise distances raised to a power beta times a weight, and asks for their m-th correlation functions, the marginal densities that control gaps, clustering, and spacing statistics. It claims that whenever beta = L^2 with L an even positive integer, the m-th correlation function has an exact hyperpfaffian form: a Vandermonde product in the observed points y times weights times the hyperpfaffian of an L-vector gamma_y. The coefficients of gamma_y are integrals of Wronskians of shifted monic polynomials against the ensemble weight, so the whole correlation function is reduced to one hyperpfaffian evaluation. If correct, this gives beta=4 its classical Pfaffian process as the L=2 case and opens beta=16,36,... to the same exact treatment, with the circular ensembles worked out in concrete polynomial form.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the hyperpfaffian of an L-vector: for omega in Lambda^L V, PF(omega) = *(omega^{wedge M}/M!), read off from the coefficient of the volume form after wedging the L-vector with itself M times. The paper builds omega(x) = p(x) wedge D^1 p(x) wedge ... wedge D^{L-1} p(x) from a complete family of monic polynomials; its Grassmann coordinates are Wronskians Wr(p_t;x). The key identity is the confluent Vandermonde formula, *omega(x_1) wedge ... wedge omega(x_M) = prod_{m<n}(x_n-x_m)^{L^2}, which turns the beta power into a wedge of L-vectors. The Gram L-vector gamma = int_W u(x) omega(x) dmu(x) carries the partition function, and the correlation hyperpfaffian gamma_y is the same ob

What would settle it

Compute the determinant of U for the smallest nontrivial cases (L=2,m=2 or L=4,m=1) with a computer-algebra system; if it is not prod_{j<k}(y_k-y_j)^beta, Theorem 4.1's Vandermonde factor is wrong. Independently, evaluate Wr(m_t;x) from Lemma 3.1 for a small index set such as t={0,1,2} to check the printed exponent before trusting the circular coefficient formulas.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is Theorem 4.1: for beta=L^2 with L even, the m-th correlation function of the ensemble is R_m(y) = (1/Z) prod_{j<k}(y_k-y_j)^beta prod_n u(y_n) PF(gamma_y), where gamma_y is the L-vector over an (L(M-m))-dimensional space whose coefficient for each index set u is integral_W [prod_{j=1}^m (x-y_j)^beta] Wr(p_u;x) u(x) dmu(x). Here Wr(p_u;x) is the renormalized Wronskian of the L monic polynomials selected by u, and PF is the hyperpfaffian, the natural L-vector extension of the Pfaffian. The partition function itself is Z = PF(gamma) for the Gram L-vector gamma = int tilde omega dmu. The theorem is proved by inserting the averaged characteristic polynomial identity an

Load-bearing premise

The proof depends on an unproved 'easy calculation': that the auxiliary complete family q_y makes the block matrix U triangular with determinant exactly prod_{j<k}(y_k-y_j)^beta; that determinant is the only source of the Vandermonde factor in Theorem 4.1, so if it is wrong every correlation formula built on it shifts. The circular branch additionally relies on the monomial Wronskian formula of Lemma 3.1, whose printed exponent should be re-verified before the circular coeffi

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every beta=L^2 even ensemble gains an exact hyperpfaffian formula for all correlation functions, with beta=4 as the Pfaffian special case and beta=16,36,... accessible by the same calculation.
  • The circular ensembles have an explicit, sparse gamma_y: coefficients vanish except when the sum of selected degrees matches a central value, and the surviving coefficients are Laurent-polynomial coefficients, making R_2(theta) a polynomial in cos(theta).
  • The framework yields hyperpfaffian evaluations from known partition functions such as Selberg, Mehta, and Dyson integrals, giving independent checks and new identities for exterior-algebra computations.
  • Finding monic families 'sympathetic' to the weight makes gamma_y sparse, a direct generalization of skew-orthogonal polynomials; such families are the route to closed-form kernels.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The determinant identity for the auxiliary family q_y is asserted as an easy calculation but not proved; a symbolic check for small L and m would settle whether the Vandermonde factor in Theorem 4.1 is exactly as stated.
  • If a diagonalizing family exists for classical weights, the construction would produce an L-vector kernel analogous to the beta=4 matrix kernel, opening a generalized Pfaffian point-process analysis; the paper does not construct such families.
  • The same Laurent-coefficient mechanism used for beta=16 should extend to beta=36,64,... and larger M, though the multinomial enumeration in E grows quickly and would need efficient recursive or parallel computation.
  • The printed monomial Wronskian formula, Lemma 3.1, should be re-verified before relying on the circular coefficient expressions numerically; any exponent error there would propagate into Theorem 4.2 and Corollary 4.3.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper presents a hyperpfaffian formulation for correlation functions of beta-ensembles when beta = L^2 with L even. The main result, Theorem 4.1, expresses the m-th correlation function as a Vandermonde determinant in the external points times the hyperpfaffian of an L-vector gamma_y whose coefficients are integrals of Wronskians multiplied by prod_j (x-y_j)^beta. The circular case is developed using monomials, yielding explicit formulas for gamma_y and pair-correlation polynomials for beta=16 and small M. The paper also records hyperpfaffian evaluations based on Selberg, Mehta, and Dyson-Gunson integrals. The proof structure of Theorem 4.1 is coherent, but Lemma 3.1 is false as stated, and the monomial-based hyperpfaffian evaluations in Section 4.2 are consequently incorrect as printed.

Significance. If corrected, the framework would give exact correlation formulas for beta=L^2 even ensembles, generalizing the beta=4 Pfaffian point-process structure. The formulas involve no free parameters, and the circular pair-correlation polynomials are concrete, checkable outputs. The main determinant step in Section 5.1 is sound. However, the advertised hyperpfaffian evaluations in Section 4.2 are currently unreliable because of the Wronskian exponent error. The central theorem and the circular formulas appear to survive, but the secondary results must be corrected before the paper can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.5, Lemma 3.1] Lemma 3.1 is false as stated. With D^ell = (1/ell!) d^ell/dx^ell, the matrix [D^ell x^{t_k}] has determinant eDelta_t x^{Sigma_t - L(L-1)/2}, not eDelta_t x^{Sigma_t}. This follows from factoring x^{t_k - ell} and using Vandermonde determinants. The missing shift propagates into every monomial-based computation that uses the lemma without an additional factor.
  2. [Section 4.2, Proposition 4.4] Proposition 4.4 is incorrect as printed. For L=2, M=2, a=b=1, the stated hyperpfaffian equals 1/240, whereas the Selberg partition function is 1/30. Replacing B(a+Sigma_t,b) by B(a+Sigma_t - L(L-1)/2,b) gives exactly 1/30 in this example. The proposition must be restated with the shifted Beta argument.
  3. [Section 4.2, Proposition 4.5] Proposition 4.5 is incorrect as printed. For L=2, M=2, the printed sum has hyperpfaffian 64, while the stated right-hand side is 6. There are two issues: the missing Wronskian shift from Lemma 3.1, and the claim that (2j)!! is the (2j)-th moment of a standard normal random variable. The even double factorial (2j)!! = 2^j j! is not the moment; the correct moment is (2j-1)!!. Both corrections are needed for the proposition to hold.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 5.1] The determinant evaluation det(U) = prod_{j<k}(y_k-y_j)^beta is asserted as 'an easy calculation.' Since this determinant is the sole source of the Vandermonde factor in Theorem 4.1, a short proof (e.g., block upper triangular with diagonal blocks S_j(y_j) I_L) should be included.
  2. [Section 4.1] The displayed formula for int_T Wr(m_t) u dmu is correct only because u includes the circular factor c^{(M-1)beta/2}; the Wronskian shift from the corrected Lemma 3.1 is absorbed by this factor. The text should say this explicitly to avoid confusion.
  3. [Section 4.2, Proposition 4.7] There is a typo in the summation condition: 'Sigma_t = Sigma_t' should be 'delta_t = 0' or equivalently 'Sigma_t = L(N-1)/2'.
  4. [Section 4.2, Proposition 4.5] The double-factorial notation should be defined consistently with standard normal moments, or the moments should be written as (2j-1)!!.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: hyperpfaffian correlation formulas follow from direct exterior-algebra/Wronskian computation; prior hyperpfaffian partition function is independently benchmarked.

full rationale

The paper contains no fitted parameters and no prediction that reduces to its inputs by construction. Theorem 4.1 is obtained from the exterior-algebra expression R_m(y)=* 1/Z (eω(y1)^...^eω(ym)^γ^{∧(M-m)}/(M-m)!) by choosing an auxiliary complete family q_y designed so that the associated confluent Vandermonde determinant equals ∏_{j<k}(y_k-y_j)^β. This determinant is a direct calculation (Section 5.1), not a definition of the Vandermonde factor; the formula is not circular. The partition-function hyperpfaffian Z=PF(γ) is imported from the authors' earlier published work (Sinclair 2012, Wells 2019), but this is an independent prior theorem, and the paper checks it against the Selberg, Mehta, and Dyson-Gunson evaluations in Section 4.2, so the citation is externally falsifiable rather than load-bearing self-citation. The circular-ensemble formulas and the β=16 pair-correlation polynomials in the appendix are exact algebraic consequences of the stated Wronskian and integration identities, with no data fitting. The reviewer's concern about Lemma 3.1 (the monomial Wronskian exponent) is a mathematical correctness issue about a stated lemma, not a circularity of the derivation chain; it does not raise the circularity score. No self-definitional step, fitted-input-called-prediction step, or uniqueness-imported-by-citation step is present.

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

No free parameters are fitted; the only choices are the polynomial family p and normalization, and the main theorem is independent of p. The paper relies on standard exterior-algebra identities, classical integral evaluations, and its own Lemma 3.1; the last is stated as a lemma but is false as written.

assumptions (4)
  • standard math Fubini's theorem for multivector-valued integrals is valid for interchanging wedge products, stars, and integration over W (cited to Chen, Luque-Thibon, and Wells).
    Used in Section 4 to define the Gram L-vector gamma and to derive Eq. 4.1, moving the integral inside the wedge product.
  • standard math Selberg, Mehta, and Dyson-Gunson integral evaluations give the partition functions of Jacobi, Gaussian, and circular beta-ensembles.
    Used in Propositions 4.4 through 4.7 to turn known partition function values into hyperpfaffian evaluations.
  • domain assumption The ambient space W is R or the unit circle T, so a function c(x) exists with |x-y|^2 = c(x)c(y)(x-y)^2; c=1 for R and c=i/x for T.
    Section 2.2 uses this factorization to rewrite the absolute Vandermonde as an algebraic Vandermonde times a weight u(x). The entire beta=L^2 hyperpfaffian scheme depends on this restriction.
  • ad hoc to paper Wr(m_t(x)) = eDelta_t x^{Sigma_t} (Lemma 3.1).
    Used for the circular Gram vector and for hyperpfaffian evaluations in Propositions 4.4, 4.5, and 4.9. As printed this is false; the determinant carries an extra factor x^{-L(L-1)/2}, so every statement depending on the printed lemma needs correction.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Hyperpfaffian Correlations for Beta-Ensembles: Beta an Even Square Integer." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AKGILLV2

@misc{pith2026250905487,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Hyperpfaffian Correlations for Beta-Ensembles: Beta an Even Square Integer},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AKGILLV2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.05487}
}
abstract

We give a hyperpfaffian formulation for correlation functions in $\beta$-ensembles arising in random matrix theory and statistical mechanics when $\beta = L^2$ is an even square integer. More specifically, for ensembles of $M$ points in a space $W \subset \mathbb C$ (typically $W=\mathbb R$ or $W=\mathbb T$), arising either as eigenvalues of a random matrix or as a system of charged particles with log interaction, to the $m$th correlation function $R_m : W^m \rightarrow [0, \infty)$ we associate the $L$-vector valued function $\gamma_m : W^m \rightarrow \Lambda^L \mathbb C^{L(M-m)}$ such that $R_m(\mathbf y)$ is given by the Vandermonde determinant in $y_1, \ldots, y_m$ times the hyperpfaffian of $\gamma_m(\mathbf y).$ The partition function of the ensemble was previously shown to be the hyperpfaffian of a {\it Gram} $L$-form $\gamma$ in $\Lambda^L \mathbb C^{LM},$ and we demonstrate the relationship between $\gamma_m(\mathbf y)$ and $\gamma$, both having coefficients built from integrals of Wronskians of monic polynomials. Assuming the existence of families of polynomials sympathetic with the weight of the ensemble, we may construct $\gamma(\mathbf y)$ so it is very sparse (relative to the expected ${L(M-m) \choose L}$ coefficients of a general $L$-vector). These generalize skew-orthogonal polynomials arising in the well-understood $\beta = 4$ situation. Finally we explore the situation in the circular $\beta = L^2$ ensembles. Here the monomials give a prototype, and we give explicit formulas for $\gamma$ and $\gamma_m$ in this setting. We use our hyperpfaffian framework to produce exact formulas for the two point function when $\beta = 16$ for small values $M.$ Along the way we will record hyperpfaffian evaluations using known values of partition functions of $\beta$-ensembles.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.05487 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. R2(θ) for β = 4 to the left and β = 16 to the right and small values of M. our previous remarks, we may interpret this as M particles on the circle with charge 2 or 4 (corresponding to β = 4 and β = 16 respectively) at inverse temperature 1/kT = 1. The joint density f(x) is invariant under simultaneous rotation of its arguments, and by extension so are the correlation functions. This allows us to reduce the number o… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. R2(θ) for β = 4, 16, 36 and M = 4. Of course the cardinality of A j  is #A j  . The set of j-tuples with coordinates in A is denoted Aj . If #A = J < ∞ and j1, . . . , jM are non-negative integers such that j1 + · · · + jM = J, then we define A j1,...,jM  to be the ordered (set) partitions of A into pairwise disjoint sets of size j1, . . . , jM. That is,  A j1, . . . , jM  :=  ⃗u = (u1, . . . , uM) : um ∈  A … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. A plot of the non-zero Fourier coefficients of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A plot of the non-zero Fourier coefficients of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: A plot of the non-zero Fourier coefficients of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png]

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. Fugacity-Resolved Stabilizer Entropy in Critical Quantum Chains: Discrete Selberg Sums and Exactly Solvable R\'enyi Indices

    quant-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    For the critical TFI chain, the degree-resolved stabilizer-entropy partition function is exactly a checkerboard-weighted discrete Selberg sum, with product formulas at α=1/2, 1, 2 and Gaussian limits after rescaling.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Adler, P

    M. Adler, P. J. Forrester, T. Nagao, and P. van Moerbeke. Classical skew orthogonal polynomials and random matrices.J. Statist. Phys., 99(1-2):141–170, 2000

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    F. A. Berezin.The method of second quantization. Translated from the Russian by Nobumichi Mugibayashi and Alan Jeffrey. Pure and Applied Physics, Vol. 24. Academic Press, New York, 1966

    work page 1966

  3. [3]

    Coefficients of Wronskian Hermite polynomials

    Niels Bonneux, Clare Dunning, and Marco Stevens. Coefficients of Wronskian Hermite polynomials. Stud. Appl. Math., 144(3):245–288, 2020

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Wronskian Appell polynomials and symmetric functions.Adv

    Niels Bonneux, Zachary Hamaker, John Stembridge, and Marco Stevens. Wronskian Appell polynomials and symmetric functions.Adv. in Appl. Math., 111:101932, 23, 2019

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Janossy densities

    Alexei Borodin and Alexander Soshnikov. Janossy densities. I. Determinantal ensembles.J. Statist. Phys., 113(3-4):595–610, 2003

    work page 2003

  6. [6]

    Iterated integrals and exponential homomorphisms.Proc

    Kuo-Tsai Chen. Iterated integrals and exponential homomorphisms.Proc. London Math. Soc. (3), 4:502–512, 1954

    work page 1954

  7. [7]

    Matrix models for beta ensembles.J

    Ioana Dumitriu and Alan Edelman. Matrix models for beta ensembles.J. Math. Phys., 43(11):5830– 5847, 2002

    work page 2002

  8. [8]

    Freeman J. Dyson. Statistical theory of the energy levels of complex systems. I.J. Mathematical Phys., 3:140–156, 1962

    work page 1962

Show all 34 references
  1. [9]

    Freeman J. Dyson. Statistical theory of the energy levels of complex systems. II.J. Mathematical Phys., 3:157–165, 1962

    1962

  2. [10]

    Freeman J. Dyson. Statistical theory of the energy levels of complex systems. III.J. Mathematical Phys., 3:166–175, 1962

    1962

  3. [11]

    Freeman J. Dyson. The threefold way. Algebraic structure of symmetry groups and ensembles in quan- tum mechanics.J. Mathematical Phys., 3:1199–1215, 1962. Christopher D. Sinclair and Jonathan M. Wells19

    1962

  4. [12]

    Alan Edelman and Brian D. Sutton. From random matrices to stochastic operators.J. Stat. Phys., 127(6):1121–1165, 2007

    2007

  5. [13]

    Felder, A

    G. Felder, A. D. Hemery, and A. P. Veselov. Zeros of Wronskians of Hermite polynomials and Young diagrams.Phys. D, 241(23-24):2131–2137, 2012

    2012

  6. [14]

    Forrester and S

    Peter J. Forrester and S. Ole Warnaar. The importance of the Selberg integral.Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.), 45(4):489–534, 2008

    2008

  7. [15]

    The expansion of Wronskian Hermite polynomials in the Hermite basis.SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom

    Codrut ¸ Grosu and Corina Grosu. The expansion of Wronskian Hermite polynomials in the Hermite basis.SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl., 17:Paper No. 003, 14, 2021

    2021

  8. [16]

    J. Gunson. Proof of a conjecture by dyson in the statistical theory of energy levels.Journal of Mathe- matical Physics, 3(4):752–753, 1962

    1962

  9. [17]

    Minor summation formula of hyperpfaffians and selberg integrals, 2022.https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.09776

    Masao Ishikawa and Jiang Zeng. Minor summation formula of hyperpfaffians and selberg integrals, 2022.https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.09776

    2022 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Density matrix of an impenetrable Bose gas and the fifth Painlev´ e transcendent.Phys

    Michio Jimbo, Tetsuji Miwa, Yasuko Mˆ ori, and Mikio Sato. Density matrix of an impenetrable Bose gas and the fifth Painlev´ e transcendent.Phys. D, 1(1):80–158, 1980

    1980

  11. [19]

    Karlin and G

    S. Karlin and G. Szeg¨ o. On certain determinants whose elements are orthogonal polynomials.J. Analyse Math., 8:1–157, 1960/61

    1960

  12. [20]

    Pfaffian and Hafnian identities in shuffle algebras.Adv

    Jean-Gabriel Luque and Jean-Yves Thibon. Pfaffian and Hafnian identities in shuffle algebras.Adv. in Appl. Math., 29(4):620–646, 2002

    2002

  13. [21]

    Hankel hyperdeterminants and Selberg integrals.J

    Jean-Gabriel Luque and Jean-Yves Thibon. Hankel hyperdeterminants and Selberg integrals.J. Phys. A, 36(19):5267–5292, 2003

    2003

  14. [22]

    Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, third edition, 2004

    Madan Lal Mehta.Random matrices, volume 142 ofPure and Applied Mathematics (Amsterdam). Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, third edition, 2004

    2004

  15. [23]

    Ram ´ ırez, Brian Rider, and B´ alint Vir´ ag

    Jos´ e A. Ram ´ ırez, Brian Rider, and B´ alint Vir´ ag. Beta ensembles, stochastic Airy spectrum, and a diffusion.J. Amer. Math. Soc., 24(4):919–944, 2011

    2011

  16. [24]

    Ensemble averages whenβis a square integer.Monatshefte f¨ ur Mathematik, 166:121–144, 2012

    Christopher Sinclair. Ensemble averages whenβis a square integer.Monatshefte f¨ ur Mathematik, 166:121–144, 2012. 10.1007/s00605-011-0371-8

    2012 doi

  17. [25]

    The partition function of multicomponent log-gases.Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 45(16):165002, 2012

    Christopher D Sinclair. The partition function of multicomponent log-gases.Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 45(16):165002, 2012

    2012

  18. [26]

    Soshnikov

    A. Soshnikov. Determinantal random point fields.Uspekhi Mat. Nauk, 55(5(335)):107–160, 2000

    2000

  19. [27]

    Janossy densities

    Alexander Soshnikov. Janossy densities. II. Pfaffian ensembles.J. Statist. Phys., 113(3-4):611–622, 2003

    2003

  20. [28]

    Tracy and Harold Widom

    Craig A. Tracy and Harold Widom. On orthogonal and symplectic matrix ensembles.Comm. Math. Phys., 177(3):727–754, 1996

    1996

  21. [29]

    Tracy and Harold Widom

    Craig A. Tracy and Harold Widom. Correlation functions, cluster functions, and spacing distributions for random matrices.J. Statist. Phys., 92(5-6):809–835, 1998

    1998

  22. [30]

    Tracy and Harold Widom

    Craig A. Tracy and Harold Widom. The distribution of the largest eigenvalue in the Gaussian ensembles: β= 1,2,4. InCalogero-Moser-Sutherland models (Montr´ eal, QC, 1997), CRM Ser. Math. Phys., pages 461–472. Springer, New York, 2000

    1997

  23. [31]

    H. W. Turnbull.The theory of determinants, matrices, and invariants. Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1960. 3rd ed

    1960

  24. [32]

    Wells.On the Solvability of Beta-ensembles when Beta Is a Square Integer

    Jonathan M. Wells.On the Solvability of Beta-ensembles when Beta Is a Square Integer. ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2019. Thesis (Ph.D.)–University of Oregon. 20Hyperpfaffian Correlations for Beta-Ensembles: Beta an Even Square Integer

    2019

  25. [33]

    On the relation between orthogonal, symplectic and unitary matrix ensembles.J

    Harold Widom. On the relation between orthogonal, symplectic and unitary matrix ensembles.J. Statist. Phys., 94(3-4):347–363, 1999

    1999

  26. [34]

    Wolff and Jonathan M

    Elisha D. Wolff and Jonathan M. Wells. The partition function of log-gases with multiple odd charges. Random Matrices Theory Appl., 11(4):Paper No. 2250041, 38, 2022. Christopher D. Sinclair Department of Mathematics, University of Oregon, Eugene OR 97403 email:csinclai@uorego...

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.