Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 57 references

Yaglom theorem for critical branching random walk on $\mathbb{Z}^d$

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that, for critical branching random walks started far from a finite set K and conditioned to hit K, occupation time scales as ||x||^{4-d} in d≤3, log||x|| in d=4, and stays bounded in d≥5; in d=4 the normalized pair converg

desk verdict The d=4 Yaglom theorem is real and worth taking seriously, but the proof has two deferred estimates—one of them load-bearing—so send it to referees and make the authors write out (A.9). read the letter →

arxiv 2512.24047 v2 pith:XQ3LJSJ3 submitted 2025-12-30 math.PR

Xinxin Chen , Shen Lin This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.PR MSC 60G5560J80
keywords criticalbranchingrandomwalkoccupationtimeexponentiallimitlawcapacityspinaldecompositionBrowniansnakeintegratedsuper-Brownianexcursion
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 answers an old question: if a critical branching random walk starts at a distant point x and is conditioned on the event that it ever visits a fixed finite set K, how many visits to K does it make? It finds that the answer depends sharply on dimension: in d≤3 the occupation time grows like a power of distance (||x||^{4-d}), in d=4 it grows like log||x||, and in d≥5 it remains bounded. In d=4 the normalized occupation time and the number of first-hitting pioneers converge jointly to a single exponential random variable, echoing the classical exponential limit law of critical branching processes. In low dimensions the limit is expressed through the continuous local time density of the Brownian snake, and in high dimensions through an explicit spinal-decomposition limit involving branching capacity.

What carries the argument

The central identity in d=4 is the decomposition at the most recent common ancestor of the pioneers: Z_T(K)=∑_{u∈N_x(K)} Z_{T_u}(K). Under the conditioning, #N_x(K)→2 in probability and log J(H_x)/log J(x) converges in distribution to a Uniform(0,1) variable, so any subsequential limit Y must satisfy Y = U(Y_1+Y_2) with independent copies Y_1,Y_2 and independent U; the unique solution is the exponential law. The proof controls convergence in L²-Wasserstein distance. For d≥5 the spinal decomposition produces an explicit limit in terms of sums built from the spine's random walk and side branches; for d≤3 the bridge is the convergence of the rescaled branching random walk to the Brownian snake

What would settle it

Simulate the d=4 critical branching random walk with symmetric finite-support jumps (e.g., simple random walk and binary offspring), start at x with large ||x||, condition on Z_T(K)≥1, and test whether Z_T(K)/(2σ²c_4 log||x||) converges in distribution to Exp(1); if the normalization is not logarithmic or the limit is not exponential, the theorem collapses.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In dimension 4, under symmetric finite-support jumps, conditionally on Z_T(K)≥1, the pair ((L_K/Cap(K))/(2σ²c_4 log J(x)), (Z_T(K)/|K|)/(2σ²c_4 log J(x))) converges in law to (Y,Y), where Y is an exponential random variable with parameter 1; all single-site occupation times Z_T(y), y∈K, share the same limiting exponential factor. In dimensions d≤3, Z_T(K)/(|K|J(x)^{4-d}) converges to a positive random variable proportional to ℓ_+, the positive local-time density of the Brownian snake in a fixed direction. In dimensions d≥5, (L_K, Z_T(K)) converges to a non-degenerate random vector whose law is given explicitly through the spinal decomposition and the branching capacity of K.

Load-bearing premise

The d=4 result rests on the jump law being symmetric and finitely supported; without that, the sharp logarithmic asymptotics and the exponential limit are not proved.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In d=4, conditionally on K being hit, all sites y∈K have occupation times Z_T(y) that are asymptotically identical after normalization: the vector converges to (1,...,1) times the same exponential Y.
  • In d=4 the ratio Z_T(K)/L_K converges in probability to |K|/Cap(K), so the number of visits per first-hitting pioneer is asymptotically deterministic.
  • In d≤3, occupation time grows as ||x||^{4-d} with random limit proportional to the ISE local time ℓ_+, so the spatial profile of the branching walk shows up in the occupation of a finite set.
  • In d≥5, occupation time and number of pioneers remain of order 1 and converge to a law that depends on d, K, the offspring law and the jump law through the branching capacity.
  • The moment asymptotics in d=4 — E[L_K^j | hit] ~ (2c_4σ²Cap(K)logJ(x))^j j! — confirm the exponential law and provide a benchmark for simulation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The uniform-occupation result in d=4 suggests the entire trace on K is driven by one random scale; a testable prediction is that the joint empirical distribution of all sites in K becomes perfectly correlated in the limit.
  • The authors note the d=4 theorem should hold for more general jump laws; a concrete extension would be to prove the same exponential limit for symmetric jumps with infinite support, where the normalization may need a modified logarithmic term.
  • The low-dimensional limit ℓ_+ could be connected to large-deviation probabilities for occupation time; one might derive tail exponents from the Brownian-snake excursion measure and compare them with the known polynomial tail for a fixed origin.
  • The L²-Wasserstein argument based on the distributional equation Y=U(Y_1+Y_2) may apply to other branching processes with a most-recent-common-ancestor decomposition, such as branching random walks on transient graphs with positive capacity.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies critical branching random walk on Z^d, started from a distant point x and conditioned to hit a finite set K, and proves asymptotic laws for the occupation time Z_T(K) and the number L_K of pioneer particles that first hit K. In dimension d=4 (Theorem 1.1) it establishes the joint convergence of (L_K/Cap(K), Z_T(K)/|K|), normalized by (2σ^2 c_4 log J(x))^{-1}, to (1,1)Y where Y is exponential with parameter 1. In dimensions d≥5 (Theorem 1.3) it shows that (L_K, Z_T(K)) converges under the conditioning to a non-degenerate law depending on d and K. In dimensions d≤3 (Theorem 1.4) it proves that Z_T(K)/(|K| J(x)^{4-d}) converges to a scaled Brownian-snake local time variable ℓ_+. The proof uses spinal decomposition for d≥5, a reduced-tree/Wasserstein argument for d=4, and Brownian-snake invariance principles for d≤3. The paper thereby answers the question of Le Gall and Merle concerning the typical number of visits to a distant set.

Significance. If the results are correct, this is a substantial contribution: it gives the first complete answer, in all dimensions, to the occupation-time question raised by Le Gall and Merle, and it provides the expected dimensional phase transition: polynomial order for d≤3, logarithmic order for d=4, and bounded order for d≥5. The d=4 exponential Yaglom limit is an elegant and non-obvious discrete analogue of the continuous super-Brownian result. The paper is also careful to state explicit constants in terms of the model parameters and to separate the regimes with different techniques. A notable strength is that the d≥5 proof is carried out through a spine decomposition that yields explicit limiting functionals, and the low-dimensional proof transfers to the Brownian snake using known invariance principles. However, the d=4 argument depends on a concentration estimate that is asserted rather than proved, and the moment recursion for occupation times is only partially written out. These gaps are local and appear fixable, but they are load-bearing for Theorem 1.1.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix B, Eq. (A.9)] The estimate (A.9) is stated with the sentence 'using similar arguments as above, one can also prove', but no proof is supplied. This is not a routine variant: the sum runs from τ_r to τ_γ−1 rather than from 0 or τ_{r0}, and the claimed constant 4 log(1/a) is obtained from a nontrivial cancellation between the Green function and the 1/J^2 normalisation. The estimate is used in the proof of Lemma 4.4 to obtain (4.20), where the exponential is replaced by a^{1+o_x(1)}. That factor a is exactly what produces the uniform limiting law of log J(H_x)/log J(x) in Proposition 4.3(4.13), which in turn drives N_x(K)→2 in probability and the Wasserstein recursion proving Theorem 1.1. If the constant in (A.9) were not exactly 4 log(1/a), or if the error were not uniform in the required sense, the d=4 Yaglom theorem would not follow. I therefore consider the missing proof of (A.9) a load-bearing gap t
  2. [Appendix B, proof of Proposition 4.1; Lemma 4.2] The moment recursion is written in detail for ℓ_{n+1}(x,K), but the corresponding recursion for m_{n+1}(x,K) is dismissed with 'can be dealt with similarly', and in Lemma 4.2 the proofs of (4.8) and (4.9) are also left to the reader. These estimates are not cosmetic: (4.9) gives the L^2 bound (4.10) used for uniformity over K, and (4.12) is used in the Wasserstein argument via (4.31). Since the second-moment and cross-moment estimates are needed for the proof of Theorem 1.1, the details for m_j, at least for j=2, should be provided or the reduction to the ℓ_j recursion should be made explicit.
  3. [Section 5, Eqs. (5.1) and (5.10)] Theorem 1.4 relies on two inputs that are asserted rather than proved: the adaptation of [35, Theorem 7] to an arbitrary finite set K, stated as (5.1), and the tightness-type estimate (5.10) said to be 'deduced from the proof of Lemma 3 in [35]'. If these are straightforward extensions of published arguments, a precise reference or a short derivation should be included. As written, the passage from the single-point hitting-probability result and from the known snake convergence to the finite-set statement is not fully transparent.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2, tree notation] In the definition of a tree, 'there exists some integer Nu(t) ∈N∈ {0, 1, 2, . . .}' appears to be a typo; it should read N_u(t) ∈ {0,1,2,\ldots}.
  2. [Theorem 1.4 display] The displayed limiting constant in Theorem 1.4 is typeset in a way that is hard to parse; please check that the exponent of √det Γ and the factor (4−d)/2 are unambiguous.
  3. [Remark after Theorem 1.1] The statement that the same result 'is expected to hold for more general jump laws' is clearly a conjecture, not a theorem. This is fine, but the paper should not imply that the proof covers it.
  4. [Reference [6]] The DOI string for reference [6] appears to contain a stray '2023'; please correct the reference.
  5. [Section 4.2.3, Eq. (4.43)] The coupling in (4.43) uses U_x^> and U_x^*; the notation is understandable but the definition of U_x^> appears only in the proof. Please define it explicitly when first used.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper's inputs are established hitting-probability asymptotics, Green-function estimates, and snake invariance principles, none of which contain the target conditional occupation-time law.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The target objects are the conditional laws of (L_K, Z_T(K)) under P_x(·|Z_T(K)≥1) and their Yaglom-type limits, and I could not find any equation in which an input is defined in terms of the output or in which a fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. In d≥5, the proof re-derives the relevant asymptotics from the spinal decomposition, many-to-one lemma and ordinary random-walk Green estimates; the cited Zhu hitting-probability result is recovered as a by-product (Remark 3), not assumed as the basis of the conditional law. In d=4, Zhu's asymptotic u_K(x) ~ 1/(2σ²J(x)²log J(x)) is used for the hitting probability, but this is an input about the rare event Z_T(K)≥1, not the target exponential limit for the normalized occupation time; the exponential law is obtained from moment asymptotics, Proposition 4.3 on the common ancestor, and an L²-Wasserstein recursion, with all constants fixed model parameters. The self-citations to Le Gall–Lin [35,36] refer to prior published theorems on the range, local times and snake invariance of tree-indexed random walk, not to the present conditional occupation-time result, and the d≤3 proof actually derives the conditional limit by conditioning on total progeny, using the external #T-tail and the ISE local-time convergence, rather than presupposing the desired law. The unproved concentration estimate (A.9) is a genuine proof gap and a correctness risk, but it is not circular: nothing in its statement or in the surrounding 'similar arguments' shows that the target exponential law was assumed as an input. No parameter fitting occurs anywhere, and the final limits depend explicitly on fixed model data (σ², c_d, Cap(K), |K|, the offspring law and the jump law).

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims depend on four families of external inputs: (i) standard branching/random-walk martingale machinery (spinal decomposition, many-to-one), (ii) published hitting-probability asymptotics from Zhu and Le Gall–Lin, (iii) the Brownian snake scaling limit for d≤3, and (iv) classical exponential characterization. None of these inputs contain the target occupation-time conditional law, so the paper's contribution is not circular. There are no fitted parameters, and no new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced; L_K and A_x(K) are descriptive bookkeeping objects.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Spinal decomposition: dQ^x/dP^x = Z_n defines a measure under which the spine's spatial motion is a random walk with i.i.d. jumps μ, with size-biased offspring on the spine.
    Constructed and stated as Proposition 2.1 (Section 2.1); used throughout the paper.
  • standard math Many-to-one lemma (Lemma 2.2).
    Reduces sums over particles to expectations for one random walk; proved from the spinal decomposition.
  • domain assumption Known hitting-probability asymptotics for CBRW: (1.4) for d≥5 (Zhu [53]), (4.1) for d=4 (Zhu [57]), (5.1) for d≤3 (Le Gall–Lin [35]).
    These external theorems provide the normalizing factors u_K(x) in the conditional limits; they are not rederived in this paper.
  • domain assumption Brownian snake / ISE invariance principle for CBRW (Theorem 4 of Le Gall–Lin [35]), including the existence and continuity of the local time density ℓ under the excursion measure (Proposition 1 of [35]).
    Basis of the d≤3 proof (Section 5), transferring the conditioned discrete process to the continuous snake.
  • standard math Strong invariance principle of Zaitsev [52] for sums of i.i.d. vectors with finite exponential moments.
    Used in Lemma A.1 and Lemma 4.4 for the d=4 proof; valid because μ is finitely supported in that setting.
  • standard math Kotz–Steutel characterization: the unique non-negative solution of Y = U(Y1+Y2) with U uniform on (0,1) is exponential.
    Identifies the exponential limit in Theorem 1.1.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Yaglom theorem for critical branching random walk on $\mathbb{Z}^d$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XQ3LJSJ3

@misc{pith2026251224047,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Yaglom theorem for critical branching random walk on $\mathbbZ^d$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XQ3LJSJ3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2512.24047}
}
abstract

We study the critical branching random walk on $\mathbb{Z}^d$ started from a distant point $x$ and conditioned to hit some compact set $K$ in $\mathbb{Z}^d$. We are interested in the occupation time in $K$ and present its asymptotic behaviors in different dimensions. It is shown in this work that the occupation time is of order $\|x\|^{4-d}$ in dimensions $d\leq 3$, of order $\log\|x\|$ in dimension $d=4$, and of order 1 in dimensions $d\geq 5$. The corresponding weak convergences are also established. These results answer a question raised by Le Gall and Merle (Elect. Comm. in Probab. 11 (2006), 252-265).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.24047 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The most recent common ancestor Ax(K) and its spatial location Hx. ZT(K) log J (x) and Y goes to zero where Y has exponential distribution with a suitable parameter. This concludes our Yaglom-type theorem 1.1. We emphasize that in order to use the L2-Wasserstein distance, we need a finite second moment of ZT(K). This is indeed the case under our assumption (1.1). In the next subsection, we first compute the moments … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The left most path entering K. To prove Proposition 4.3, we will treat J (Hx) and Nx(K) separately. First observe that if u = u ∗ K is the first individual hitting K in the lexicographic order, then Ax(K) lies on the ancestral line {u0, u1, · · · , u|u|} of u. So by change of measure and Proposition 2.1, similarly as in (4.3), we obtain Px(J (Hx) ≤ r, ZT(K) ≥ 1) = EQ∗ x " 1{TK(w)<∞} TKY (w) k=1 Y u∈L(wk) 1{ZTu (K)=… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Spine behavior in the space Z 4 . Here, we observe that EQ∗ x  1{TK(w)<∞} TKY (w) k=1 Y u∈L(wk) 1{ZTu (K)=0}; Ax(K) ≤ wσγ (w)   ≤ EQ∗ x  1{TK(w)<∞} TKY (w) k=1 Y u∈L(wk) 1{ZTu (K)=0} × 1 nPσγ (w) k=1 P u∈R(wk) ZTu (K)≥1 o   , which is ox(1)uK(x) by (4.19). Applying it and (4.18) to (4.21) yields that Px(J (Hx) ≤ r, ZT(K) ≥ 1) ≤ ox(1)uK(x) + EQ∗ x  1{TK(w)<∞} TKY (w) k=1 Y u∈L(wk) 1{ZTu (K)=0}1 Pσ r 1+δ/a … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith

  1. [35]

    Le Gall and S

    J.-F. Le Gall and S. Lin (2015). The range of tree-indexed random walk in low dimensions. Ann. Probab.,43(5): 2701–2728

    2015

  2. [1]

    Angel, T

    O. Angel, T. Hutchcroft, and A. J´ arai (2021). On the tail of the branching random walk local time.Probab. Theory Relat. Fields,180(1): 467–494

    2021

  3. [2]

    Asselah, I

    A. Asselah, I. Okada, B. Schapira, and P. Sousi (2025). Branching random walks and Minkowski sum of random walks.Probab. Theory Relat. Fields,191(1): 1289–1322

    2025

  4. [3]

    Asselah and B

    A. Asselah and B. Schapira (2024). Time spent in a ball by a critical branching random walk. J. ´Ecole Polytech. - Math.,11, 1441–1481

    2024

  5. [4]

    Asselah, B

    A. Asselah, B. Schapira, and P. Sousi (2018). Capacity of the range of random walk on Zd. Trans. Am. Math. Soc.,370(11): 7627–7645

    2018

  6. [5]

    Asselah, B

    A. Asselah, B. Schapira, and P. Sousi (2019). Capacity of the range of random walk on Z4. Ann. Probab.,47(3): 1447–1497

    2019

  7. [6]

    Asselah, B

    A. Asselah, B. Schapira, and P. Sousi (2025). Local times and capacity for tran- sient branching random walks,Probab. Theory Relat. Fields. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00440-025-01378-52023

    2025

  8. [7]

    Baran (2024)

    Z. Baran (2024). Intersections of branching random walks on Z8. Preprint available at arXiv:2410.13834

    arXiv 2024

Show all 57 references
  1. [8]

    Benjamini and N

    I. Benjamini and N. Curien (2012). Recurrence of theZd-valued infinite snake via unimodularity. Electron. Commun. Probab.,17: 1–10

    2012

  2. [9]

    T. Bai, X. Chen and Y. Peres (2025). Minkowski sum of fractal percolation and random sets. Math. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc.,179(3): 557-578

    2025

  3. [10]

    Bai, J.-F

    T. Bai, J.-F. Delmas, and Y. Hu (2024). Branching capacity and Brownian snake capacity. Preprint available atarXiv:2402.13735

    2024 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Bai, J.-F

    T. Bai, J.-F. Delmas, and Y. Hu (2025). Branching capacity of a random walk in Z5, Electron. J. Probab.,30: 1–25

    2025

  5. [12]

    Bai and Y

    T. Bai and Y. Hu (2022). Capacity of the range of branching random walks in low dimensions. Proc. Steklov Inst. Math.,316: 26–39

    2022

  6. [13]

    Bai and Y

    T. Bai and Y. Hu (2023). Convergence in law for the capacity of the range of a critical branching random walk.Ann. Appl. Probab.,33(6A): 4964–4994

    2023

  7. [14]

    Bai and Y

    T. Bai and Y. Hu (2025). Central limit theorem for the range of critical branching random walk. Preprint available atarXiv:2511.17101

    2025

  8. [15]

    Bai and Y

    T. Bai and Y. Wan (2022). Capacity of the range of tree-indexed random walk. Ann. Appl. Probab.,32(3): 1557–1589

    2022

  9. [16]

    Berestycki, T

    N. Berestycki, T. Hutchcroft, and A. Jego (2025). Thick points of 4D critical branching Brownian motion.Proc. London Math. Soc.,131: e70086. https://doi.org/10.1112/plms. 70086

    2025 doi

  10. [17]

    Bousquet-M´ elou and S

    M. Bousquet-M´ elou and S. Janson (2006). The density of the ISE and local limit laws for embedded trees.Ann. Appl. Probab.,16: 1597–1632

    2006

  11. [18]

    Cardona-Tob´ on, A

    N. Cardona-Tob´ on, A. Jaramillo, and S. Palau (2024). Rates on Yaglom’s limit for Galton– Watson processes in a varying environment.ALEA, Lat. Am. J. Probab. Math. Stat.,21, 1–23

    2024

  12. [19]

    Cardona-Tob´ on and S

    N. Cardona-Tob´ on and S. Palau (2021). Yaglom’s limit for critical Galton—Watson processes in varying environment: A probabilistic approach.Bernoulli,27(3): 1643—1665

    2021

  13. [20]

    Chang (2017)

    Y. Chang (2017). Two observations on the capacity of the range of simple random walks on Z3 andZ 4.Electron. Commun. Probab.,22: 1–9

    2017

  14. [21]

    Devroye and S

    L. Devroye and S. Janson (2011). Distances between pairs of vertices and vertical profile in conditioned Galton—Watson trees.Random Structures Algorithms,38: 381–395

    2011

  15. [22]

    Durrett (2010).Probability: Theory and Examples, volume 31 ofCamb

    R. Durrett (2010).Probability: Theory and Examples, volume 31 ofCamb. Ser. Stat. Probab. Math., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 4th edition

    2010

  16. [23]

    Dvoretzky and P

    A. Dvoretzky and P. Erd¨ os (1951). Some problems on random walk in space. InProceedings Second Berkeley Symposium on Math. Statistics and Probability, pages 353–367. University of California Press, Berkeley

    1951

  17. [24]

    Fleischman (1978)

    J. Fleischman (1978). Limiting distributions for branching random fields.Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.,239: 353–389. 58

    1978

  18. [25]

    Harris, E

    S. Harris, E. Horton, A. Kyprianou, and M. Wang (2022). Yaglom limit for critical nonlocal branching Markov processes.Ann. Probab.,50, no. 6: 2373–2408

    2022

  19. [26]

    Geiger (2000)

    J. Geiger (2000). A new proof of Yaglom’s exponential limit law. In D. Gardy and A. Mokka- dem, editors,Mathematics and computer science. Algorithms, trees, combinatorics and proba- bilities. Proceedings of the colloquium, September 18–20, 2000, pages 245–249. Birkh¨ auser Basel

    2000

  20. [27]

    Grama, R

    I. Grama, R. Lauvergnat, and ´E. Le Page (2022). Limit theorems for critical branching processes in a finite-state-space Markovian environment.Adv. in Appl. Probab.,54, no. 1: 111–140

    2022

  21. [28]

    Janson and J.-F

    S. Janson and J.-F. Marckert (2005). Convergence of discrete snakes.J. Theoret. Probab.,18: 615–647

    2005

  22. [29]

    Jain and S

    N. Jain and S. Orey (1968). On the range of random walk.Israel J. Math.,6: 373–380

    1968

  23. [30]

    Kotz and F

    S. Kotz and F. W. Steutel (1988). Note on a characterization of exponential distributions. Stat. Prob. Lett.,6: 201–203

    1988

  24. [31]

    Lalley and X

    S. Lalley and X. Zheng (2010). Spatial epidemics and local times for critical branching random walks in dimensions 2 and 3.Probab. Theory Relat. Fields,148(3-4): 527–566

    2010

  25. [32]

    Lalley and X

    S. Lalley and X. Zheng (2011). Occupation statistics of critical branching random walks in two or higher dimensions.Ann. Probab.,39(1): 327–368

    2011

  26. [33]

    Lawler and V

    G. Lawler and V. Limic (2010).Random walk: A modern introduction, volume 123 of Camb. Stud. Adv. Math.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

    2010

  27. [34]

    Le Gall (1986)

    J.-F. Le Gall (1986). Propri´ et´ es d’intersection des marches al´ eatoires I. Convergence vers le temps local d’intersection.Comm. Math. Phys.,104: 471–507

    1986

  28. [36]

    Le Gall and S

    J.-F. Le Gall and S. Lin (2016). The range of tree-indexed random walk.J. Inst. Math. Jussieu, 15(2): 271–317

    2016

  29. [37]

    Le Gall and M

    J.-F. Le Gall and M. Merle (2006). On the occupation measure of super-Brownian motion. Elect. Comm. Probab.,11: 252–265

    2006

  30. [38]

    Legrand, C

    A. Legrand, C. Sabot, and B. Schapira (2025). Recurrence and transience of the critical random walk snake in random conductances.Electron. J. Probab.,30: 1–23

    2025

  31. [39]

    Lyons, R

    R. Lyons, R. Pemantle, and Y. Peres (1995). Conceptual Proofs of LlogL criteria for mean behavior of branching processes.Ann. Probab.23: 1125-1138

    1995

  32. [40]

    Marzouk (2020)

    C. Marzouk (2020). Scaling limits of discrete snakes with stable branching.Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar´ e Probab. Stat.,56: 502–523

    2020

  33. [41]

    Maillard and J

    P. Maillard and J. Schweinsberg (2022). Yaglom-type limit theorems for branching Brownian motion with absorption.Ann. H. Lebesgue,5: 921–985

    2022

  34. [42]

    Pek¨ oz and A

    E. Pek¨ oz and A. R¨ ollin (2011). New rates for exponential approximation and the theorems of R´ enyi and Yaglom.Ann. Probab.,39(2): 587-–608

    2011

  35. [43]

    Pek¨ oz, A

    E. Pek¨ oz, A. R¨ ollin, and N. Ross (2020). Exponential and Laplace approximation for occupation statistics of branching random walk.Electron. J. Probab.,25: 1–22

    2020

  36. [44]

    Powell (2019)

    E. Powell (2019). An invariance principle for branching diffusions in bounded domains. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields173, no. 3-4: 999–1062

    2019

  37. [45]

    Y.-X. Ren, R. Song, and Z. Sun (2018). A 2-spine decomposition of the critical Galton–Watson tree and a probabilistic proof of Yaglom’s Theorem.Electron. Commun. Probab.,23, no. 42: 1–12

    2018

  38. [46]

    Revuz and M

    D. Revuz and M. Yor (2005).Continuous Martingales and Brownian motion, volume 293 of Grundlehren Math. Wiss.Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 3rd. corrected printing edition

    2005

  39. [47]

    Schapira (2024)

    B. Schapira (2024). Branching capacity of a random walk range.Bull. Soc. Math. France, 152(3): 571–603

    2024

  40. [48]

    Sugitani (1989)

    S. Sugitani (1989). Some properties for the measure-valued branching diffusion processes. J. Math. Soc. Jpn,41(3): 437–462

    1989

  41. [49]

    Villani (2003).Topics in Optimal Transportation, volume 58 ofGraduate studies in mathematics

    C. Villani (2003).Topics in Optimal Transportation, volume 58 ofGraduate studies in mathematics. American Mathematical Society

    2003

  42. [50]

    Watanabe (1968)

    S. Watanabe (1968). A limit theorem of branching processes and continuous state branching processes.J. Math. Kyoto Univ.,8: 141–167

    1968

  43. [51]

    Yaglom (1947)

    A. Yaglom (1947). Certain limit theorems of the theory of branching random processes. Doklady Akad. Nauk SSSR (N.S.),56: 795–798

    1947

  44. [52]

    Zaitsev (1998)

    A. Zaitsev (1998). Multidimensional version of the results of Koml´ os, Major and Tusn´ ady for vectors with finite exponential moments.ESAIM Probab. Stat.,2: 41–108

    1998

  45. [53]

    Zhu (2016)

    Q. Zhu (2016). On the critical branching random walk I: Branching capacity and visiting probability. Preprint available atarXiv:1611.10324

    2016 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Zhu (2016)

    Q. Zhu (2016). On the critical branching random walk II: Branching capacity and branching recurrence. Preprint available atarXiv:1612.00161. 59

    2016 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Zhu (2018)

    Q. Zhu (2018). Branching interlacements and tree-indexed random walks in tori. Preprint available atarXiv:1812.10858

    2018 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Zhu (2019)

    Q. Zhu (2019). An upper bound for the probability of visiting a distant point by a critical branching random walk inZ 4.Electron. Commun. Probab.,24: 1–6

    2019

  49. [57]

    Zhu (2021)

    Q. Zhu (2021). On the critical branching random walk III: the critical dimension.Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar´ e Probab. Stat.,57(1): 73–93. (Xinxin Chen)Beijing Normal University, School of Mathematical Sciences, China Email address:xinxin.chen@bnu.edu.cn (Shen Lin)Sorbonne Unive...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.