Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 48 references

The symmetric Dyson exclusion process is solved exactly from deterministic initial states, yielding the Euler-scale block-melting profile and its arctic curve.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 00:20 UTC pith:GKEXD57X

load-bearing objection Solid exact results for a long-range exclusion process, with the Euler-scale theorem hanging on a steepest-descent lemma that is sketched rather than proved. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.28807 v1 pith:GKEXD57X submitted 2026-07-30 cond-mat.stat-mech math-phmath.MP

Exact Results for the Symmetric Dyson Exclusion Process

Ali Zahra , Jerome Dubail , Gunter M. Schutz This is my paper
classification cond-mat.stat-mech math-phmath.MP MSC 60K3582C2282B23 PACS 05.40.-a
keywords symmetric Dyson exclusion processlong-range interacting particle systemfree-fermion representationdeterminantal processLagrange interpolationarctic curveEuler scalingCatalan numbers
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper takes on the symmetric Dyson exclusion process (SDEP), a lattice gas in which particles exclude each other and also repel through a long-range logarithmic Coulomb interaction—equivalently, symmetric random walkers conditioned never to collide. It shows that because the process is the ground-state Doob transform of the free-fermion XX chain, every equal-time observable from a deterministic initial configuration is a determinant built from a mixed kernel. That kernel is evaluated in closed form by trigonometric Lagrange interpolation, which turns the melting of a fully packed block into a finite computation. The paper then derives the exact density profile in the Euler scaling limit as arg u/pi, where u is the upper-half-plane root of an explicit cubic, and identifies the arctic curve—the boundary between frozen and liquid regions—as the locus where two roots coalesce. These results confirm a previously conjectured hydrodynamic description and bring out Catalan numbers as the leading long-time coefficients of the density moments.

Core claim

The central claim is that the block-melting problem for the SDEP admits an exact finite-time formula and a computable macroscopic limit. Starting from the block {1,...,N}, the density at time t is the finite sum (5.20) of products of modified Bessel functions times block Lagrange polynomials. Under Euler scaling x_N = floor(xi N) and t_N = tau N, this density converges uniformly on compact subsets of the liquid region to (1/pi) arg u(xi,tau), where u is the upper-half-plane root of the cubic (6.2). The boundary of the liquid region is the discriminant locus of that cubic, equation (6.4), which separates the frozen phases rho=0 and rho=1 from the liquid region 0<rho<1. Along the way, all dens

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are: (i) the ground-state (Doob) transform conjugating the SDEP generator to the XX free-fermion Hamiltonian, which converts SDEP expectations into mixed free-fermion matrix elements; (ii) the trigonometric Lagrange interpolation formula for the initial mixed kernel, which turns deterministic initial data into a closed interpolation problem; (iii) the operator identity e^{sB} X e^{-sB} = X + sD acting on the space of polynomials of degree < N, which makes the whole moment hierarchy finite-dimensional; and (iv) an exact double-contour representation whose phase has critical points exactly the roots of the cubic (6.2). The Euler-scale limit is obtained by a steepest-de

Load-bearing premise

The Euler-scale limit relies on an estimate that the two contour integrals can be deformed with uniform O(N^{-1/2}) error—sketched in the text as the usual construction, not fully proved—together with an unproved claim that the trigonometric Lagrange interpolation functions have Fourier modes only inside the filled Fermi sea.

What would settle it

Evaluate the exact double-contour representation (6.15) numerically at finite N for points (xi,tau) inside the liquid region and compare the result with arg u/pi; if the difference does not decay as N^{-1/2}, the steepest-descent lemma fails. Alternatively, simulate the SDEP block melting at Euler scale and measure the density profile: any consistent deviation from the discriminant curve (6.4) would falsify the derived arctic boundary.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The conjectured Euler-scale hydrodynamic profile of SDEP block melting is now a theorem: the density limit is arg u/pi with u the upper-half-plane root of the cubic, and the arctic-curve equation coincides with the companion hydrodynamic prediction.
  • Every spatial moment of the density from a deterministic finite initial set is a polynomial in time of degree at most floor(n/2); the first moment is conserved and the second grows linearly with coefficient 2wN^2, independent of the geometry of the initial set.
  • The highest-time coefficients of even moments are universal, independent of initial positions, and equal Catalan numbers C_r times N^{r+1} to leading order, matching the semicircular shape seen at large times.
  • For a compact block, the exact density profile has a genuinely finite algebraic representation and explicit centered moments up to O(s^3), giving an enhanced one-body spreading rate 2wN.
  • The method establishes a determinantal, free-fermion route to exact finite-size and scaling-limit results for a long-range interacting exclusion process with a hard-core constraint.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same Lagrange-interpolation and operator-compression machinery should extend to other deterministic initial states; if the steepest-descent lemma is made fully rigorous, arbitrary finite configurations yield explicit Euler-scale profiles rather than only the block.
  • The non-Hermitian mixed kernel suggests that higher-order correlations and current statistics of the SDEP can also be computed exactly, possibly exposing nontrivial dependence on the initial ordering that is absent in Hermitian free-fermion settings.
  • Because the lattice constraint becomes negligible at late times, the finite-N exact formulas provide a systematic handle on finite-density corrections to the continuous Dyson gas, which could be compared with macroscopic fluctuation theory.
  • A decisive small check is to verify the Fourier-support property of the trigonometric Lagrange functions numerically for generic deterministic configurations; if it fails, formula (3.1) and everything built on it would need revision.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies the symmetric Dyson exclusion process (SDEP), a lattice exclusion process with long-range logarithmic jump rates, using the ground-state transform that maps it to the free-fermion XX chain. The authors derive exact equal-time correlation formulas for deterministic initial configurations, expressing the mixed determinantal kernel through trigonometric Lagrange interpolation. From this they obtain finite- and infinite-volume density evolution equations, a finite-dimensional polynomial algebra for all density moments, Catalan asymptotics for the highest-time coefficients, and an Euler-scale limit shape with an arctic curve for the melting of a compact block. The central claim is that the Euler-scale density profile is ρ = arg u(ξ,τ)/π, where u is the upper-half-plane root of the cubic (6.2), and that the arctic boundary is the discriminant locus (6.4), coinciding with the earlier hydrodynamic conjecture in [23].

Significance. If the claims are fully justified, this is a substantial contribution to the exact theory of long-range interacting exclusion processes. The finite-time formulas (Theorems 4.1 and 5.3) are explicit and parameter-free, and the polynomial moment algebra is a genuinely new structural result. The Euler-scale theorem provides the first microscopic derivation of the conjectured arctic curve of [23] and places the SDEP in the broader context of free-fermion limit-shape problems. The paper is careful in many places, especially the derivation of the moment algebra and the exact double-contour representation. However, the rigorous status of the central Euler-scale theorem currently depends on a sketch rather than a proof, so the work needs revision before it can be regarded as closing the advertised 'rigorous steepest-descent analysis.'

major comments (3)
  1. [§6.1.2, Lemma 6.4] Theorem 6.2, the paper's headline Euler-scale result, rests on Lemma 6.4, whose proof is a one-sentence reference to 'the usual two-contour steepest-descent construction.' This is not a routine estimate. In (6.15) the integrand has a singular factor 1/(z−ω) and the phase Ψ_{ξ,τ} has two conjugate saddles u and ū; because Re Ψ(u)=Re Ψ(ū), the double integral has four stationary combinations (u,u), (u,ū), (ū,u), (ū,ū), not only the diagonal crossing. At (u,u) the pole coincides with the saddle, so the local integral with 1/(z−ω) is a singular saddle-point problem; the text does not show that the crossing subtraction removes the O(N^{−1/2}) contribution, nor does it analyze the off-diagonal combinations. The uniform bound (6.16) is therefore not established, and the limit (6.3) remains conditional on a missing calculation. The authors should give a complete proof of Lemma 6.4.
  2. [§3.1, Prop. 3.1] The proof of the finite-volume kernel (3.1) asserts without demonstration that the trigonometric Lagrange function L_y(x) is a Laurent polynomial 'with Fourier modes contained in the Fermi sea.' This is not immediate: writing L_y in terms of q=e^{2π i x/L} produces a prefactor q^{−(N−1)/2} times a polynomial, and the cancellation must be shown explicitly. Since every subsequent formula (Theorems 4.1, 5.3, and 6.2) inherits Prop. 3.1, this step should be proved in the text rather than asserted.
  3. [§5.5, Prop. 5.8] In Prop. 5.8, the combinatorial identity (5.30), which is the only input that makes the average over balanced words vanish, is stated without proof. The sentence on reversal is not enough: one must define h_q for the reversed word and verify the height transform h ↦ 1−h, including words that go below 0. Please supply the calculation; as written, the Catalan claim κ_{r,N}=C_r N^{r+1}+O_r(N^{r−1}) is not fully justified.
minor comments (3)
  1. [§6.1.3] The sentence 'Start from the exact representation (6.15).' is duplicated verbatim at the beginning of the subsection.
  2. [Eq. (6.6)] The notation I_n(t) is introduced for the modified Bessel function, whereas Section 4.2 uses I_x(−2wt). After setting w=1/2 the conventions are consistent, but the switch is abrupt; please state explicitly that t in Section 6 is the physical time with w=1/2.
  3. [Figure 1] The right panel reports 'exact finite-lattice result (5.20) at N=20.' If these are direct numerical evaluations of the exact formula, state so; if any quadrature or truncation is used, it should be described.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the Euler-scale profile and arctic curve are derived from the exact microscopic double-contour formula by steepest descent; the companion paper [23] is used only for comparison and motivation, so the derivation is self-contained.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is self-contained. The mixed kernel (3.1) is proven by direct Vandermonde inversion; the exact density formulas (4.1)-(5.20) follow from the free-fermion dictionary (Proposition 2.2); and Theorem 6.2 derives rho = arg u/pi by deforming the double contour (6.15), where the phase Psi in (6.14) is read off the exact integrand rather than imported from [23]. The cubic (6.2) is obtained by clearing denominators in Psi'(a)=0, and the crossing integral in (6.18) is a direct residue computation; the target limit is computed, not assumed. No parameter is fitted to the final profile or arctic curve: the model input is just the deterministic block and the free-fermion representation, and the equality of (6.4) with the hydrodynamic result of [23] is verified only after the fact ('Equation (6.4) coincides with the arctic-curve equation obtained from the hydrodynamic description in [23]'). Similarly, Proposition 5.8's Catalan asymptotics are proven from the balanced-word trace formula (5.28)-(5.29), with the semicircle remark citing [23] used only as motivation, not as an input. The self-citation [23] (same three authors) is therefore not load-bearing. The main caveats are rigor gaps rather than circularity: Lemma 6.4's uniform O(N^{-1/2}) bound is only sketched as 'the usual two-contour steepest-descent construction,' and Proposition 3.1's Fourier-support assertion is stated without a full derivation; these are unproven estimates/identities within an otherwise independent argument and belong under correctness risk, not circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on standard free-fermion and complex-analysis tools plus two load-bearing claims that are not fully proved: the Fourier-support property of the Lagrange kernel and the uniform steepest-descent estimate. No free parameters are fitted to data and no new entities are postulated.

axioms (5)
  • standard math The N-particle ground state of the XX chain in the chosen sector has wave function Phi_N(x_1,...,x_N) = prod_{i<j} sin(pi(x_j-x_i)/L) (Eq. 2.7).
    Used to establish the ground-state transform (2.9); standard result from free-fermion diagonalization, not derived in the paper.
  • standard math Wick's theorem applies to the mixed matrix element in Prop. 2.2, giving the determinant formula (2.17).
    Both |GS_N> and |S> are Slater determinants; the time-evolved operators remain quadratic.
  • domain assumption The trigonometric Lagrange function L_y(x) has Fourier modes exactly in the N-particle Fermi sea (proof of Prop. 3.1).
    Asserted without full demonstration; load-bearing for the kernel formula (3.1).
  • domain assumption Lemma 6.4: the double-contour integral can be deformed to steepest-descent contours with uniform O(N^{-1/2}) error.
    Stated with a sketch only; essential for Theorem 6.2.
  • standard math The infinite-volume limit of the finite-torus propagator is the modified Bessel function I_x(-2wt) (Eq. 4.3).
    Standard Fourier integral; used in all infinite-volume formulas.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 19636 in / 18042 out tokens · 162726 ms · 2026-08-03T00:20:15.154812+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The symmetric Dyson exclusion process (SDEP) is an exclusion process on the lattice with a long-range logarithmic Coulomb-type interaction. It appears in several equivalent forms: as symmetric random walkers conditioned, in the Doob-transform sense, not to collide; as the maximal-activity limit of a conditioned SSEP; and as a ground-state transform of the spin- 1/2 XX chain. In this work, we exploit this latter representation to obtain exact evolution formulas from deterministic initial configurations. The resulting determinantal kernel is expressed through a finite interpolation expression in terms of Lagrange polynomials, leading to explicit density evolution in finite and infinite lattices. For the melting of a densely packed block, we show that the full hierarchy of density moments is governed by a finite-dimensional polynomial algebra, and we identify Catalan numbers in the leading time coefficients. We also derive the Euler-scale density profile and the arctic curve separating frozen and liquid regions, and show that they coincide with conjectured hydrodynamic results obtained in a previous work.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.28807 by Ali Zahra, Gunter M. Schutz, Jerome Dubail.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Euler-scale melting of the block SN = {1, . . . , N}, with ξ = x/N, τ = t/N and w = 1 2 . Left: phase diagram in the (ξ, τ ) plane; colour is the limiting density ρ = 1 π arg u(ξ, τ ) (Theorem 6.2), and the red arctic curve ∂L separates the liquid region 0 < ρ < 1 from the frozen phases ρ = 0 (empty) and ρ = 1 (full). The full tongue closes at the cusp ( 1 2 , 1 4 ); Right: density profiles at different ti… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Steepest-descent geometry for the phase Ψ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_2.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Spohn,Large Scale Dynamics of Interacting Particles, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg (1991), doi:10.1007/978-3-642-84371-6

    H. Spohn,Large Scale Dynamics of Interacting Particles, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg (1991), doi:10.1007/978-3-642-84371-6

    doi:10.1007/978-3-642-84371-6 1991

  2. [2]

    Kipnis and C

    C. Kipnis and C. Landim,Scaling Limits of Interacting Particle Systems, Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften320, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg (1999), doi:10.1007/978- 3-662-03752-2

    doi:10.1007/978- 1999

  3. [3]

    T. M. Liggett,Continuous Time Markov Processes: An Introduction, Graduate Stud- ies in Mathematics113, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI (2010), doi:10.1090/gsm/113

    doi:10.1090/gsm/113 2010

  4. [4]

    G. M. Sch¨ utz,Exact solution of the master equation for the asymmetric exclusion process, J. Stat. Phys.88, 427 (1997), doi:10.1007/BF02508478

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02508478 1997

  5. [5]

    G. M. Sch¨ utz,Exactly Solvable Models for Many-Body Systems Far from Equilibrium, inPhase Transitions and Critical Phenomena, vol. 19, Academic Press, London (2001), doi:10.1016/S1062-7901(01)80015-X

    doi:10.1016/s1062-7901(01)80015-x 2001

  6. [6]

    Johansson,Shape fluctuations and random matrices, Commun

    K. Johansson,Shape fluctuations and random matrices, Commun. Math. Phys.209, 437 (2000)

    2000

  7. [7]

    Borodin, P

    A. Borodin, P. L. Ferrari, M. Pr¨ ahofer and T. Sasamoto,Fluctuation properties of the TASEP with periodic initial configuration, J. Stat. Phys.129, 1055 (2007), doi:10.1007/s10955-007-9383-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s10955-007-9383-0 2007

  8. [8]

    Imamura, M

    T. Imamura, M. Mucciconi and T. Sasamoto,New approach to KPZ models through free fermions at positive temperature, J. Math. Phys.64, 083301 (2023), doi:10.1063/5.0089778

    doi:10.1063/5.0089778 2023

  9. [9]

    P. L. Garrido, J. L. Lebowitz, C. Maes and H. Spohn,Long-range correlations for conser- vative dynamics, Phys. Rev. A42, 1954 (1990), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.42.1954

    doi:10.1103/physreva.42.1954 1954

  10. [10]

    T. M. Liggett,Long-range exclusion processes, Ann. Probab.8, 861 (1980), doi:10.1214/aop/1176994618

    arXiv 1980

  11. [11]

    E. D. Andjel and H. Guiol,Long-range exclusion processes, generator and invariant mea- sures, Ann. Probab.33, 2314 (2005), doi:10.1214/009117905000000486

    doi:10.1214/009117905000000486 2005

  12. [12]

    Gon¸ calves and M

    P. Gon¸ calves and M. Jara,Density fluctuations for exclusion processes with long jumps, Probab. Theory Relat. Fields170, 311 (2018), doi:10.1007/s00440-017-0758-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s00440-017-0758-0 2018

  13. [13]

    Belitsky, N

    V. Belitsky, N. P. N. Ngoc and G. M. Sch¨ utz,Asymmetric exclusion process with long-range interactions, arXiv:2409.05017 (2024), doi:10.48550/arXiv.2409.05017

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.05017 2024

  14. [14]

    Spohn,Bosonization, vicinal surfaces, and hydrodynamic fluctuation theory, Phys

    H. Spohn,Bosonization, vicinal surfaces, and hydrodynamic fluctuation theory, Phys. Rev. E60, 6411 (1999), doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.60.6411

    doi:10.1103/physreve.60.6411 1999

  15. [15]

    Popkov, D

    V. Popkov, D. Simon and G. M. Sch¨ utz,ASEP on a ring conditioned on enhanced flux, J. Stat. Mech. P10007 (2010), doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2010/10/P10007. 25

    work page doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2010/10/p10007 2010

  16. [16]

    G. M. Sch¨ utz,The space-time structure of extreme current and activity events in the ASEP, inNonlinear Mathematical Physics and Natural Hazards, Springer Proc. Phys.163, 13 (2015), doi:10.1007/978-3-319-14328-6 2

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-14328-6 2015

  17. [17]

    F. J. Dyson,A Brownian-motion model for the eigenvalues of a random matrix, J. Math. Phys.3, 1191 (1962), doi:10.1063/1.1703862

    doi:10.1063/1.1703862 1962

  18. [18]

    Calogero,Ground state of a one-dimensionalN-body system, J

    F. Calogero,Ground state of a one-dimensionalN-body system, J. Math. Phys.10, 2197 (1969), doi:10.1063/1.1664821

    doi:10.1063/1.1664821 1969

  19. [19]

    Sutherland,Exact results for a quantum many-body problem in one dimension

    B. Sutherland,Exact results for a quantum many-body problem in one dimension. II, Phys. Rev. A5, 1372 (1972), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.5.1372

    doi:10.1103/physreva.5.1372 1972

  20. [20]

    A. G. Abanov, E. Bettelheim and P. Wiegmann,Integrable hydrodynamics of Calogero– Sutherland model: bidirectional Benjamin–Ono equation, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.42, 135201 (2009), doi:10.1088/1751-8113/42/13/135201

    doi:10.1088/1751-8113/42/13/135201 2009

  21. [21]

    E. Lieb, T. Schultz and D. Mattis,Two soluble models of an antiferromagnetic chain, Ann. Phys.16, 407 (1961), doi:10.1016/0003-4916(61)90115-4

    doi:10.1016/0003-4916(61)90115-4 1961

  22. [22]

    Niemeijer,Some exact calculations on a chain of spins1/2, Physica36, 377 (1967), doi:10.1016/0031-8914(67)90235-2

    T. Niemeijer,Some exact calculations on a chain of spins1/2, Physica36, 377 (1967), doi:10.1016/0031-8914(67)90235-2

    doi:10.1016/0031-8914(67)90235-2 1967

  23. [23]

    Zahra, J

    A. Zahra, J. Dubail and G. M. Sch¨ utz,Emergent hydrodynamics in an exclusion process with long-range interactions, arXiv:2508.09879 (2025), doi:10.48550/arXiv.2508.09879

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.09879 2025

  24. [24]

    A. G. Abanov,Hydrodynamics of correlated systems, inApplications of Random Matrices in Physics, NATO Sci. Ser. II221, 139, Springer, Dordrecht (2006), doi:10.1007/1-4020- 4531-X 5

    doi:10.1007/1-4020- 2006

  25. [25]

    Kenyon and A

    R. Kenyon and A. Okounkov,Limit shapes and the complex Burgers equation, Acta Math.199, 263 (2007), doi:10.1007/s11511-007-0021-0

    doi:10.1007/s11511-007-0021-0 2007

  26. [26]

    Antal, Z

    T. Antal, Z. R´ acz, A. R´ akos and G. M. Sch¨ utz,Transport in the XX chain at zero temperature: emergence of flat magnetization profiles, Phys. Rev. E59, 4912 (1999), doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.59.4912

    doi:10.1103/physreve.59.4912 1999

  27. [27]

    Bettelheim, A

    E. Bettelheim, A. G. Abanov and P. Wiegmann,Orthogonality catastrophe and shock waves in a nonequilibrium Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 246402 (2006), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.246402

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.97.246402 2006

  28. [28]

    Ruggiero, Y

    P. Ruggiero, Y. Brun and J. Dubail,Conformal field theory on top of a breathing one-dimensional gas of hard core bosons, SciPost Phys.6, 051 (2019), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.6.4.051

    doi:10.21468/scipostphys.6.4.051 2019

  29. [29]

    Scopa, P

    S. Scopa, P. Calabrese and J. Dubail,Exact entanglement growth of a one-dimensional hard-core quantum gas during a free expansion, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.54, 404002 (2021), doi:10.1088/1751-8121/ac20ee

    doi:10.1088/1751-8121/ac20ee 2021

  30. [30]

    Allegra, J

    N. Allegra, J. Dubail, J.-M. St´ ephan and J. Viti,Inhomogeneous field theory inside the arctic circle, J. Stat. Mech. 053108 (2016), doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2016/05/053108

    doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2016/05/053108 2016

  31. [31]

    Gorin,Lectures on Random Lozenge Tilings, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathe- matics193, Cambridge University Press (2021), doi:10.1017/9781108921183

    V. Gorin,Lectures on Random Lozenge Tilings, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathe- matics193, Cambridge University Press (2021), doi:10.1017/9781108921183

    doi:10.1017/9781108921183 2021

  32. [32]

    Colomo and A

    F. Colomo and A. G. Pronko,The arctic curve of the domain-wall six-vertex model, J. Stat. Phys.138, 662 (2010), doi:10.1007/s10955-009-9902-2. 26

    doi:10.1007/s10955-009-9902-2 2010

  33. [33]

    St´ ephan,Extreme boundary conditions and random tilings, SciPost Phys

    J.-M. St´ ephan,Extreme boundary conditions and random tilings, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes 26(2021), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhysLectNotes.26

    doi:10.21468/scipostphyslectnotes.26 2021

  34. [34]

    Di Francesco and E

    P. Di Francesco and E. Guitter,The arctic curve for Aztec rectangles with defects via the tangent method, J. Stat. Phys.176, 624 (2019), doi:10.1007/s10955-019-02315-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s10955-019-02315-2 2019

  35. [35]

    A. G. Abanov and F. Franchini,Emptiness formation probability for the anisotropic XY spin chain in a magnetic field, Phys. Lett. A316, 342 (2003), doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2003.07.009

    doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2003.07.009 2003

  36. [36]

    St´ ephan,Emptiness formation probability, Toeplitz determinants, and conformal field theory, J

    J.-M. St´ ephan,Emptiness formation probability, Toeplitz determinants, and conformal field theory, J. Stat. Mech. P05010 (2014), doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2014/05/P05010

    doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2014/05/p05010 2014

  37. [37]

    J. S. Pallister, S. H. Pickering, D. M. Gangardt and A. G. Abanov,Phase transitions in full counting statistics of free fermions and directed polymers, Phys. Rev. Research7, L022008 (2025), doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.7.L022008

    doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.7.l022008 2025

  38. [38]

    Andraus and M

    S. Andraus and M. Katori,Characterizations of the hydrodynamic limit of the Dyson model, arXiv:1602.00449 (2016), doi:10.48550/arXiv.1602.00449

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1602.00449 2016

  39. [39]

    Dandekar, P

    R. Dandekar, P. L. Krapivsky and K. Mallick,Dynamical fluctuations in the Riesz gas, Phys. Rev. E107, 044129 (2023), doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.107.044129

    doi:10.1103/physreve.107.044129 2023

  40. [40]

    Dandekar, P

    R. Dandekar, P. L. Krapivsky and K. Mallick,Current fluctuations in the Dyson gas, Phys. Rev. E110, 064153 (2024), doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.110.064153

    doi:10.1103/physreve.110.064153 2024

  41. [41]

    P. L. Krapivsky and K. Mallick,Expansion into the vacuum of stochastic gases with long- range interactions, Phys. Rev. E111, 064109 (2025), doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.111.064109

    doi:10.1103/physreve.111.064109 2025

  42. [42]

    J. L. Doob,Conditional Brownian motion and the boundary limits of harmonic functions, Bull. Soc. Math. France85, 431–458 (1957), doi:10.24033/bsmf.1494

    work page doi:10.24033/bsmf.1494 1957

  43. [43]

    Karlin and J

    S. Karlin and J. McGregor,Coincidence properties of birth and death processes, Pacific J. Math.9, 1109–1140 (1959), doi:10.2140/pjm.1959.9.1109

    work page doi:10.2140/pjm.1959.9.1109 1959

  44. [44]

    Katori and H

    M. Katori and H. Tanemura,Noncolliding Brownian motion and determinantal processes, J. Stat. Phys.129, 1233–1277 (2007), doi:10.1007/s10955-007-9421-y

    work page doi:10.1007/s10955-007-9421-y 2007

  45. [45]

    Scopa, P

    S. Scopa, P. Calabrese and J. Dubail,Exact hydrodynamic solution of a double domain wall melting in the spin-1/2XXZ model, SciPost Phys.12, 207 (2022), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.12.6.207

    work page doi:10.21468/scipostphys.12.6.207 2022

  46. [46]

    J. S. Pallister, D. M. Gangardt and A. G. Abanov,Limit shape phase transitions: a merger of arctic circles, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.55, 304001 (2022), doi:10.1088/1751- 8121/ac79ad

    doi:10.1088/1751- 2022

  47. [47]

    G.-C. Rota, D. Kahaner and A. Odlyzko,On the foundations of combinatorial theory. VIII. Finite operator calculus, J. Math. Anal. Appl.42, 684–760 (1973). doi:10.1016/0022- 247X(73)90172-8

    doi:10.1016/0022- 1973

  48. [48]

    Dimakis, F

    A. Dimakis, F. M¨ uller-Hoissen and T. Striker,Umbral calculus, discretization, and quantum mechanics on a lattice, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.29, 6861–6876 (1996). doi:10.1088/0305- 4470/29/21/017. 27

    doi:10.1088/0305- 1996