Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 31 references

The law of (1+1)D SOS with an area tilt in a wedge

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

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

Pith's one-line read The limit law of a K-curve area-tilted SOS ensemble in a wedge is a product of independent Brownian bridges and Brownian GATEs, with explicit transition points α_k = θ_*/(hλ^{k-1}).

desk verdict A substantial new limit theorem for wedge-tilted SOS curves, with the Brownian bridge half self-contained and the Brownian GATE half resting on an unproved extension of Serio's theorem and on an unpublished preprint. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05262 v1 pith:3W4IBRGJ submitted 2026-08-05 math.PR math-phmath.MP

Amir Dembo , Eyal Lubetzky , Ofer Zeitouni This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.PRmath-phmath.MP MSC 60K3560F1760J6582B2082B41
keywords Solid-On-SolidmodellineensemblesgeometricareatiltwedgefloorBrownianGATEbridgesrandomwalkentropicrepulsion
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 derives the exact limit law of a K-curve (1+1)-dimensional Solid-On-Solid model on [-N,N], with a floor shaped like a wedge and a geometrically increasing area tilt. The main theorem states that the K ordered curves split at explicit critical points α_0=1>α_1>...>α_K>0: along the 2K intervals adjacent to ±α_r N, the bottom K+1-r curves, rescaled by ($N^{{2/3}}$, $N^{{1/3}}$), converge to an independent Brownian GATE, while each separated curve, centered and rescaled by (N, √N), converges to an independent Brownian bridge with an explicit variance. A sympathetic reader should care because this gives a tractable, fully explicit model of how $N^{{1/3}}$ fluctuations at a wall transition to √N fluctuations away from it, the same transition conjectured for level lines of the (2+1)-dimensional SOS surface near the corners of a box.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a measure change that replaces the area tilt with tilted increments (Definition 2.1, Lemma 2.2): the geometric weight exp(-$hλ^{{k-1}}$φ_k(t)/N) is absorbed into independent increments with log-moment-generating function Λ, tilted at site j by θ_k(j)=θ_*( (|j|/(Nα_k)) ∧ 1 ). The conditioned product law Q^h(·|B) is then shown to be close to Q^h(·|A), where A only imposes ordering and positivity in the extreme intervals (Proposition 2.4), and the system decomposes into a left random-walk GATE piece, a right piece, and an independent middle random-walk piece with matched boundary values (Lemma 2.8). Concentration of those boundary values at scale N^ε $Δ^{{1/2}}$, with Δ=$N^{{2/3+ε}}$, yields decoupling (Lemma 4.6): the middle piece becomes a collection of nearly independent random-walk bridges converging to Brownian bridges by an invariance principle, and the edge pieces are exactly random-walk GATEs converging to the Brownian GATE by the imported theorem. The Brownian GATE is the weak limit, as T→∞, of non-crossing Brownian paths with area tilts a $λ^{{i-1}}$.

What would settle it

Simulate (or rigorously analyze) the discrete random-walk GATE with zero floor on an interval of length comparable to $N^{{1/3}}$ shifted by 2N^ε away from a transition point, rescale the bottom K+1-r curves by ($N^{{2/3}}$, $N^{{1/3}}$), and compare the limiting edge heights and correlations with the Brownian GATE law μ^o_{λ,a_r,K+1-|r|}; any discrepancy, or any dependence between the two sides of the wedge, would falsify Part (b).

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.3: fix β>0, λ>1, h>θ_* and K≥1. For the ordered line ensemble (1.3)-(1.4), the K centered curves on [-N,N], rescaled by (N, √N), converge weakly on C([-1,1], R^K) to independent Brownian bridges whose variance profile is v_*(t/α_k) on [-α_k, α_k] and zero outside; and for each of the 2K intervals I_N^(r) adjacent to ±α_r N, the bottom K+1-|r| curves, rescaled by ($N^{{2/3}}$, $N^{{1/3}}$), converge subject to interval shifts to an independent Brownian GATE of law μ^o_{λ,a_r,K+1-|r|}. The two limiting families are jointly independent. The critical points are explicit: α_k = θ_*/($hλ^{{k-1}}$) with θ_* = log $\cosh$ β the unique root of Λ'(θ_*)=1, and a_r = θ_*√Λ''(θ_*)/α_r.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the random-walk GATE convergence theorem from [28] carries over to the closed Weyl chamber and to the shifted asymmetric intervals used here, and that the unpublished tail bounds from [20] are valid; if either fails, the Brownian GATE part of Theorem 1.3 does not follow from the proof given.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The fluctuation scale is not uniform: along the 2K transition intervals the bottom curves fluctuate as N^{1/3}, but once separated they fluctuate as √N, with the switch occurring at the explicit locations ±α_r N.
  • The limiting process is a product of independent objects, so correlations between different transition intervals disappear in the limit.
  • The Brownian GATE parameters are read off from the model data: on interval r the tilt parameter is a_r = θ_*√Λ''(θ_*)/α_r and the number of curves is K+1-|r|.
  • If hλ^{i-1} ≤ θ_* for some i, the corresponding curve has no flat portion and its limit is an independent Brownian bridge on [-1,1], without the GATE regime (Remark 1.5).
  • Parts (a) and (b) converge jointly to independent limits, so the Brownian bridges and the Brownian GATEs are asymptotically independent of one another (Remark 1.6).

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: if the closed-chamber import from [28] is valid, the same transition should appear in the innermost level lines of the (2+1)-dimensional SOS surface near a corner, with each level line showing N^{1/3}-scale Brownian GATE behavior along the flat side and √N-scale Brownian-bridge behavior along the curved side; the paper leaves that passage to the full SOS model open.
  • Editorial inference: the decoupling proof only needs the boundary values of the middle piece to be o(√N), so the Brownian-bridge half of the theorem should extend to area tilts that are not exactly geometric, as long as the critical points α_r remain separated.
  • Editorial inference: a direct simulation of the discrete random-walk GATE with a zero floor (closed Weyl chamber) on shifted intervals of length roughly N^{1/3} would give a finite-N check of the only imported step, since the limiting law μ^o_{λ,a,ℓ} is explicitly computable in principle.
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. The paper studies the (1+1)-dimensional SOS line ensemble with K ordered curves, a geometric area tilt with parameter λ>1, and a wedge-shaped floor, as defined in (1.3)-(1.4). Theorem 1.3 claims that as N→∞ (a) the K curves, centered around the deterministic shape Nφ_k^*(·) and rescaled by (N,√N), converge weakly on C([-1,1],R^K) to K independent Brownian bridges with explicit time changes; and (b) for each r=±1,...,±K, along the intervals I_N^{(r)} of length Θ(N^{1/3}) near the transition points ±α_r N, the bottom K+1-|r| curves, rescaled by (N^{2/3},N^{1/3}), converge subject to I_N^{(r)}-shifts to a Brownian GATE of law μ^o_{λ,a_r,K-|r|+1}, independently across the 2K intervals. The proof proceeds by a change of measure to independent random walks, a stochastic ordering lemma, bounds on area-tilted random walks, a decoupling of the left/right/middle pieces, a local CLT for boundary values, and a final appeal to the discrete GATE scaling limit of [28] and tail bounds of [20].

Significance. The result is a rigorous two-scale description of a line ensemble in a wedge, showing the transition from N^{1/3} (GATE) fluctuations near the transition points to √N (Brownian bridge) fluctuations away from them. This matches the conjectured behavior of level lines of (2+1)D SOS surfaces near corners and gives a tractable model stepping stone for that problem. Part (a) is proved essentially self-contained with a transparent coupling argument and a local CLT, which is a strength. The Brownian GATE part (b) is imported from [28] modulo an unproved extension to the closed Weyl chamber and shifted windows; if that extension holds, the paper's picture is complete, but the manuscript as written does not establish it.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5.2, final paragraph] The proof of Theorem 1.3(b) is completed by the assertion that [28, Thm. 1.2] applies after two modifications: replacing the open Weyl chamber by the closed Weyl chamber and using shifted asymmetric intervals I_N^{(r)}. The sentence 'the same proof applies' is the only justification for the first modification, and 'in view of [28, Thm. 1.7]' for the second. These modifications are load-bearing: the rw GATE in [28] is proved for strict non-crossing, and passing to the closed chamber requires showing that the probability of collisions (zero gaps) in the scaling window is negligible and that the inter-curve gaps are of order N^{1/3} away from zero. The paper does not provide such a proof. The authors should either prove the closed-chamber extension explicitly or, if [28, Thm. 1.2] is known for the closed chamber, give a precise reference with the exact statement and proof.
  2. [Proposition 5.1] The tightness estimate (5.9) relies on [20, Lem. 4.2] and [20, Cor. 5.2] as black boxes, and the stochastic ordering Lemma 3.1 is an extension of [20, Lem. 3.2] with a proof sketch. Since [20] is an unpublished preprint (arXiv:2502.10384), the reader cannot verify these results from the manuscript. Even if [20] is accepted elsewhere, the present paper should either state the needed results with full hypotheses and either proofs or a precise published reference, or replace them with self-contained arguments. This is necessary because Proposition 5.1 is an essential step for the convergence in Section 5.2.
  3. [Section 5.2] The application of [28, Thm. 1.7] to the intervals I_N^{(r)} is not checked against its hypotheses. The intervals in question have length Θ(N^{1/3}) in the u-scaling, while [28, Thm. 1.7] is invoked for windows of length 2T N^{2/3} whose distances from the endpoints T±, rescaled by N^{2/3}, diverge. The paper asserts that the same applies for 'any choice of T± and intervals of length 2T N^{2/3}' without verifying that the boundary values of the rw gate in the present setting (which are random and depend on the preceding change of measure) satisfy the conditions of [28, Thm. 1.7]. The authors should state the exact form of [28, Thm. 1.7] they use and verify its hypotheses, or prove the needed convergence directly.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Definition 2.3 and Theorem 1.3] The symbol ε is used in two different senses: in Theorem 1.3 ε ∈ (0,1/12) for the intervals I_N^{(r)}, while in Definition 2.3 ε ∈ (0,1/9) for Δ = N^{2/3+ε}; the relation between these parameters should be clarified.
  2. [Lemma 3.1] The proof of Lemma 3.1 says it is 'identical' to [20, App. A] but the setup is more general (site-dependent increments and tilts). The provided explanation is useful, but for a journal submission the authors should either give a full proof or point to a version of [20] that is freely available in published form.
  3. [Section 2, Equation (2.3)] The definition of θ_k(j) after (2.3) uses the notation a^-_k, a^+_k, but these are only introduced in (2.4); moving the definitions before the first use would help readability.
  4. [Throughout] The abbreviations 'whp' and 'wlog' are used without definition in several places; a short explanation of the probabilistic meaning of 'whp' (probability at least 1 - N^{-C} for all C) would be helpful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: Part (a) is self-contained and Part (b) imports independent external results; the only caveat is an unproved extension of [28], a correctness gap, not a circular step.

full rationale

The derivation of Theorem 1.3(a) is self-contained: after the exact change of measure in Lemma 2.2 and the decomposition Q_h(·|A)=Q̂_h(·|Γ) in Lemma 2.8, the proof uses stochastic ordering, tail bounds, a local CLT, and the Sakhanenko invariance principle to establish conditional weak convergence to independent Brownian bridges without fitting any parameter. Theorem 1.3(b) is imported from the external rw-GATE convergence theorem [28, Thm. 1.2], with an asserted extension to the closed Weyl chamber and asymmetric time windows, and from ordering and tail lemmas of the preprint [20]; neither reference has authors overlapping with the present paper, so the self-citation patterns do not arise. The constants θ_*, α_k, a_k, and φ*_k are computed explicitly from (β,h,λ) in (1.7)-(1.11); none is estimated from data or from the limiting Brownian GATE. The only substantive gap is that the closed-chamber and shifted-window version of [28, Thm. 1.2] is asserted rather than proved, and [20] is an unpublished black box. That is a correctness risk, not a reduction of the conclusion to its own inputs, and therefore is not circularity.

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

The theorem has no fitted parameters or invented quantities: alpha_k, a_k, and theta* are explicit functions of the model parameters beta, h, and lambda. The Brownian GATE itself is imported from prior work. Two imported inputs are not fully self-contained: [20] is an unpublished preprint, and the closed-Weyl-chamber extension of [28] is asserted rather than proved.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math The Brownian GATE measure mu^o_{lambda,a,ell} of Definition 1.1 exists as the T to infinity limit of the measures in [9, (1.10)].
    Definition 1.1 imports existence and tightness from [9, Thm. 1.3] and monotonicity from [9, (3.12)]. This defines the target object of the theorem.
  • ad hoc to paper The random-walk GATE scaling limits of [28, Thm. 1.2] hold also for the closed Weyl chamber, non-symmetric intervals, and the boundary values needed in Section 5.2.
    The paper asserts that 'the same proof applies' without carrying out the modification; this step is load-bearing for Part (b).
  • standard math The tail and confinement lemmas of [20] (Prop. 4.1, Cor. 5.2, Lem. 4.2) and the area-tilted single-walk estimates of [23], [12], [16], and [26] used in Sections 3-5 are correct.
    These are imported results; [20] is an unpublished arXiv preprint, so the current theorem inherits their correctness.
  • standard math The local central limit theorem of Petrov [25, Thm. VII.4] applies uniformly to the centered partial sums of the tilted increments.
    Used in Lemma 4.4 and in the bounds (4.10)-(4.12) to control ratios of transition probabilities.
  • domain assumption The (1+1)D SOS model (1.1)-(1.4) is the correct proxy for the (2+1)D SOS level-line corner problem described in Section 1.1.
    This is the physical motivation for the model, not a mathematical premise of Theorem 1.3. It affects significance but not the proof.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The law of (1+1)D SOS with an area tilt in a wedge." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3W4IBRGJ

@misc{pith2026260805262,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The law of (1+1)D SOS with an area tilt in a wedge},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3W4IBRGJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05262}
}
abstract

Motivated by the study of the level lines of the $(2+1)$D Solid-On-Solid (SOS) model above a floor, near the corners of the box, we derive the limit law of an ensemble of $K$ curves from a $(1+1)$D SOS model, with an area tilt, and above a wedge-shaped floor in $\{-N,\ldots,N\}$. We show that there exist explicit critical points $\alpha_0=1>\alpha_1>\ldots>\alpha_K>0$ such that, for each $r \geq 1$, along the intervals $\pm(\alpha_{r} N,\alpha_{r-1} N)$, the bottom $K+1-r$ curves, rescaled by $(N^{2/3},N^{1/3})$, tend to the law of a Geometrically-Area-Tilted Ensemble of non-crossing Brownian paths (Brownian GATE), independently across those $2K$ intervals. All other curves, centered and rescaled by $(N,\sqrt{N})$, tend to a product of $K$ suitable Brownian bridges.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.05262 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The p1 ` 1qd sos from (1.4) with N “ 1000 and K “ 4 curves. The αk’s, per (1.11), mark the transition from flat to curved scaling limits. with m‹puq “ v‹puq “ 0 in case |u| ě 1. Next, for h ą θ‹ and λ ą 1, let α0 :“ 1 and αk :“ θ‹ hλk´1 , ak :“ θ‹ αk a Λ2pθ‹q, ϕ‹ k ptq :“ αkm‹ ` t αk ˘ , 1 ď k ď K . (1.11) Theorem 1.3. Fix β ą 0, λ ą 1, h ą θ‹ and K ě 1. Consider the line ensemble tϕku K k“1 on r´N, Ns with a geomet… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustration of the transformation from tφku to tϕku and the limit law of Theorem 1.3 for tϕpku. Remark 1.4. Part (a) of our main theorem says that the k-th curve from the top separates from the curves below it during r´αkN, αkNs, and upon centering around Nϕ‹ k p¨q those separated curves jointly possess at pN, ? Nq-diffusive scaling the limit law of the independent Brownian bridges pBB1, . . . ,BBKq. As seen in Fig… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Illustration of the setting of Definition 2.3. The curves tϕrku are concentrated (after rescaling) about tϕ ‹ k u. The event B says, as per Lemma 2.2, that ϕrkpiq ě ϕrk`1piq ě 0 @i, starting and ending at 0. The event A relaxes this condition to |i| ą a ` k ´ ∆, which for ϕr2 is the blue shaded region. Let Q p´q h be the sub-probability measure on Φ ´ whose Radon–Nikodym derivative wrt the Φ ´-marginal of Q‹ is e ´h… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustration of the bounds established in Propositions 4.1 and 4.2. The former states that ϕrrpa ´ r ´¨q and ϕrr`1pa ´ r `∆q are each at most N1{3`ε (the intervals in blue and purple). The latter states that ϕrrpa ´ r `∆q is concentrated about E‹rϕrrpa ´ r ` ∆qs up to …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [20]

    Hegde, Y

    M. Hegde, Y. H. Kim, and C. Serio. Scaling limit and tail bounds for a random walk model of SOS level lines, 2025. Preprint,arXiv:2502.10384

    arXiv 2025

  2. [28]

    C. Serio. Scaling limit for line ensembles of random walks with geometric area tilts.Electron. J. Probab., 28:Paper No. 124, 14, 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [1]

    Basu Roy Chowdhury, P

    M. Basu Roy Chowdhury, P. Caputo, and S. Ganguly. Characterizing Gibbs states for area-tilted Brownian lines.Ann. Probab., 53(6):2196–2255, 2025

    work page 2025

  4. [2]

    Boucheron, G

    S. Boucheron, G. Lugosi, and P. Massart.Concentration inequalities. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2013. A nonasymptotic theory of independence, With a foreword by Michel Ledoux

    work page 2013

  5. [3]

    Brandenberger and C

    R. Brandenberger and C. E. Wayne. Decay of correlations in surface models.J. Statist. Phys., 27(3):425–440, 1982

    work page 1982

  6. [4]

    Bricmont, A

    J. Bricmont, A. El Mellouki, and J. Fr¨ ohlich. Random surfaces in statistical mechanics: roughening, rounding, wetting,. . . .J. Statist. Phys., 42(5-6):743–798, 1986

    work page 1986

  7. [5]

    W. K. Burton, N. Cabrera, and F. C. Frank. The growth of crystals and the equilibrium structure of their surfaces.Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A, 243:299–358, 1951

    work page 1951

  8. [6]

    Caddeo, Y

    P. Caddeo, Y. H. Kim, and E. Lubetzky. On level line fluctuations of SOS surfaces above a wall. Forum Math. Sigma, 12:Paper No. e91, 59, 2024

    2024

Show all 31 references
  1. [7]

    Caputo and S

    P. Caputo and S. Ganguly. Uniqueness, mixing, and optimal tails for Brownian line ensembles with geometric area tilt.Probab. Math. Phys., 6(1):195–239, 2025

    2025

  2. [8]

    Caputo, D

    P. Caputo, D. Ioffe, and V. Wachtel. Confinement of Brownian polymers under geometric area tilts.Electron. J. Probab., 24:Paper No. 37, 21, 2019. THE LA W OFp1`1qD SOS WITH AN AREA TILT IN A WEDGE 33

    2019

  3. [9]

    Caputo, D

    P. Caputo, D. Ioffe, and V. Wachtel. Tightness and line ensembles for Brownian polymers under geometric area tilts. InStatistical mechanics of classical and disordered systems, volume 293 of Springer Proc. Math. Stat., pages 241–266. Springer, Cham, 2019

    2019

  4. [10]

    Caputo, E

    P. Caputo, E. Lubetzky, F. Martinelli, A. Sly, and F. L. Toninelli. Dynamics ofp2`1q-dimensional SOS surfaces above a wall: Slow mixing induced by entropic repulsion.Ann. Probab., 42(4):1516– 1589, 2014

    2014

  5. [11]

    Caputo, E

    P. Caputo, E. Lubetzky, F. Martinelli, A. Sly, and F. L. Toninelli. Scaling limit and cube-root fluctuations in SOS surfaces above a wall.J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), 18(5):931–995, 2016

    2016

  6. [12]

    Caravenna and L

    F. Caravenna and L. Chaumont. An invariance principle for random walk bridges conditioned to stay positive.Electron. J. Probab., 18:no. 60, 32 pp., 2013

    2013

  7. [13]

    Chen and E

    J. Chen and E. Lubetzky. The limiting law of the Discrete Gaussian level lines, 2025. Preprint, arXiv:2509.04333

    2025 arXiv

  8. [14]

    Chen and E

    J. Chen and E. Lubetzky. The limit shape and emergence of the Discrete Gaussian level lines,

  9. [15]

    Dembo, E

    A. Dembo, E. Lubetzky, and O. Zeitouni. On the limiting law of line ensembles of Brownian polymers with geometric area tilts.Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar´ e Probab. Stat., 60(1):113–125, 2024

    2024

  10. [16]

    Denisov, A

    D. Denisov, A. Sakhanenko, and V. Wachtel. First-passage times for random walks with noniden- tically distributed increments.Ann. Probab., 46(6):3313–3350, 2018

    2018

  11. [17]

    P. L. Ferrari and H. Spohn. Constrained Brownian motion: fluctuations away from circular and parabolic barriers.Ann. Probab., 33(4):1302–1325, 2005

    2005

  12. [18]

    Fr¨ ohlich and T

    J. Fr¨ ohlich and T. Spencer. Kosterlitz-Thouless transition in the two-dimensional plane rotator and Coulomb gas.Phys. Rev. Lett., 46(15):1006–1009, 1981

    1981

  13. [19]

    Fr¨ ohlich and T

    J. Fr¨ ohlich and T. Spencer. The Kosterlitz-Thouless transition in two-dimensional abelian spin systems and the Coulomb gas.Comm. Math. Phys., 81(4):527–602, 1981

    1981

  14. [21]

    Y. Higuchi. On some limit theorems related to the phase separation line in the two-dimensional Ising model.Z. Wahrsch. Verw. Gebiete, 50(3):287–315, 1979

    1979

  15. [22]

    Ioffe, S

    D. Ioffe, S. Ott, S. Shlosman, and Y. Velenik. Critical prewetting in the 2D Ising model.Ann. Probab., 50(3):1127–1172, 2022

    2022

  16. [23]

    Ioffe, S

    D. Ioffe, S. Shlosman, and Y. Velenik. An invariance principle to Ferrari-Spohn diffusions.Comm. Math. Phys., 336(2):905–932, 2015

    2015

  17. [24]

    Ioffe, Y

    D. Ioffe, Y. Velenik, and V. Wachtel. Dyson Ferrari-Spohn diffusions and ordered walks under area tilts.Probab. Theory Related Fields, 170(1-2):11–47, 2018

    2018

  18. [25]

    V. V. Petrov.Sums of Independent Random Variables. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1975

    1975

  19. [26]

    A. I. Sakhanenko. A general estimate in the invariance principle.Sib. Math. J., 52(4):696–710,

  20. [27]

    R. H. Schonmann and S. B. Shlosman. Complete analyticity for 2D Ising completed.Comm. Math. Phys., 170(2):453–482, 1995

    1995

  21. [29]

    H. N. V. Temperley. Statistical mechanics and the partition of numbers. II. The form of crystal surfaces.Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 48:683–697, 1952. 34 AMIR DEMBO, EYAL LUBETZKY, AND OFER ZEITOUNI Amir Dembo Mathematics Department and Statistics Department, Stanford Univer...

    1952

  22. [2011]

    Translated from Sibirsk. Mat. Zh.52(2011), no. 4, 876–893

    2011

  23. [2026]

    Preprint,arXiv:2606.06612

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.