Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 51 references

Confinement transitions in half-space constrained Riesz gases

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that half-space constrained Riesz gases exhibit a sharp confinement transition: for weakly long-ranged interactions the gas is never fully confined to the wall, while for strongly long-ranged interactions it is fully…

desk verdict Sharp, likely correct proof of a confinement dichotomy for half-space Riesz gases, with the exact threshold confirming the 2021 conjecture; the only real caveat is that the variational characterization for negative s is imported. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.11813 v1 pith:GE4XCJFH submitted 2026-08-12 math-ph cond-mat.stat-mechmath.MPmath.PR

Sung-Soo Byun , Yong-Woo Lee , Eui Yoo This is my paper · ORCID
classification math-phcond-mat.stat-mechmath.MPmath.PR MSC 31A1582B0533C05
keywords Rieszgasequilibriummeasurehardwallconfinementtransitionlong-rangeinteractionsCoulombhalf-spaceconstraintEuler-Lagrangeconditions
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 studies the equilibrium measure of a Riesz gas in $\mathbb{R}^d$ with interaction exponent $s\in(d-3,d)$, confined to a half-space by a hard wall and subject to a quadratic potential. It proves that the equilibrium measure exhibits a sharp dichotomy: for weakly long-ranged interactions $s\in(d-2,d)$, the gas is never completely confined to the wall for any wall position, while for strongly long-ranged interactions $s\in(d-3,d-2]$, complete confinement to the wall occurs exactly when the wall lies at or beyond an explicit critical distance $a_{\rm cri}(d,s)$. This gives a single family of formulas that contains the recently studied Coulomb case $s=d-2$ as a special value, and it shows that the transition to wall confinement is controlled by the interaction range rather than by the dimension alone. A reader should care because it turns a qualitative question about long-range interactions into a computable threshold with an explicit equilibrium density on the wall.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the potential-theoretic Euler-Lagrange conditions (3.1): a probability measure is the equilibrium measure exactly when its weighted Riesz potential plus the external potential equals a constant on the support and is at least that constant off the support. For the candidate wall-supported measure, the paper reduces the outside-support inequality to a one-dimensional auxiliary function $f$ on $(0,\infty)$ built from an incomplete $\beta$ function (3.12); Lemma 3.1 shows $f$ has a unique global maximum, and formula (3.16) identifies that maximum with the critical threshold $a_{\rm cri}$. A hypergeometric transformation (Lemma 3.2) and a radial-nonincreasing convolution lemma (Lemma 4.2) then show it is enough to verify the inequality along the direction perpendicular to the wall.

What would settle it

For $d=1$ and $s=-3/2$, the predicted threshold is $a_{\rm cri}=1/2$, while an earlier simulation-based estimate was near $0.441$; computing the equilibrium measure at high numerical precision and locating the onset of full wall support strictly below $1/2$ would falsify the exact critical-value formula.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is an interaction-range dichotomy for the half-space constrained equilibrium measure $\widehat{\mu}_a$. Theorem 2.2 states that for $s\in(d-2,d)$ the measure is never fully supported on the hyperplane $\{x_d=a\}$, regardless of $a$; for $s\in(d-3,d-2]$ it is fully supported on that hyperplane if and only if $a\ge a_{\rm cri}(d,s)$, where $a_{\rm cri}$ is defined by (2.8)-(2.10) and the wall-supported measure is given explicitly by (2.12)-(2.13). In the Coulomb case $s=d-2$, the critical value reduces to (2.14) and the wall density to the known Coulomb form, so the theorem unifies and extends the Coulomb-gas results of the recent literature.

Load-bearing premise

The argument imports from the literature the potential-theoretic principle that the minimizer is uniquely characterized by the Euler-Lagrange conditions, and applies it for every $s\in(d-3,d)$, including negative $s$ where the Riesz kernel is not positive; if that uniqueness or characterization fails for those negative exponents, the if-and-only-if confinement statement and the exact critical value collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every Riesz exponent $s\in(d-2,d)$, pushing the wall arbitrarily far away still leaves a non-trivial absolutely continuous bulk component in the equilibrium measure.
  • For $s\in(d-3,d-2]$, the wall-supported equilibrium density (2.13) is explicit, so the fraction of particles sitting on the wall jumps from strictly less than one to exactly one at $a_{\rm cri}(d,s)$.
  • In one dimension, the formula (2.16) gives the true confinement threshold and proves it lies strictly below the earlier metastable threshold, resolving the previously conjectured distinction.
  • The Coulomb critical distance (2.14) is recovered as the endpoint $s=d-2$, so the full-confinement transition for Coulomb gases in every dimension is a single instance of the general Riesz dichotomy.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The apparent monotonicity of $s\mapsto a_{\rm cri}(d,s)$ suggests a quantitative picture in which stronger long-rangedness propagates the wall's influence deeper into the bulk; deriving rigorous monotonicity and large-$d$ asymptotics would tie this to the dimension dependence discussed in Remark 3.
  • The numerical evidence for an exponent $s_*(d)$ with $a_{\rm cri}(d,s_*)=1$ suggests a sub-regime where complete confinement occurs while the wall is still inside the unconstrained support; a proof of this threshold's existence for $d\le 8$ would sharpen the phase diagram.
  • For $s<d-3$, the paper expects additional equilibrium phases with singular components on spheres; extending the dichotomy analysis there would test whether the confinement transition persists outside the range covered by Proposition 2.1.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the equilibrium measure of a Riesz gas in dimension d with interaction parameter s in (d-3,d), confined to a half-space by a hard wall and subject to a quadratic confining potential. The main result, Theorem 2.2, establishes a dichotomy: for s in (d-2,d) the equilibrium measure is never fully confined to the hard wall, while for s in (d-3,d-2] there is a critical wall position a_cri(d,s) such that full confinement to the wall occurs if and only if a >= a_cri(d,s). The fully confined measure is given explicitly in (2.12)-(2.13), and the critical value is characterized via the solution of the transcendental equation (2.8). The proofs use Frostman's Euler-Lagrange conditions, explicit hypergeometric identities, and a monotonicity argument; the Coulomb case s=d-2 is recovered as a special case, and the one-dimensional results confirm a conjecture of Kethepalli et al.

Significance. If the result is correct, it gives a sharp and quantitative interaction-range dichotomy within the Riesz family, beyond the classical long-range/short-range split. The explicit formula for a_cri(d,s) and for the wall-supported equilibrium measure is a substantive advance, and the recovery of the Coulomb results of [5,9,24,29] together with the confirmation of the conjecture in [34] gives the paper strong external coherence. The proofs in the new regimes are detailed and self-contained: Lemma 3.1 establishes existence and uniqueness of the critical root, Lemma 4.1 supplies the exact off-wall potential, and Lemma 4.2 reduces the full Euler-Lagrange inequality to the one-dimensional check along x_hat=0. The main caveat is the imported potential-theoretic characterization for negative s, which is load-bearing and not stated with hypotheses.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3, Eq. (3.1)] The Euler-Lagrange characterization (3.1) is imported from [25, Theorem 2] and [30] and is used as an if-and-only-if criterion for the minimizer over the entire range s in (d-3,d), including negative s (d=1, s in (-2,-1); d=2, s in (-1,0)). For s<0 the kernel g_s is negative, and the classical positive-definite Riesz potential theory does not apply verbatim. The manuscript neither states the hypotheses of [25, Theorem 2] nor verifies them for the external field V_a, which takes the value +infinity outside a half-space. Both directions of the confinement dichotomy in Theorem 2.2(ii) rely on the converse part of (3.1), so this is load-bearing. Please add a precise statement of the invoked theorem and a verification that it covers (i) the range s in (-2,d), (ii) the normalization with the prefactor 1/s, and (iii) external fields taking the value +infinity, or give a self-contained proof for the class of potentials used here.
  2. [Section 4, proof of Theorem 2.2(i)] The exclusion of full confinement for s in [d-1,d) rests on the assertion, cited to [3,32], that every probability measure supported on the hyperplane {x_d=a} has infinite Riesz energy when s >= d-1. This assertion is standard, but it is not stated precisely or proved, and it is the only mechanism that covers the upper part of the weakly long-ranged regime. Please include a short proof: for s >= d-1, the kernel |x-y|^{-s} is not integrable near the diagonal on R^{d-1}, so any probability measure on that hyperplane has infinite Riesz energy.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 2, Definition of critical value] The displayed definition of a_cri is written for s in (d-3,d-2), while the case s=d-2 is treated separately by continuity with x=0; please make this explicit in the displayed definition, since equation (2.8) is not directly meaningful at s=d-2.
  2. [Section 3, Eq. (3.10)] In the reflection-formula line, the notation should be Gamma((d-s)/2) rather than Gamma(d-s/2), to avoid ambiguity with the intended argument.
  3. [Section 2, Remark 3 and Table 1] The monotonicity of s |-> a_cri(d,s) and the existence of the threshold s_* with a_cri(d,s_*)=1 are presented as numerical observations; if these claims are not proven, please state explicitly that they are supported by computation rather than by a theorem.
  4. [Section 3, proof of Proposition 2.1] The step 'Following the same steps as in [9, Lemma 3.5]' that leads from inequality (3.8) to (3.9) is a substantial hypergeometric manipulation; please include the intermediate identities or give a more detailed reference, since this is part of the proof of the new regime s in (d-3,d-2).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the confinement threshold is verified against the Euler–Lagrange conditions rather than fitted, and the self-citations used are independent published results that do not assume Theorem 2.2.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. Theorem 2.2 is proved by the standard Frostman route: the candidate wall measure (4.1)–(4.2) is not imposed to force the conclusion but is uniquely determined by the Euler–Lagrange equality on the hyperplane, after which the paper verifies the Euler–Lagrange inequality in the bulk. The critical value a_cri is introduced through the auxiliary equation (2.8), and the proof then shows, via Lemmas 3.1, 3.2, 4.1 and the representation (4.13)–(4.14), that the bulk inequality holds exactly when a ≥ a_cri. This is a genuine verification, not a parameter fit renamed as a prediction. The main imported ingredient is the Frostman Euler–Lagrange characterization (3.1), cited to [30] and [25, Theorem 2]; those are external classical results, not assumptions of the present theorem. The paper also imports Proposition 2.1 for some parameter ranges from [3], [15], and [9]; [9] is co-authored by one of the present authors, but it is a published, parameter-free result that does not assume Theorem 2.2, and the same unconstrained equilibrium formula is corroborated by independent sources [15], [31], while the Coulomb endpoint is supplied by the independent paper [29]. The remaining range s∈(d−3,d−2) is proved self-contained in Section 3. A possible validity concern for the imported Euler–Lagrange characterization when s<0 is a correctness or hypothesis-checking issue about the cited theorem, not a circular reduction: the paper does not define its conclusion into that theorem. No equation in the paper reduces by construction to its own inputs, and no fitted quantity is relabeled as a derived threshold.

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

No free parameters are fitted: the constants C_{d,s}, R, and a_cri are determined by the model and by solving equation (2.8), which is proven to have a unique solution. The proof relies on standard equilibrium measure theory, hypergeometric identities, and a lemma of Lieb. No new particles, fields, or forces are postulated.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Frostman's theorem and the Euler-Lagrange conditions (3.1) hold for the Riesz kernel g_s for s∈(d-3,d), including the negative-kernel cases s<0.
    Invoked in Section 3 before (3.1) via [25, Theorem 2] and [30]; the paper does not prove existence or uniqueness of minimizers for s<0, where g_s is non-positive and unbounded below at infinity.
  • domain assumption The Riesz potential identity (3.5) for the unconstrained equilibrium measure holds; it is imported from [9,15,31] for s∈[d-2,d) and extended to s∈(d-3,d-2) in Proposition 2.1.
    Used to verify the Euler-Lagrange equality on the support of the measure (2.3); this is a known special-function identity for the potential of the inverted-parabola measure.
  • standard math The Gauss hypergeometric transformation formulas (3.6), (4.10), and the integral representation (3.25) from [47] are valid for the parameter ranges appearing in the proofs.
    Used heavily in Proposition 2.1, Lemma 3.2, and Lemma 4.1; these are standard identities from the NIST Handbook.
  • domain assumption Lieb's radial monotonicity lemma [41, Lemma 2.2] applies to the convolution in (4.16) with the kernel ψ_t(y)=2t/(|y|^2+t^2)^{s/2+1}, which is radially decreasing for s∈(d-3,d-2].
    Used in the proof of Theorem 2.2(ii) to reduce the full Euler-Lagrange inequality to the radial case x̂=0; requires the density and kernel to be radially symmetric and non-increasing.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Confinement transitions in half-space constrained Riesz gases." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GE4XCJFH

@misc{pith2026260811813,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Confinement transitions in half-space constrained Riesz gases},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GE4XCJFH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.11813}
}
abstract

We study a Riesz gas with interaction parameter $s \in (d-3,d)$ in an arbitrary spatial dimension $d$, confined to a half-space by a hard wall. We prove that the equilibrium measure exhibits a dichotomy according to the interaction range. For $s \in (d-2,d)$, corresponding to the weakly long-ranged regime, the equilibrium measure always retains a non-trivial bulk component and thus is never completely confined to the wall. In contrast, for $s \in (d-3,d-2]$, corresponding to the strongly long-ranged regime, a confinement transition occurs: there exists a critical wall position beyond which the equilibrium measure is supported entirely on the wall. Our theorem generalises recent results established for the Coulomb gas, corresponding to the case $s=d-2$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.11813 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Interaction regimes for the Riesz exponent s. By definition, the Riesz gas at inverse temperature β > 0 follows the distribution (1.4) dPN,β(XN ) = 1 ZN,β exp  − β 2 N − s d HN (XN )  dXN . It is well known that the empirical measure 1 N PN j=1 δxj converges weakly, as N → ∞, to the unique probability measure µV that minimises the energy functional (1.5) IV [µ] := Z Z (Rd) 2 gs(x − y) dµ(x) dµ(y) + Z Rd V (x) dµ(x… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Point configurations of the minimiser of (1.1), obtained numerically via gradient descent for N = 1000. Here, d = 2 and s = 1 2 , corresponding to the weakly long-ranged regime. The shaded region represents the hard wall, while the dashed circle indicates the boundary of the unconstrained equilibrium measure. a < acri a = acri s = 0 s = − 3 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Graphs of the function s 7→ acri(d, s) for d = 1, . . . , 10. The horizontal axis repre￾sents s − (d − 3), which ranges from 0 to 1 for every d. Theorem 2.2 (Interaction-range dichotomy for full confinement). Let d ≥ 1 and s ∈ (d − 3, d). For a ∈ R, let µba be the equi…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [34]

    Kethepalli, M

    J. Kethepalli, M. Kulkarni, A. Kundu, S. N. Majumdar, D. Mukamel and G. Schehr,Harmonically confined long-ranged interacting gas in the presence of a hard wall, J. Stat. Mech. (2021), 103209

    work page 2021

  2. [30]

    Frostman,Potentiel d’´ equilibre et capacite des ensembles avec quelques applications a la theorie des fonctions, Thesis, Meddel, Lunds Univ

    O. Frostman,Potentiel d’´ equilibre et capacite des ensembles avec quelques applications a la theorie des fonctions, Thesis, Meddel, Lunds Univ. Mat. Sem.3(1935), 1–118

    work page 1935

  3. [1]

    Adhikari,Hole probabilities forβ-ensembles and determinantal point processes in the complex plane, Electron

    K. Adhikari,Hole probabilities forβ-ensembles and determinantal point processes in the complex plane, Electron. J. Probab. 23(2018), no. 23, 1–21

    work page 2018

  4. [2]

    Adhikari and N

    K. Adhikari and N. K. Reddy,Hole probabilities for finite and infinite Ginibre ensembles, Int. Math. Res. Not.2017(2017), 6694–6730

    work page 2017

  5. [3]

    Agarwal, A

    S. Agarwal, A. Dhar, M. Kulkarni, A. Kundu, S. N. Majumdar, D. Mukamel and G. Schehr,Harmonically confined particles with long-range repulsive interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.123(2019), 100603

    work page 2019

  6. [4]

    Alishahi and M

    K. Alishahi and M. Zamani,The spherical ensemble and uniform distribution of points on the sphere, Electron. J. Probab. 20(2015), no. 23, 1–27

    work page 2015

  7. [5]

    S. N. Armstrong, S. Serfaty and O. Zeitouni,Remarks on a constrained optimization problem for the Ginibre ensemble, Potential Anal.41(2014), 945–958

    work page 2014

  8. [6]

    Ben Arous, A

    G. Ben Arous, A. Dembo and A. Guionnet,Aging of spherical spin glasses, Probab. Theory Relat. Fields120(2001), 1–67

    work page 2001

Show all 51 references
  1. [7]

    Byun and P

    S.-S. Byun and P. J. Forrester,Progress on the study of the Ginibre ensembles, KIAS Springer Ser. Math.3, Springer, 2025, 221 pp

    2025

  2. [8]

    Byun and P

    S.-S. Byun and P. J. Forrester,Electrostatic computations for statistical mechanics and random matrix applications, arXiv:2510.14334

  3. [9]

    S.-S. Byun, P. J. Forrester, S. N. Majumdar and G. Schehr,Equilibrium measures for higher dimensional rotationally symmetric Riesz gases, J. Math. Anal. Appl.563(2026), 130813

    2026

  4. [10]

    Byun, Y.-W

    S.-S. Byun, Y.-W. Lee and S. Oh,Upper tail large deviations for extremal eigenvalues of the real, complex and symplectic elliptic Ginibre matrices, J. Phys. A (Online), arXiv:2603.16339

  5. [11]

    Byun and S

    S.-S. Byun and S. Park,Large gap probabilities of complex and symplectic spherical ensembles with point charges, J. Funct. Anal.290(2026), 111260

    2026

  6. [12]

    Byun and E

    S.-S. Byun and E. Yoo,Three topological phases of the elliptic Ginibre ensembles with a point charge, Constr. Approx. (to appear), arXiv:2502.02948

    arXiv

  7. [13]

    Campa, T

    A. Campa, T. Dauxois, D. Fanelli and S. Ruffo,Physics of long-range interacting systems, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2014

    2014

  8. [14]

    Chafa¨ ı, R

    D. Chafa¨ ı, R. W. Matzke, E. B. Saff, M. Q. H. Vu and R. S. Womersley,Riesz energy with a radial external field: when is the equilibrium support a sphere?, Potential Anal.63(2025), 705–738

    2025

  9. [15]

    Chafa¨ ı, E

    D. Chafa¨ ı, E. B. Saff and R. S. Womersley,On the solution of a Riesz equilibrium problem and integral identities for special functions, J. Math. Anal. Appl.515(2022), 126367

    2022

  10. [16]

    Chafa¨ ı, E

    D. Chafa¨ ı, E. B. Saff and R. S. Womersley,Threshold condensation to singular support for a Riesz equilibrium problem, Anal. Math. Phys.13(2023), no. 19

    2023

  11. [17]

    Charlier,Hole probabilities and balayage of measures for planar Coulomb gases, arXiv:2311.15285

    C. Charlier,Hole probabilities and balayage of measures for planar Coulomb gases, arXiv:2311.15285

    arXiv

  12. [18]

    Charlier,Large gap asymptotics on annuli in the random normal matrix model, Math

    C. Charlier,Large gap asymptotics on annuli in the random normal matrix model, Math. Ann.388(2024), 3529–3587

    2024

  13. [19]

    Cronvall and A

    J. Cronvall and A. Wennman,A direct approach to soft and hard edge universality for random normal matrices, arXiv:2511.18628

  14. [20]

    F. D. Cunden, P. Facchi, M. Ligab` o and P. Vivo,Universality of the third-order phase transition in the constrained Coulomb gas, J. Stat. Mech. (2017), 053303

    2017

  15. [21]

    F. D. Cunden, P. Facchi, M. Ligab` o and P. Vivo,Third-order phase transition: random matrices and screened Coulomb gas with hard walls, J. Stat. Phys.175(2019), 1262–1297

    2019

  16. [22]

    D. S. Dean and S. N. Majumdar,Large deviations of extreme eigenvalues of random matrices, Phys. Rev. Lett.97(2006), 160201

    2006

  17. [23]

    D. S. Dean and S. N. Majumdar,Extreme value statistics of eigenvalues of Gaussian random matrices, Phys. Rev. E77 (2008), 041108

    2008

  18. [24]

    A. Dhar, A. Kundu, S. N. Majumdar, S. Sabhapandit and G. Schehr,Exact extremal statistics in the classical 1D Coulomb gas, Phys. Rev. Lett.119(2017), 060601

    2017

  19. [25]

    Dragnev, R

    P. Dragnev, R. Orive, E. B. Saff and F. Wielonsky,Riesz energy problems with external fields and related theory, Constr. Approx.57(2023), 1–43

    2023

  20. [26]

    P. J. Forrester,Log-gases and random matrices, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2010

    2010

  21. [27]

    P. J. Forrester,Gegenbauer polynomials and fluctuation properties of the one-dimensional Riesz gas, arXiv:2604.25078

    arXiv

  22. [28]

    P. J. Forrester and N. S. Witte,Asymptotic forms for hard and soft edge generalβconditional gap probabilities, Nuclear Phys. B859(2012), 321–340

    2012

  23. [29]

    R. L. Frank, P. Ivanishvili and C. Torres-Latorre,Minimizers for Coulomb gases constrained to a halfspace, arXiv:2606.20484

    arXiv

  24. [31]

    T. S. Gutleb, J. A. Carrillo and S. Olver,Computation of power law equilibrium measures on balls of arbitrary dimension, Constr. Approx.58(2023), 75–120

    2023

  25. [32]

    D. P. Hardin, T. Lebl´ e, E. B. Saff and S. Serfaty,Large deviation principles for hypersingular Riesz gases, Constr. Approx. 48(2018), 61–100

    2018

  26. [33]

    Katzav and I

    E. Katzav and I. P. Castillo,Large deviations of the smallest eigenvalue of the Wishart–Laguerre ensemble, Phys. Rev. E82 (2010), 040104. HALF-SPACE CONSTRAINED RIESZ GAS 17

    2010

  27. [35]

    Kethepalli, M

    J. Kethepalli, M. Kulkarni, A. Kundu, S. N. Majumdar, D. Mukamel and G. Schehr,Edge fluctuations and third-order phase transition in harmonically confined long-range systems, J. Stat. Mech. (2022), 033203

    2022

  28. [36]

    Kethepalli, M

    J. Kethepalli, M. Kulkarni, A. Kundu, S. N. Majumdar, D. Mukamel and G. Schehr,Full counting statistics of 1d short-range Riesz gases in confinement, J. Stat. Mech. (2024), 083206

    2024

  29. [37]

    Le Doussal and G

    P. Le Doussal and G. Schehr,Cumulants and large deviations for the linear statistics of the one-dimensional trapped Riesz gas, J. Stat. Phys.192(2025), no. 47

    2025

  30. [38]

    Le Doussal and G

    P. Le Doussal and G. Schehr,Linear statistics at the microscopic scale for the 2D Coulomb gas, J. Phys. A58(2025), 485001

    2025

  31. [39]

    Lebl´ e and S

    T. Lebl´ e and S. Serfaty,Large deviation principle for empirical fields of log and Riesz gases, Invent. Math.210(2017), 645–757

    2017

  32. [40]

    Lewin,Coulomb and Riesz gases: The known and the unknown, J

    M. Lewin,Coulomb and Riesz gases: The known and the unknown, J. Math. Phys.63(2022), 061101

    2022

  33. [41]

    E. H. Lieb,Sharp constants in the Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev and related inequalities, Ann. of Math. (2)118(1983), 349–374

    1983

  34. [42]

    S. N. Majumdar, C. Nadal, A. Scardicchio and P. Vivo,The Index Distribution of Gaussian Random Matrices, Phys. Rev. Lett.103(2009), 220603

    2009

  35. [43]

    S. N. Majumdar, C. Nadal, A. Scardicchio and P. Vivo,How many eigenvalues of a Gaussian random matrix are positive?, Phys. Rev. E83(2011), 041105

    2011

  36. [44]

    S. N. Majumdar and G. Schehr,Top eigenvalue of a random matrix: Large deviations and third order phase transition, J. Stat. Mech. (2014), P01012

    2014

  37. [45]

    S. N. Majumdar and M. Vergassola,Large deviations of the maximum eigenvalue for Wishart and Gaussian random matrices, Phys. Rev. Lett.102(2009), 060601

    2009

  38. [46]

    R. M. May,Will a large complex system be stable?, Nature238(1972), 413–414

    1972

  39. [47]

    F. W. J. Olver, D. W. Lozier, R. F. Boisvert and C. W. Clark, eds.NIST Handbook of Mathematical Functions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010

    2010

  40. [48]

    H. M. Ramli, E. Katzav and I. P. Castillo,Spectral properties of the Jacobi ensembles via the Coulomb gas approach, J. Phys. A45(2012), 465005

    2012

  41. [49]

    E. B. Saff and V. Totik,Logarithmic Potentials with External Fields, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1997

    1997

  42. [50]

    Serfaty,Lectures on Coulomb and Riesz Gases, Amer

    S. Serfaty,Lectures on Coulomb and Riesz Gases, Amer. Math. Soc. Colloq. Publ.70, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2026

    2026

  43. [51]

    Xu and Q

    Y. Xu and Q. Zeng,Large deviations for the extremal eigenvalues of Ginibre ensembles, Acta Math. Sin. (to appear), arXiv:2512.12711. Department of Mathematical Sciences and Research Institute of Mathematics, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Republic of Korea Email addre...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.