Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Using dense graph limit theory to count cocycles of random simplicial complexes

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that random 2-dimensional determinantal hypertrees and random 1-out 2-complexes have subquadratically many cocycles over every finite abelian group, so their first homology over every finite field has dimension o(n^2) with

desk verdict Genuinely new cochain graphon tool and correct mod-p homology results, but the hypertree application rests entirely on an unproved imported lemma; deserves peer review, not desk rejection. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.06559 v1 pith:4YW2GEXA submitted 2025-09-08 math.CO

András Mészáros This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.CO MSC 05C8060F1005E4555U10
keywords randomsimplicialcomplexesdeterminantalhypertrees1-out2-complexcochaingraphonslargedeviationscutnormfinite-fieldhomologydensegraphlimits
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 develops a dense limit theory for 1-cochains on complete graphs with coefficients in a finite abelian group, and proves a large-deviation principle for the random cochain whose independent edge labels have a fixed symmetric distribution. That principle is the counting engine: it tells how many cochains can lie at each exponential rate, and lets the paper count how many are likely to be cocycles in a random 2-complex. The main results are that a random 2-dimensional determinantal hypertree and the random 1-out 2-complex both have E|Z^1| = exp(o(n^2)) G-cocycles for every finite abelian G, hence dim H_1(F_p)/n^2 and the normalized number of generators of the integral homology converge to 0 in probability. This extends a previous mod-2 treatment to all finite abelian coefficient groups by replacing graphs with group-labeled complete directed graphs as the limiting objects.

What carries the argument

A cochain graphon is a bounded symmetric function W^G on [0,1]^2 x G with W^G(x,y,g) = W^G(y,x,-g); every f in C^1(K_n,G) gives one by putting the label f(u,v) on the rectangle for the pair (u,v). The cocycle condition is detected by the convolution W^G * W^G, whose g-coordinate is sum_h W^h o W^{g-h}; for an embedded cochain it measures the fraction of middle vertices v with f(u,v)+f(v,w)=g. The paper proves a large-deviation principle for the random cochain in the cut metric, with rate function I_nu(W) = (1/2) int sum_g W^g log(W^g/nu(g)), and then bounds log P(f in Z^1) via b(W) = <W, log o (W*W)>. The counting step partitions all cochains by the value of b; the LDP bounds how many lie in

What would settle it

Simulate the 1-out 2-complex S_2(n,1) for n up to a few hundred, compute dim H_1(S_2(n,1), F_2)/n^2 over many samples, and check whether the median tends to 0; a bounded-away median would falsify Theorem 4. Because S_2(n,1) is trivial to sample and rank over F_2 is linear algebra, this is a direct statistical test.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is stated as Theorem 1 and Theorem 4. For T_n a 2-dimensional determinantal hypertree, and for the 1-out 2-complex S_2(n,1), and for any finite abelian group G, it proves lim n^{-2} log E|Z^1(.,G)| = 0. From this it derives that for every prime p, n^{-2} dim H_1(.,F_p) converges to 0 in probability, and that the minimal number of generators of the integral homology, normalized by n^2, also converges to 0 in probability. The proof route is a limit theory: embed each G-valued 1-cochain as a cochain graphon on [0,1]^2 x G, prove a large-deviation principle in the cut metric for the independent-label random cochain, and use it to bound the number of cochains whose cocyc

Load-bearing premise

The proof rests on a bound imported from the author's earlier work: for any fixed set of triangular faces Y, the probability that the determinantal hypertree is contained in Y is at most a product over edges of the fraction of Y-faces on that edge; all other steps are general to arbitrary random 2-complexes with complete 1-skeleton.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every prime p, the normalized mod-p Betti number dim H_1(T_n,F_p)/n^2 of a random determinantal hypertree converges to 0 in probability; the same holds for the random 1-out 2-complex S_2(n,1).
  • For every finite abelian group G, E|Z^1| is exp(o(n^2)) in both models, so even the full 1-cycle space over G is typically exponentially smaller than the about |G|^{n^2} cochain space of the complete skeleton.
  • The minimal number of generators of H_1 over Z is o(n^2) in probability, so the integral homology is generated by few elements even though the order of its torsion subgroup can be exponentially large in n^2.
  • The large-deviation principle for cochain graphons is a reusable counting tool: it supplies exponential asymptotics for G-valued 1-cocycle counts in any random 2-complex whose triangle-inclusion probabilities can be expressed through a cochain graphon's convolution.
  • The method replaces the graph limit picture with a group-labeled complete directed graph limit picture, extending the dense graph large-deviation toolbox to all finite abelian coefficient groups, not just two-element coefficients.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The higher-dimensional analogue, which the paper leaves open, should follow the same template: a d-cochain graphon on [0,1]^d x G, a convolution counting (d+1)-face sums, and the same relative-entropy inequality; if it works, d-dimensional determinantal hypertrees and 1-out d-complexes would have homology rank o(n^d) over finite fields.
  • For the sparse Linial-Meshulam model, the paper notes that the log-expectation route is fluctuation-dominated; one could instead compute the rate function for the event dim Z^1 >= c n^2, which the cochain-graphon topology may support, to separate typical behavior from rare large deviations.
  • Because the theorem is purely an upper bound, it leaves the conjectured limiting distribution of dim H_1(F_p) untouched; if anything, it sharpens the target by showing that only subquadratic fluctuations are possible.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a dense-limit theory for 1-cochains of complete graphs with coefficients in a finite abelian group G, modeled as symmetric step functions on [0,1]^2 × G. It states a Chatterjee–Varadhan-type large deviation principle (Theorem 6) for i.i.d. symmetric G-valued edge labels: an upper bound for closed sets and a lower bound for open sets in the cut metric, with rate function I_nu. This LDP is then applied to count 1-cocycles in random 2-complexes. Theorem 1 asserts that for a 2-dimensional determinantal hypertree T_n and any finite abelian G, E|Z^1(T_n,G)| = exp(o(n^2)); consequently dim H_1(T_n,F_p)/n^2 converges to zero in probability, and the same holds for the minimum number of generators of H_1(T_n,Z). Theorem 4 asserts the analogous statements for the 1-out 2-complex S_2(n,1). The proof combines a bound imported from the author's earlier paper [50, Lemma 3.2] with a new cochain-graphon level-set argument.

Significance. If correct, the paper is a substantial methodological contribution. It extends graphon large-deviation technology from binary graphs to G-valued cochains, provides a clean sufficient inequality b(W)+H(W)<=0 for counting cocycles, and uses it to prove new mod-p homology vanishing for determinantal hypertrees and 1-out 2-complexes. The upper-bound LDP in Section 4.4 is largely self-contained, and the level-set decomposition in Section 3.3 is elegant. The main caveats are that the only hyper-tree-specific input, Lemma 17, is imported without proof from the author's own prior paper, and that the lower-bound half of the main LDP is only sketched. These issues do not appear fatal to the applications, but they need to be addressed before publication.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.1, Lemma 17 and Eq. (6)] The proof of Theorem 1 depends entirely on the imported bound log P(T_n^(2) subset Y) <= (n-2) log n + (1-2/n) sum_tau log(t_Y(tau)/n). This is the only place where the determinantal-hypertree measure enters; the rest of the argument is a general cochain-graphon upper bound. Since the main theorem stands or falls with this estimate, the paper should either reproduce the proof or at least state the lemma with all hypotheses, including the convention for t_Y(tau)=0. A citation to [50] is not circular, but the dependency should be explicit and the reader should not have to consult another paper to verify the pivotal step.
  2. [Section 4.4, Theorem 6(b)] The lower bound in the strong large deviation principle is not proved. The text says 'Part (b) can be proved along the lines of the proof of the lower bound in [10] with minimal technical changes, so we omit the details.' This is a main theorem, not a corollary. The weak lower bound of Lemma 42(b) is proved, but the passage from weak to strong lower bound in the quotient space requires an exponential approximation argument, which is not identical to [10] because of the cochain-graphon structure and the factor 1/2 in the rate function. At minimum, the author should outline the approximation of open sets by cut balls, the use of Lemma 41, and the compactness argument.
  3. [Section 4.3, Lemma 38 and Lemma 41] Lemma 38 leaves 'the other cases' to the reader. One of these cases, sum_g W^g < 1, is needed to show I_nu(W)=infinity outside W^G_00; the displayed example only treats sum>1. Lemma 41 states without proof that lim_{t->1} barLambda*_nu(W_t)=barLambda*_nu(W) for the convex combinations W_t. These facts are used in the proof of the lower bound. Please include the short calculations; they are not completely immediate from what is written.
  4. [Section 3.6, Theorem 4] The proof of Theorem 4 is compressed to a sketch. Since Theorem 4 claims the same three statements as for determinantal hypertrees (E|Z^1|, dim H_1 over F_p, and mg(H_1(Z))), the level-set and large-deviation steps should be spelled out or it should be stated explicitly that they follow verbatim from Section 3.3 after accounting for the extra O(n) term n(n-1)/(n-2). The current text gives the cocycle probability but does not show how the partition into eL_i and the final summation are adapted.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.1, Eq. (9)] Equation (9) writes log P(f in Z^1(T_n,F_2)), but the argument works for any finite abelian group G and should read Z^1(T_n,G).
  2. [Section 4.1, Lemma 28 proof] The text 'the partition P has at most k^{|G|}_0 parts' is a typo; it should be k_0^{|G|}. The notation is also inconsistent: k_0 is introduced but the lemma statement uses k.
  3. [Section 2.1, Lemma 11 proof] In the displayed equation, 'where is1 is the constant1 function' has missing spacing; the intended meaning is clear but should be corrected.
  4. [Section 4.2, Lemma 34] The sentence 'Note that it the symmetry of phi...' contains a typo ('it the'). Also, the definition of phi-bar should be displayed more clearly.
  5. [Section 4.3, Lemma 39] The extension to nonnegative w_g with the conventions log(0)=-infinity, 0 log 0=0, exp(-infinity)=0 is stated but not used carefully in the proof of Lemma 38. It would help to make the conventions explicit in Lemma 38 itself.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the cocycle-counting argument is a genuine derivation; the one imported self-cited lemma (Lemma 17) is a parameter-free bound whose stated assumptions do not include the target result.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is: Lemma 17 (cited from the author's earlier paper [50]) supplies the only place where the determinantal hypertree measure enters, giving log P(T_n^(2) ⊆ Y) ≤ (n−2) log n + (1−2/n) Σ_τ log(t_Y(τ)/n). Equation (5) identifies the cocycle event {f ∈ Z^1(T_n,G)} with the face-containment event {T_n^(2) ⊆ Y_f}, which is an exact identity. The in-paper Lemma 10 expresses t_Y(τ)/n as the convolution W_f^G * W_f^G evaluated on the relevant square, and equations (6)–(9) convert Lemma 17 into the upper bound in terms of b(W_f^G). Sections 3.2–3.3 then use only the newly proved closed-set upper bound of the cochain LDP (Theorem 6(a)) and a deterministic level-set partition of C^1(K_n,G) by the function b. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction: the rate function I_ν is defined from the fixed distribution ν and the proof of Theorem 6 is carried out in Section 4 from the Gärtner–Ellis theorem and compactness/regularity arguments. No uniqueness theorem is imported to forbid alternatives, and no definitional identity makes a 'prediction' equal to its input. The one load-bearing self-citation is Lemma 17, whose proof is not reproduced in this paper ('The next lemma was proved in [50, Lemma 3.2]'). That is a real completeness/verification concern, but it is not circularity: Lemma 17 is a parameter-free statement about the determinantal-hypertree measure for an arbitrary face set Y, its assumptions do not contain Theorem 1 or the cocycle count being derived, and it can be checked from the published proof in [50] independently of the present claims. Similarly, the omitted details in Theorem 6(b) ('we omit the details') concern the lower bound of the LDP, while Theorem 1 uses only the upper bound (a). Overall the paper is self-contained in the sense relevant to circularity apart from one imported, non-target lemma, so the score is 2 rather than 0.

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

The central claim rests on standard large-deviation machinery, the regularity lemma, and one prior determinantal-hypertree bound from the author's own [50]. No free parameters are fitted; no new physical entities are postulated.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Lemma 17 of [50]: for any Y subset of [n]^3, log P(T_n^(2) subset of Y) <= (n-2) log n + (1-2/n) sum_{tau in [n]^2} log(t_Y(tau)/n), where t_Y(tau) is the number of 2-faces of Y containing edge tau.
    This is the only place the determinantal hypertree model's specifics enter. It is used in equation (6) to bound the probability that a cochain is a cocycle. The bound is imported from the author's earlier paper and is not reproved here.
  • standard math Gartner-Ellis theorem for Hausdorff real topological vector spaces (Dembo-Zeitouni, Theorems 32-33 in the paper).
    Used in Section 4.2 and again in Lemma 42 to derive the weak large deviation principle from the logarithmic moment generating function computed in Lemma 37.
  • standard math Frieze-Kannan weak regularity lemma and compactness of the unlabeled cochain graphon space (Lemmas 27-31).
    These are used in Section 4.4 to upgrade the weak LDP to the strong LDP by approximating arbitrary cochain graphons with step functions on a bounded number of parts.
  • standard math The rate function I_nu defined in (3) is well-defined on the quotient space ilde{W}_0^G and is lower semicontinuous with respect to the cut metric.
    Proved in Section 4.3 (Lemmas 43-44) and needed to apply the weak LDP to closed and open sets in the strong LDP proof. The proof is included but relies on standard convexity and continuity arguments.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Using dense graph limit theory to count cocycles of random simplicial complexes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4YW2GEXA

@misc{pith2026250906559,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Using dense graph limit theory to count cocycles of random simplicial complexes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4YW2GEXA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.06559}
}
abstract

We develop a limit theory for $1$-cochains of complete graphs with coefficients from a finite abelian group. We prove an analogue of the large deviation principle of Chatterjee and Varadhan for random cochains. We use these new tools to prove results about the homology of random $2$-dimensional simplicial complexes. More specifically, we prove that if $T_n$ is a random $2$-dimensional determinantal hypertree on $n$ vertices and $p$ is any prime, then \[\frac{\dim H_1(T_n,\mathbb{F}_p)}{n^2}\] converges to zero in probability. The same result holds for random $1$-out 2-complexes.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Local limits of determinantal processes

    math.PR 2025-10 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The local limit of the determinantal process on a C4-free (d,k+1)-bi-regular bipartite graph, as d tends to infinity, is a multi-type Poisson(k) branching tree T_k.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [50]

    Bounds on the mod 2 homology of random 2-dimensional determinantal hypertrees.Combinatorica, 45(2):17, 2025

    András Mészáros. Bounds on the mod 2 homology of random 2-dimensional determinantal hypertrees.Combinatorica, 45(2):17, 2025

    work page 2025

  2. [10]

    The large deviation principle for the Erdős- Rényi random graph.European Journal of Combinatorics, 32(7):1000–1017, 2011

    Sourav Chatterjee and SR Srinivasa Varadhan. The large deviation principle for the Erdős- Rényi random graph.European Journal of Combinatorics, 32(7):1000–1017, 2011

    work page 2011

  3. [1]

    The continuum random tree I.The Annals of Probability, 19(1):1 – 28, 1991

    David Aldous. The continuum random tree I.The Annals of Probability, 19(1):1 – 28, 1991

    work page 1991

  4. [2]

    The continuum random tree II

    David Aldous. The continuum random tree II. An overview.Stochastic analysis, 167:23–70, 1991

    work page 1991

  5. [3]

    The continuum random tree III.The Annals of Probability, pages 248–289, 1993

    David Aldous. The continuum random tree III.The Annals of Probability, pages 248–289, 1993

    work page 1993

  6. [4]

    The satisfiability threshold for random linear equations.Combinatorica, 40(2):179–235, 2020

    Peter Ayre, Amin Coja-Oghlan, Pu Gao, and Noëla Müller. The satisfiability threshold for random linear equations.Combinatorica, 40(2):179–235, 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [5]

    Topology of random geometric complexes: a survey

    Omer Bobrowski and Matthew Kahle. Topology of random geometric complexes: a survey. Journal of applied and Computational Topology, 1(3):331–364, 2018

    work page 2018

  8. [6]

    Random simplicial complexes: models and phe- nomena

    Omer Bobrowski and Dmitri Krioukov. Random simplicial complexes: models and phe- nomena. InHigher-Order Systems, pages 59–96. Springer, 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 56 references
  1. [7]

    Counting graph homomorphisms

    Christian Borgs, Jennifer Chayes, László Lovász, Vera T Sós, and Katalin Vesztergombi. Counting graph homomorphisms. InTopics in Discrete Mathematics: Dedicated to Jarik Nešetřil on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday, pages 315–371. Springer, 2006

    2006

  2. [8]

    Convergent sequences of dense graphs i: Subgraph frequencies, metric properties and testing.Advances in Mathematics, 219(6):1801–1851, 2008

    Christian Borgs, Jennifer T Chayes, László Lovász, Vera T Sós, and Katalin Veszter- gombi. Convergent sequences of dense graphs i: Subgraph frequencies, metric properties and testing.Advances in Mathematics, 219(6):1801–1851, 2008

    2008

  3. [9]

    Convergent sequences of dense graphs ii

    Christian Borgs, Jennifer T Chayes, László Lovász, Vera T Sós, and Katalin Vesztergombi. Convergent sequences of dense graphs ii. multiway cuts and statistical physics.Annals of Mathematics, pages 151–219, 2012

    2012

  4. [11]

    Vanishing of cohomology groups of random simplicial complexes.Random Structures & Algorithms, 56(2):461–500, 2020

    Oliver Cooley, Nicola Del Giudice, Mihyun Kang, and Philipp Sprüssel. Vanishing of cohomology groups of random simplicial complexes.Random Structures & Algorithms, 56(2):461–500, 2020

    2020

  5. [12]

    Large deviations techniques and applications

    Amir Dembo and Ofer Zeitouni. Large deviations techniques and applications. 23

  6. [13]

    Graph limits and exchangeable random graphs.Ren- diconti di Matematica e delle sue Applicazioni

    Persi Diaconis and Svante Janson. Graph limits and exchangeable random graphs.Ren- diconti di Matematica e delle sue Applicazioni. Serie VII, pages 33–61, 2008

    2008

  7. [14]

    Homologyofmulti-parameterrandomsimplicialcomplexes.Discrete & Computational Geometry, 62(1):87–127, 2019

    ChristopherFFowler. Homologyofmulti-parameterrandomsimplicialcomplexes.Discrete & Computational Geometry, 62(1):87–127, 2019

    2019

  8. [15]

    Reflection positivity, rank connectivity, andhomomorphismofgraphs.Journal of the American Mathematical Society, 20(1):37–51, 2007

    Michael Freedman, László Lovász, and Alexander Schrijver. Reflection positivity, rank connectivity, andhomomorphismofgraphs.Journal of the American Mathematical Society, 20(1):37–51, 2007

    2007

  9. [16]

    Quick approximation to matrices and applications.Com- binatorica, 19(2):175–220, 1999

    Alan Frieze and Ravi Kannan. Quick approximation to matrices and applications.Com- binatorica, 19(2):175–220, 1999

    1999

  10. [17]

    Random labelled trees and their branching networks.Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society, 30(2):229–237, 1980

    Geoffrey R Grimmett. Random labelled trees and their branching networks.Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society, 30(2):229–237, 1980

    1980

  11. [18]

    Algebraic topology, 2000

    Allen Hatcher. Algebraic topology, 2000

    2000

  12. [19]

    The threshold for integer homology in random d-complexes.Discrete & Computational Geometry, 57:810–823, 2017

    Christopher Hoffman, Matthew Kahle, and Elliot Paquette. The threshold for integer homology in random d-complexes.Discrete & Computational Geometry, 57:810–823, 2017

    2017

  13. [20]

    Determinantal processes and independence.Probability Surveys, 3:206–229, 2006

    J Ben Hough, Manjunath Krishnapur, Yuval Peres, and Bálint Virág. Determinantal processes and independence.Probability Surveys, 3:206–229, 2006

    2006

  14. [21]

    Sharp vanishing thresholds for cohomology of random flag complexes

    Matthew Kahle. Sharp vanishing thresholds for cohomology of random flag complexes. Annals of Mathematics, pages 1085–1107, 2014

    2014

  15. [22]

    Cohen–Lenstra heuristics for torsion in homology of random complexes.Experimental Mathematics, 29(3):347–359, 2020

    Matthew Kahle, Frank H Lutz, Andrew Newman, and Kyle Parsons. Cohen–Lenstra heuristics for torsion in homology of random complexes.Experimental Mathematics, 29(3):347–359, 2020

    2020

  16. [23]

    Topology and geometry of random 2-dimensional hypertrees.Discrete & Computational Geometry, 67(4):1229–1244, 2022

    Matthew Kahle and Andrew Newman. Topology and geometry of random 2-dimensional hypertrees.Discrete & Computational Geometry, 67(4):1229–1244, 2022

    2022

  17. [24]

    Inside the critical window for cohomology of random k-complexes.Random Structures & Algorithms, 48(1):102–124, 2016

    Matthew Kahle and Boris Pittel. Inside the critical window for cohomology of random k-complexes.Random Structures & Algorithms, 48(1):102–124, 2016

    2016

  18. [25]

    Enumeration ofQ-acyclic simplicial complexes.Israel Journal of Mathematics, 45:337–351, 1983

    Gil Kalai. Enumeration ofQ-acyclic simplicial complexes.Israel Journal of Mathematics, 45:337–351, 1983

    1983

  19. [26]

    Law of large numbers for Betti numbers of homogeneous and spatially independent random simplicial complexes.Random Structures & Algorithms, 60(1):68– 105, 2022

    Shu Kanazawa. Law of large numbers for Betti numbers of homogeneous and spatially independent random simplicial complexes.Random Structures & Algorithms, 60(1):68– 105, 2022

    2022

  20. [27]

    Multigraph limits and exchangeability.Acta Mathe- matica Hungarica, 130:1–34, 2011

    István Kolossváry and Balázs Ráth. Multigraph limits and exchangeability.Acta Mathe- matica Hungarica, 130:1–34, 2011

    2011

  21. [28]

    Uniqueness of Banach space valued graphons.Journal of Math- ematical Analysis and Applications, 474(1):413–440, 2019

    Dávid Kunszenti-Kovács. Uniqueness of Banach space valued graphons.Journal of Math- ematical Analysis and Applications, 474(1):413–440, 2019

    2019

  22. [29]

    Multigraph limits, un- bounded kernels, and Banach space decorated graphs.Journal of Functional Analysis, 282(2):109284, 2022

    Dávid Kunszenti-Kovács, László Lovász, and Balázs Szegedy. Multigraph limits, un- bounded kernels, and Banach space decorated graphs.Journal of Functional Analysis, 282(2):109284, 2022

    2022

  23. [30]

    Distribution of the cokernels of determinantal row-sparse matrices.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.11700, 2025

    Jungin Lee and Myungjun Yu. Distribution of the cokernels of determinantal row-sparse matrices.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.11700, 2025. 24

    2025

  24. [31]

    Homological connectivity of random 2-complexes

    Nathan Linial and Roy Meshulam. Homological connectivity of random 2-complexes. Combinatorica, 26(4):475–487, 2006

    2006

  25. [32]

    On the phase transition in random simplicial complexes

    Nathan Linial and Yuval Peled. On the phase transition in random simplicial complexes. Annals of Mathematics, pages 745–773, 2016

    2016

  26. [33]

    Enumeration and randomized constructions of hypertrees

    Nati Linial and Yuval Peled. Enumeration and randomized constructions of hypertrees. Random Structures & Algorithms, 55(3):677–695, 2019

    2019

  27. [34]

    The rank of connection matrices and the dimension of graph algebras

    László Lovász. The rank of connection matrices and the dimension of graph algebras. European Journal of Combinatorics, 27(6):962–970, 2006

    2006

  28. [35]

    American Mathematical Soc., 2012

    László Lovász.Large networks and graph limits, volume 60. American Mathematical Soc., 2012

    2012

  29. [36]

    Generalized quasirandom graphs.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 98(1):146–163, 2008

    László Lovász and Vera T Sós. Generalized quasirandom graphs.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 98(1):146–163, 2008

    2008

  30. [37]

    Limits of dense graph sequences.Journal of Combina- torial Theory, Series B, 96(6):933–957, 2006

    László Lovász and Balázs Szegedy. Limits of dense graph sequences.Journal of Combina- torial Theory, Series B, 96(6):933–957, 2006

    2006

  31. [38]

    Szemerédi’s lemma for the analyst.GAFA Geometric And Functional Analysis, 17:252–270, 2007

    László Lovász and Balázs Szegedy. Szemerédi’s lemma for the analyst.GAFA Geometric And Functional Analysis, 17:252–270, 2007

    2007

  32. [39]

    Contractors and connectors of graph algebras.Journal of Graph Theory, 60(1):11–30, 2009

    László Lovász and Balázs Szegedy. Contractors and connectors of graph algebras.Journal of Graph Theory, 60(1):11–30, 2009

    2009

  33. [40]

    Limits of compact decorated graphs.arXiv preprint arXiv:1010.5155, 2010

    László Lovász and Balázs Szegedy. Limits of compact decorated graphs.arXiv preprint arXiv:1010.5155, 2010

    2010 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Testing properties of graphs and functions.Israel Journal of Mathematics, 178(1):113–156, 2010

    László Lovász and Balázs Szegedy. Testing properties of graphs and functions.Israel Journal of Mathematics, 178(1):113–156, 2010

    2010

  35. [42]

    Integral homology of random simplicial complexes

    Tomasz Łuczak and Yuval Peled. Integral homology of random simplicial complexes. Discrete & Computational Geometry, 59(1):131–142, 2018

    2018

  36. [43]

    Determinantal probability measures.Publications Mathématiques de l’IHÉS, 98:167–212, 2003

    Russell Lyons. Determinantal probability measures.Publications Mathématiques de l’IHÉS, 98:167–212, 2003

    2003

  37. [44]

    Randomcomplexesandℓ 2-Bettinumbers.Journal of Topology and Analysis, 1(02):153–175, 2009

    RussellLyons. Randomcomplexesandℓ 2-Bettinumbers.Journal of Topology and Analysis, 1(02):153–175, 2009

    2009

  38. [45]

    Cambridge University Press, 2017

    Russell Lyons and Yuval Peres.Probability on trees and networks, volume 42. Cambridge University Press, 2017

    2017

  39. [46]

    Homological connectivity of random k-dimensional complexes.Random Structures & Algorithms, 34(3):408–417, 2009

    Roy Meshulam and Nathan Wallach. Homological connectivity of random k-dimensional complexes.Random Structures & Algorithms, 34(3):408–417, 2009

    2009

  40. [47]

    The local weak limit of k-dimensional hypertrees.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 375(9):6127–6154, 2022

    András Mészáros. The local weak limit of k-dimensional hypertrees.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 375(9):6127–6154, 2022

    2022

  41. [48]

    The2-torsion of determinantal hypertrees is not Cohen-Lenstra.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02308, 2024

    András Mészáros. The2-torsion of determinantal hypertrees is not Cohen-Lenstra.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02308, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Coboundary expansion for the union of determinantal hypertrees.Ran- dom Structures & Algorithms, 65(4):896–914, 2024

    András Mészáros. Coboundary expansion for the union of determinantal hypertrees.Ran- dom Structures & Algorithms, 65(4):896–914, 2024. 25

    2024

  43. [51]

    Cohen–Lenstra distribution for sparse matrices with determinantal bi- asing.International Mathematics Research Notices, 2025(3), 2025

    András Mészáros. Cohen–Lenstra distribution for sparse matrices with determinantal bi- asing.International Mathematics Research Notices, 2025(3), 2025

    2025

  44. [52]

    The homology torsion growth of determinantal hypertrees.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.14694, 2025

    András Mészáros. The homology torsion growth of determinantal hypertrees.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.14694, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Distribution of labelled trees by diameter

    George Szekeres. Distribution of labelled trees by diameter. InCombinatorial Mathematics X: Proceedings of the Conference held in Adelaide, Australia, August 23–27, 1982, pages 392–397. Springer, 2006

    1982

  46. [54]

    Regular partitions of graphs

    Endre Szemerédi. Regular partitions of graphs. InProc. Colloq. Inter. CNRS, 1978

    1978

  47. [55]

    Simplex links in determinantal hypertrees.Journal of Applied and Computational Topology, pages 1–26, 2024

    Andrew Vander Werf. Simplex links in determinantal hypertrees.Journal of Applied and Computational Topology, pages 1–26, 2024

    2024

  48. [56]

    Probability theory for random groups arising in number theory

    Melanie Matchett Wood. Probability theory for random groups arising in number theory. InProc. Int. Cong. Math, volume 6, pages 4476–4508, 2022. András Mészáros, meszaros@renyi.hu HUN-REN Alfréd Rényi Institute of Mathematics, Budapest, Hungary 26

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.