Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Deformations of biorthogonal ensembles and universality

T0 review · 1 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · 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 when a biorthogonal ensemble converges to a universal limit, any microscopic deformation of it converges to the corresponding deformation of that same limit, with the deformed limit built by marking and conditioning.

desk verdict A solid, genuinely useful transfer principle for deformed biorthogonal ensembles; the main fix before publication is the h-range statement, and the imported full-line bounds should be verified. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15830 v2 pith:HN557R4G submitted 2024-11-24 math.PR math-phmath.CAmath.MP

Tom Claeys , Guilherme L. F. Silva This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.PRmath-phmath.CAmath.MP MSC 60G5560B2042C05
keywords biorthogonalensemblesdeterminantalpointprocessesprobabilitygeneratingfunctionalsuniversalitymarkingandconditioningPainlevékernelsdiscreteCoulombgasessinekernelAiry
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 establishes a transfer principle for universality in a large family of random particle systems known as biorthogonal ensembles. It proves that if a biorthogonal ensemble converges, as the number of particles grows, to a limiting point process such as the sine or Airy process, then a microscopic deformation of the ensemble converges to the corresponding deformation of that same limiting process. The deformed limit is built by marking each particle with an independent Bernoulli label and conditioning on the event that no label is observed. The proof works through probability generating functionals rather than correlation kernels, so it needs only mild regularity and a factorized square-integrable bound on the scaled kernels. As a consequence, several Painlevé-type kernels studied in the literature are identified as conditional and thinned versions of sine and Airy point processes.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the probability generating functional (PGF) of a determinantal point process, G[h] = det(1 - $\sqrt$(h) K $\sqrt$(h)). For a deformed ensemble the PGF has the ratio form $G_n^{{sigma_n}}$[h] = det(1 - (sigma_n + h - sigma_n h)K_n) / det(1 - sigma_n K_n), and the proof shows that both determinants in the ratio converge by dominated convergence of their Fredholm series. The domination comes from Hadamard's inequality plus a factorized $L^{2}$ bound on the kernels, the product Phi(u)Psi(v) that is Assumption 2.2(3). The deformed limiting kernel K^$\sigma$ = $\sqrt$(1-$\sigma$) K (1-$\sigma$ K)^{-1} $\sqrt$(1-$\sigma$), supplied by the marking-and-conditioning construction, is the object that carries the limit through.

What would settle it

Search for a sequence of biorthogonal ensembles whose kernels converge pointwise to a limit but whose diagonal grows too fast for the factorized $L^{2}$ bound to hold, for instance an orthogonal polynomial ensemble at a point where the equilibrium density vanishes. For a fixed deformation $\sigma$, compute the deformed probability generating functional numerically for increasing n; if the limit differs from the Fredholm determinant of the deformed kernel K^$\sigma$, the transfer principle fails exactly where the domination assumption is essential.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the deformation operation commutes with the large-n limit. Given a sequence of biorthogonal ensembles whose scaled kernels converge pointwise to a kernel K, and deformations sigma_n that converge to a function $\sigma$, the deformed ensembles converge weakly to the deformed limit point process X^$\sigma$, the process obtained by taking the ground process X, assigning each point an independent Bernoulli mark with probability $\sigma$(u), and conditioning on all marks being zero. X^$\sigma$ is again determinantal, with kernel K^$\sigma$ = $\sqrt$(1-$\sigma$) K (1-$\sigma$ K)^{-1} $\sqrt$(1-$\sigma$). Theorems 2.3 and 2.7 state this for fixed and varying reference measures, respectively, and the applications show that bulk deformations of orthogonal polynomial ensembles yield deformed sine processes, edge deformations yield deformed Airy processes, and deformed discrete Coulomb gases yield deformed discrete sine processes.

Load-bearing premise

The proof needs a uniform domination bound: for every bounded region, the matrix entries of the scaled kernel, with the deformation factor inserted, must be bounded by a product Phi(u)Psi(v) with Phi and Psi square-integrable; if no such bound holds, the dominated-convergence argument in the paper does not go through.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Bulk deformations of orthogonal polynomial ensembles with weight e^{-nV} converge to sigma-deformations of the sine point process; if the deformation is on sub-microscopic scales, the limit is the plain sine process (Corollary 3.1).
  • Edge deformations of orthogonal polynomial ensembles converge to sigma-deformations of the Airy point process, covering hard-edge-to-soft-edge transitions and kernels tied to Painlevé II (Corollary 3.2).
  • Deformed discrete Coulomb gases converge to deformed discrete sine point processes on the limiting lattice (Corollary 3.5).
  • Several Painlevé-type kernels in the literature are revealed to be the correlation kernels of conditioned and thinned sine or Airy processes, giving them a ready probabilistic interpretation (Remark 3.3).
  • The framework turns universality into a transferable property: any class of deformations sigma generates new explicit limit kernels from an existing limit kernel.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The formula K^sigma = sqrt(1-sigma) K (1-sigma K)^{-1} sqrt(1-sigma) is an operator-valued transformation on the limiting kernel; viewing the limit as a functional calculus could allow classifying which sigma produce genuinely new universal processes.
  • The sub-microscopic case (t > 0) shows a sharp scale threshold, and one could test whether the deformed limit varies continuously as the deformation scale crosses from microscopic to sub-microscopic.
  • The same PGF-based transfer could apply to other biorthogonal limits, such as Bessel or Pearcey kernels, whenever analogous one-point bounds are available; the paper's assumptions are formulated to make such checks routine.
  • For the discrete sine case, the paper's condition uses only local bounds on the kernel from the existing literature, suggesting the method extends to other tiling or exclusion models where such bounds are known.
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

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proves a transfer theorem for deformed biorthogonal ensembles. Under pointwise kernel convergence plus a factorized L² domination bound (Assumption 2.2), Theorem 2.3 shows that the probability generating functionals of the deformed ensembles converge to those of the σ-deformation of the limiting point process; Theorem 2.7 gives a varying-measure analogue (Assumption 2.6). The proof expands the relevant Fredholm determinants and applies dominated convergence, after establishing a finite-rank identity for the deformed kernel in Lemma 4.1. Applications are given to bulk and soft-edge deformations of orthogonal polynomial ensembles and to bulk deformations of discrete Coulomb gases, yielding deformed sine, Airy, and discrete sine processes.

Significance. If the results are correct, the paper offers a conceptually clean and quite general mechanism for universality transfer: deformations by marking and conditioning commute with scaling limits under mild assumptions, without a separate asymptotic analysis of the deformed models. The use of probability generating functionals rather than correlation kernels is a genuine methodological novelty, and the resulting probabilistic interpretation of several Painlevé-type kernels is valuable. The finite-n deformed kernel identity and the dominated-convergence argument for the continuous cases are coherent and carefully written. The discrete application, however, contains a normalization issue that needs correction before the corollary as stated can be trusted.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 3.3, Eqs. (3.25)–(3.26) and Corollary 3.5] The normalization in the discrete Coulomb gas application appears inconsistent. Since ∫ k_n(x,x)dν_N(x)=n and dν_N is the counting measure on N sites, the per-site one-point function cannot converge to κV(x) if κV is the Lebesgue density of a probability measure on [0,1] as in (3.24); with n=βN the correct per-site limit should involve a factor β/ρ, namely βκV(x)/ρ(x). Moreover, with the scaling (3.26), the lattice spacing of the limiting set Ω is δ=κV(x*)/ρ(x*), so a discrete sine process with intensity β per unit length has kernel δ sin(πβ(u−v))/(π(u−v)) in continuous coordinates, equivalently site-index kernel sin(πβδ(i−j))/(π(i−j)), not (βκV(x*)/ρ(x*)) sin(π(u−v))/(π(u−v)) as printed. As written, Kdsin in Corollary 3.5 has the wrong prefactor and oscillation frequency unless β=1. The authors should correct (3.25) and the Kdsin formula, and reconcile them with the quoted [4, Lemma 7.13]; otherwise the discrete corollary is not established.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Theorems 2.3 and 2.7, Sections 4 and 5] The theorem statements allow continuous h: K → [0,+∞) with bounded support, but the proofs in Sections 4 and 5 explicitly restrict to 0 ≤ h < 1 with sup h < 1. Since weak convergence is characterized by the class h ∈ [0,1], the statements should either be restricted to this class or an analytic-continuation argument in h should be supplied.
  2. [Section 3.3, verification of Assumption 2.6(3)] The verification of Assumption 2.6(3) sets Φ=Ψ=2C1_{[-L,L]}, which is not continuous on all of R; the argument should explicitly invoke the relaxed continuity condition stated after Theorem 2.7, namely continuity on a neighborhood of supp μ.
  3. [Lemma 5.2] The proof uses without comment that the measure of ∂G under ⊗(ΦΨ dμ) is zero; this follows because G is defined by ΦΨ≠0 and the measure has density ΦΨ, but a one-sentence justification would avoid a gap for the reader.
  4. [Lemmas 5.2 and 5.4] The weak convergence of the product measures ⊗(ΦΨ dμ_n) to ⊗(ΦΨ dμ) is used without proof; it follows from the uniform boundedness of the total masses guaranteed by Assumption 2.6(3), but this step should be stated explicitly.
  5. [Section 3, applications] Corollaries 3.1, 3.2, and 3.5 inherit imported full-line or compact one-point bounds, namely (3.5), (3.14), and [4, Lemma 7.13]; the paper should state explicitly that these estimates are not re-proved here and that the conclusions depend on them.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the deformed-kernel identity is proved from scratch, the determinant limits are established under explicit domination assumptions, and the final identification of the limiting PGF is an independent same-author result [24], not a restatement of the theorem.

full rationale

The central claim is a transfer principle: if the undeformed biorthogonal ensemble Xn converges to X, then the deformed ensemble Xn^{σn} converges to X^σ. This is not true by construction. Lemma 4.1 derives the finite-n deformed kernel K^{σn}_n = sqrt(1-σn)Kn(1-σn Kn)^{-1}sqrt(1-σn) from the biorthogonal projection structure, and Lemma 4.2 reduces the deformed PGF to a ratio of two Fredholm determinants. Lemmas 4.4-4.5 and 5.2-5.4 prove the convergence of these determinants using Assumptions 2.2/2.6; the factorized L2 domination bound is a hypothesis, not a fitted parameter, and it is verified in the applications through independent full-line estimates (3.5), (3.14), and [4, Lemma 7.13]. The only same-first-author citation that enters the proof is [24, Theorem 2.4(2)], used at the end of the proof of Theorem 2.3 to identify the ratio of limit determinants with the PGF G^σ of the marked-and-conditioned limit process. That theorem is proved in a separate paper, does not involve the n-convergence at issue, and its assumptions do not include the target result; it is independent support rather than a circular premise. No parameter is fitted to data and renamed a prediction, no known kernel is redefined as a new object, and no uniqueness claim is imported to forbid alternatives. The h ≥ 0 versus h < 1 statement/proof mismatch is a presentation issue, not a circularity.

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

The paper introduces no fitted numerical parameters; the deformation symbol σ and the model data V, f, and ρ are user-provided inputs. The central transfer theorem and its applications rest on known universality results and uniform kernel bounds imported from the literature, plus the marking-conditioning construction of [24].

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Bulk universality for orthogonal polynomial ensembles: the scaled Christoffel-Darboux kernel converges pointwise to the sine kernel under conditions (3.1), and the diagonal is uniformly bounded by C as in (3.5).
    Used in Section 3.1 to verify Assumption 2.2; imported from Pastur-Shcherbina [73], Levin-Lubinsky [65], and Saff-Totik [76].
  • domain assumption Soft edge universality: for real analytic strictly convex V, the scaled kernel converges uniformly to the Airy kernel and satisfies the diagonal bounds (3.14).
    Used in Section 3.2; imported from Deift et al. [34,33].
  • domain assumption For discrete Coulomb gases under Assumption 3.4, the one-point function converges to κV and the scaled kernel satisfies the rate bound (3.32) from [4, Lemma 7.13].
    Used in Section 3.3 to verify Assumption 2.6.
  • domain assumption The marking-conditioning construction of deformed DPPs and the kernel formula K^σ = sqrt(1-σ)K(1-σK)^{-1}sqrt(1-σ), with the associated probability generating functional identity, from [24].
    Used throughout; the finite-n analogue is re-derived in Lemma 4.1, but the limit identity G^σ[h] = det(1 - sqrt(h)K^σ sqrt(h)) is imported from [24, Theorem 2.4(2)].
  • standard math General determinantal point process facts: Fredholm determinant expansion of probability generating functionals and weak convergence via pointwise convergence of PGFs.
    Standard background from Borodin, Daley-Vere-Jones, and Soshnikov.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Deformations of biorthogonal ensembles and universality." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HN557R4G

@misc{pith2026241115830,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Deformations of biorthogonal ensembles and universality},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HN557R4G}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15830}
}
read the original abstract

We consider a large class of deformations of continuous and discrete biorthogonal ensembles and investigate their behavior in the limit of a large number of particles. We provide sufficient conditions to ensure that if a biorthogonal ensemble converges to a (universal) limiting process, then the deformed biorthogonal ensemble converges to a deformed version of the same limiting process. To construct the deformed version of the limiting process, we rely on a procedure of marking and conditioning. Our approach is based on an analysis of the probability generating functionals of the ensembles and is conceptually different from the traditional approach via correlation kernels. Thanks to this method, our sufficient conditions are rather mild and do not rely on much regularity of the original ensemble and of the deformation. As a consequence of our results, we obtain probabilistic interpretations of several Painlev\'e-type kernels that have been constructed in the literature, as deformations of classical sine and Airy point processes.

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. Deformations of OP ensembles in a bulk critical scaling

    math-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A local finite-temperature-type deformation of exponential weights changes the bulk sine kernel into a new kernel governed by the Claeys-Tarricone nonlocal equation and creates oscillatory n^{-1} terms in recurrence c...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [24]

    Determinantal point processes conditioned on randomly incomplete configurations

    T. Claeys and G. Glesner. Determinantal point processes conditioned on randomly incomplete configurations.arXiv e-prints, page arXiv:2112.10642, Dec. 2021

    work page Pith review arXiv 2021

  2. [1]

    Akemann, M

    G. Akemann, M. Duits, and L. D. Molag. The elliptic Ginibre ensemble: a unifying approach to local and global statistics for higher dimensions.J. Math. Phys., 64(2):Paper No. 023503, 39, 2023

    2023

  3. [2]

    Akemann and J

    G. Akemann and J. R. Ipsen. Recent exact and asymptotic results for products of independent random matrices. Acta Phys. Polon. B, 46(9):1747–1784, 2015

    2015

  4. [3]

    Akemann, M

    G. Akemann, M. Kieburg, and L. Wei. Singular value correlation functions for products of Wishart random matrices. J. Phys. A, 46(27):275205, 22, 2013

    work page 2013

  5. [4]

    J. Baik, T. Kriecherbauer, K. T.-R. McLaughlin, and P. D. Miller.Discrete orthogonal polynomials, volume 164 of Annals of Mathematics Studies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2007. Asymptotics and applications

    work page 2007

  6. [5]

    Balogh, M

    F. Balogh, M. Bertola, S.-Y. Lee, and K. D. T.-R. McLaughlin. Strong asymptotics of the orthogonal polynomials with respect to a measure supported on the plane.Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 68(1):112–172, 2015

    work page 2015

  7. [6]

    Beltrán, J

    C. Beltrán, J. Marzo, and J. Ortega-Cerdà. Energy and discrepancy of rotationally invariant determinantal point processes in high dimensional spheres.J. Complexity, 37:76–109, 2016

    work page 2016

  8. [7]

    R. J. Berman. Determinantal point processes and fermions on complex manifolds: large deviations and bosonization. Comm. Math. Phys., 327(1):1–47, 2014

    work page 2014

Show all 82 references
  1. [8]

    Billingsley.Convergence of probability measures

    P. Billingsley.Convergence of probability measures. Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics: Probability and Sta- tistics. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, second edition, 1999. A Wiley-Interscience Publication

    1999

  2. [9]

    Bleher and K

    P. Bleher and K. Liechty. Uniform asymptotics for discrete orthogonal polynomials with respect to varying exponential weights on a regular infinite lattice.Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, (2):342–386, 2011

    2011

  3. [10]

    P. M. Bleher and A. R. Its. Semiclassical asymptotics of orthogonal polynomials, Riemann-Hilbert problem, and universality in the matrix model.Ann. of Math., 150(1):185–266, 1999

    1999

  4. [11]

    P. M. Bleher and A. B. J. Kuijlaars. Random matrices with external source and multiple orthogonal polynomials. Int. Math. Res. Not., (3):109–129, 2004

    2004

  5. [12]

    P. M. Bleher and A. B. J. Kuijlaars. Orthogonal polynomials in the normal matrix model with a cubic potential.Adv. Math., 230(3):1272–1321, 2012

    2012

  6. [13]

    P. M. Bleher and K. Liechty.Random matrices and the six-vertex model, volume 32 of CRM Monograph Series. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2014

    2014

  7. [14]

    Bogatskiy, T

    A. Bogatskiy, T. Claeys, and A. Its. Hankel determinant and orthogonal polynomials for a Gaussian weight with a discontinuity at the edge.Comm. Math. Phys., 347(1):127–162, 2016

    2016

  8. [15]

    A. Borodin. Biorthogonal ensembles.Nuclear Phys. B, 536(3):704–732, 1999

    1999

  9. [16]

    A. Borodin. Determinantal point processes.The Oxford Handbook of Random Matrix Theory, Oxford University Press, pages 231–249, 2011. DEFORMATIONS OF BIORTHOGONAL ENSEMBLES AND UNIVERSALITY 31

    2011

  10. [17]

    Borodin and V

    A. Borodin and V. Gorin. Lectures on integrable probability. InProbability and statistical physics in St. Petersburg, volume 91 ofProc. Sympos. Pure Math., pages 155–214. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2016

    2016

  11. [18]

    Borodin and G

    A. Borodin and G. Olshanski. Infinite random matrices and ergodic measures.Commun. Math. Phys., 223(1):87–123, 2001

    2001

  12. [19]

    Borodin and G

    A. Borodin and G. Olshanski. The ASEP and determinantal point processes.Comm. Math. Phys., 353(2):853–903, 2017

    2017

  13. [20]

    Bothner, P

    T. Bothner, P. Deift, A. Its, and I. Krasovsky. On the asymptotic behavior of a log gas in the bulk scaling limit in the presence of a varying external potential I.Comm. Math. Phys., 337(3):1397–1463, 2015

    2015

  14. [21]

    Cafasso and T

    M. Cafasso and T. Claeys. Biorthogonal measures, polymer partition functions, and random matrices. arXiv:2401.10130

    arXiv

  15. [22]

    Cafasso, T

    M. Cafasso, T. Claeys, and G. Ruzza. Airy kernel determinant solutions to the KdV equation and integro-differential Painlevé equations.Comm. Math. Phys., 386(2):1107–1153, 2021

    2021

  16. [23]

    C. E. Candido, V. Alves, T. Chouteau, C. F. Santos, and G. L. F. Silva. Deformations of OP ensembles in a bulk critical scaling.ArXiv:2506.05622, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Claeys and A

    T. Claeys and A. B. J. Kuijlaars. Universality in unitary random matrix ensembles when the soft edge meets the hard edge. InIntegrable systems and random matrices, volume 458 ofContemp. Math., pages 265–279. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2008

    2008

  18. [26]

    Claeys and S

    T. Claeys and S. Tarricone. On the integrable structure of deformed sine kernel determinants.arXiv:2309.03803, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    D. J. Daley and D. Vere-Jones.An introduction to the theory of point processes. Vol. I. Probability and its Applications (New York). Springer-Verlag, New York, second edition, 2003. Elementary theory and methods

    2003

  20. [28]

    D. J. Daley and D. Vere-Jones.An introduction to the theory of point processes. Vol. II. Probability and its Applica- tions (New York). Springer, New York, second edition, 2008. General theory and structure

    2008

  21. [29]

    Das and E

    S. Das and E. Dimitrov. Large deviations for discreteβ-ensembles. J. Funct. Anal., 283(1):Paper No. 109487, 108, 2022

    2022

  22. [30]

    Deift.Orthogonal Polynomials and Random Matrices: A Riemann-Hilbert Approach

    P. Deift.Orthogonal Polynomials and Random Matrices: A Riemann-Hilbert Approach. Number 3 in Courant Lecture Notes. American Mathematical Society, 2000

    2000

  23. [31]

    P. Deift. Universality for mathematical and physical systems. InProceedings of the international congress of math- ematicians (ICM), Madrid, Spain, August 22–30, 2006. Volume I: Plenary lectures and ceremonies, pages 125–152. Zürich: European Mathematical Society (EMS), 2007

    2006

  24. [32]

    Deift, A

    P. Deift, A. R. Its, and X. Zhou. A Riemann-Hilbert approach to asymptotic problems arising in the theory of random matrix models and also in the theory of integrable statistical mechanics.Ann. of Math., 146:149–235, 1997

    1997

  25. [33]

    Deift, T

    P. Deift, T. Kriecherbauer, K. T.-R. McLaughlin, S. Venakides, and X. Zhou. Strong asymptotics of orthogonal polynomials with respect to exponential weights.Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 52(12):1491–1552, 1999

    1999

  26. [34]

    Deift, T

    P. Deift, T. Kriecherbauer, K. T.-R. McLaughlin, S. Venakides, and X. Zhou. Uniform asymptotics for polynomials orthogonal with respect to varying exponential weights and applications to universality questions in random matrix theory.Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 52:1335–1425, 1999

    1999

  27. [35]

    Deift, K

    P. Deift, K. T.-R. McLaughlin, and T. Kriecherbauer. New results on the equilibrium measure for logarithmic poten- tials in the presence of an external field.J. Approx. Theory, 95:388–475, 1998

    1998

  28. [36]

    Delvaux, A

    S. Delvaux, A. B. J. Kuijlaars, and L. Zhang. Critical behavior of non-intersecting Brownian-motions at a tacnode. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 64:1305–1383, 2011

    2011

  29. [37]

    P. D. Dragnev and E. B. Saff. Constrained energy problems with applications to orthogonal polynomials of a discrete variable. J. Anal. Math., 72:223–259, 1997

    1997

  30. [38]

    P. D. Dragnev and E. B. Saff. A problem in potential theory and zero asymptotics of Krawtchouk polynomials.J. Approx. Theory, 102(1):120–140, 2000

    2000

  31. [39]

    M. Duits. Painlevé kernels in Hermitian matrix models.Constr. Approx., 39(1):173–196, 2014

    2014

  32. [40]

    M. Duits. On global fluctuations for non-colliding processes.Ann. Probab., 46(3):1279–1350, 2018

    2018

  33. [41]

    Duits and A

    M. Duits and A. B. J. Kuijlaars. Universality in the two-matrix model: a Riemann-Hilbert steepest-descent analysis. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 62(8):1076–1153, 2009

    2009

  34. [42]

    Duits and A

    M. Duits and A. B. J. Kuijlaars. The two-periodic Aztec diamond and matrix valued orthogonal polynomials.J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), 23(4):1075–1131, 2021

    2021

  35. [43]

    F. J. Dyson. The Coulomb fluid and the fifth Painlevé transcendent. InChen Ning Yang, pages 131–146. Int. Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995. 32 T. CLAEYS AND G. SIL V A

    1995

  36. [44]

    D. Féral. On large deviations for the spectral measure of discrete Coulomb gas. InSéminaire de probabilités XLI, volume 1934 ofLecture Notes in Math., pages 19–49. Springer, Berlin, 2008

    1934

  37. [45]

    P. J. Forrester. The spectrum edge of random matrix ensembles.Nucl. Phys., B, 402(3):709–728, 1993

    1993

  38. [46]

    Ghosal and G

    P. Ghosal and G. L. F. Silva. Universality for multiplicative statistics of Hermitian random matrices and the integro- differential Painlevé II equation.Comm. Math. Phys. (to appear, ArXiv:2201.12941), page 60 pp., 2022

    2022 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Guionnet and J

    A. Guionnet and J. Huang. Rigidity and edge universality of discrete β-ensembles. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 72(9):1875–1982, 2019

    1982

  40. [48]

    Imamura and T

    T. Imamura and T. Sasamoto. Determinantal structures in the O’Connell-Yor directed random polymer model.J. Stat. Phys., 163(4):675–713, 2016

    2016

  41. [49]

    I. C. F. Ipsen and R. Rehman. Perturbation bounds for determinants and characteristic polynomials.SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 30(2):762–776, 2008

    2008

  42. [50]

    A. R. Its, A. G. Izergin, V. E. Korepin, and N. A. Slavnov. Differential equations for quantum correlation functions. In Proceedings of the Conference on Yang-Baxter Equations, Conformal Invariance and Integrability in Statistical Mechanics and Field Theory, volume 4, pages 10...

    1990

  43. [51]

    Jimbo, T

    M. Jimbo, T. Miwa, Y. Môri, and M. Sato. Density matrix of an impenetrable Bose gas and the fifth Painlevé transcendent. Phys. D, 1(1):80–158, 1980

    1980

  44. [52]

    Johansson

    K. Johansson. Shape fluctuations and random matrices.Comm. Math. Phys., 209(2):437–476, 2000

    2000

  45. [53]

    Johansson

    K. Johansson. Discrete orthogonal polynomial ensembles and the Plancherel measure.Ann. of Math. (2), 15(1):259– 296, 2001

    2001

  46. [54]

    Johansson

    K. Johansson. Non-intersecting paths, random tilings and random matrices.Probab. Theory Relat. Fields, 123(2):225– 280, 2002

    2002

  47. [55]

    Johansson

    K. Johansson. Discrete polynuclear growth and determinantal processes.Comm. Math. Phys., 242(1-2):277–329, 2003

    2003

  48. [56]

    Johansson

    K. Johansson. Non-intersecting, simple, symmetric random walks and the extended Hahn kernel.Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble), 55(6):2129–2145, 2005

    2005

  49. [57]

    Johansson

    K. Johansson. Random matrices and determinantal processes. InMathematical statistical physics, pages 1–55. Elsevier B. V., Amsterdam, 2006

    2006

  50. [58]

    R. Kenyon. An introduction to the dimer model. InSchool and conference on probability theory, Trieste, Italy, May 13–17, 2002., pages 267–304. Trieste: ICTP - The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, 2004

    2002

  51. [59]

    Kieburg, A

    M. Kieburg, A. B. J. Kuijlaars, and D. Stivigny. Singular value statistics of matrix products with truncated unitary matrices. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, 2016(11):3392–3424, 2016

    2016

  52. [60]

    Kimura and X

    T. Kimura and X. Navand. Fredholm determinants from Schrödinger type equations, and deformation of Tracy- Widom distribution.ArXiv:2408.06888, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  53. [61]

    W. König. Orthogonal polynomial ensembles in probability theory.Probab. Surv., 2:385–447, 2005

    2005

  54. [62]

    A. B. J. Kuijlaars. Multiple orthogonal polynomials in random matrix theory. InProceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians. Volume III, pages 1417–1432, New Delhi, 2010. Hindustan Book Agency

    2010

  55. [63]

    A. B. J. Kuijlaars and D. Stivigny. Singular values of products of random matrices and polynomial ensembles.Random Matrices Theory Appl., 3(3):1450011, 22, 2014

    2014

  56. [64]

    A. B. J. Kuijlaars and M. Vanlessen. Universality for eigenvalue correlations from the modified Jacobi unitary en- semble. Int. Math. Res. Not., 2002(30):1575–1600, 2002

    2002

  57. [65]

    Levin and D

    E. Levin and D. S. Lubinsky. Universality limits in the bulk for varying measures.Adv. Math., 219(3):743–779, 2008

    2008

  58. [66]

    Levin and D

    E. Levin and D. S. Lubinsky. Universality limits at the soft edge of the spectrum via classical complex analysis.Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, (13):3006–3070, 2011

    2011

  59. [67]

    D. S. Lubinsky. Universality limits in the bulk for arbitrary measures on compact sets.J. Anal. Math., 106:373–394, 2008

    2008

  60. [68]

    D. S. Lubinsky. A new approach to universality limits involving orthogonal polynomials. Ann. of Math. (2), 170(2):915–939, 2009

    2009

  61. [69]

    K. T.-R. McLaughlin and P. D. Miller. The∂ steepest descent method for orthogonal polynomials on the real line with varying weights.Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, pages Art. ID rnn 075, 66, 2008

    2008

  62. [70]

    M. L. Mehta. A nonlinear differential equation and a Fredholm determinant.J. Physique I, 2(9):1721–1729, 1992

    1992

  63. [71]

    A. F. Moreno, A. Martínez-Finkelshtein, and V. L. Sousa. On a conjecture of A. Magnus concerning the asymptotic behavior of the recurrence coefficients of the generalized Jacobi polynomials.J. Approx. Theory, 162(4):807–831, 2010

    2010

  64. [72]

    Nagao and M

    T. Nagao and M. Wadati. Eigenvalue distribution of random matrices at the spectrum edge.J. Phys. Soc. Japan, 62(11):3845–3856, 1993. DEFORMATIONS OF BIORTHOGONAL ENSEMBLES AND UNIVERSALITY 33

    1993

  65. [73]

    Pastur and M

    L. Pastur and M. Shcherbina. Universality of the local eigenvalue statistics for a class of unitary invariant random matrix ensembles.J. Statist. Phys., 86(1-2):109–147, 1997

    1997

  66. [74]

    D. Remenik. Integrable fluctuations in the KPZ universality class. InInternational congress of mathematicians 2022, ICM 2022, Helsinki, Finland, virtual, July 6–14, 2022. Volume 6. Sections 12–14, pages 4426–4450. Berlin: European Mathematical Society (EMS), 2023

    2022

  67. [75]

    G. Ruzza. Bessel kernel determinants and integrable equations.arXiv:2401.11213, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  68. [76]

    E. B. Saff and V. Totik.Logarithmic potentials with external fields, volume 316 ofFundamental Principles of Mathe- matical Sciences. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1997. Appendix B by Thomas Bloom

    1997

  69. [77]

    Shirai and Y

    T. Shirai and Y. Takahashi.J. Funct. Anal., (205):414–463, 2003

    2003

  70. [78]

    Simon.Trace Ideals and Their Applications

    B. Simon.Trace Ideals and Their Applications. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs - vol. 120. American Mathe- matical Society, New York, second edition, 2005

    2005

  71. [79]

    Soshnikov

    A. Soshnikov. Determinantal random point fields.Uspekhi Mat. Nauk, 55(5(335)):107–160, 2000

    2000

  72. [80]

    V. Totik. Asymptotics for Christoffel functions with varying weights.Adv. in Appl. Math., 25(4):322–351, 2000

    2000

  73. [81]

    C. A. Tracy and H. Widom. Level spacing distributions and the Bessel kernel.Commun. Math. Phys., 161(2):289–309, 1994

    1994

  74. [82]

    Xu and Y.-Q

    S.-X. Xu and Y.-Q. Zhao. Painlevé XXXIV asymptotics of orthogonal polynomials for the Gaussian weight with a jump at the edge.Stud. Appl. Math., 127(1):67–105, 2011. (TC) UCLouv ain, Belgium. Email address: tom.claeys@uclouvain.be (GS) Instituto de Ciências Matemáticas e de Co...

    2011

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.