Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 37 references

Sequential order survives at the fluctuation scale: an infinite hierarchy, not a closed equation.

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

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 04:36 UTC pith:I5P4YBYV

load-bearing objection A genuinely new fluctuation phenomenon—an infinite logarithmic hierarchy—proved cleanly, with the only real vulnerability being an entropy estimate imported from the authors' companion paper. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.22470 v1 pith:I5P4YBYV submitted 2026-07-24 math.PR

A Logarithmic Fluctuation Hierarchy for Sequential Interacting Diffusions

Zhenfu Wang , Xianliang Zhao This is my paper
classification math.PR MSC 60F0560K3560H1560J60
keywords sequential interacting diffusionsnon-exchangeable particle systemsGaussian fluctuationscentral limit theoremlogarithmic fluctuation hierarchymean-field limitfluctuation SPDE
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Sequential interactivity changes the central-limit corrections of a mean-field diffusion even when it does not change the law of large numbers. In this system, particle i feels only particles 1 through i-1, yet the empirical measure converges to the same deterministic limit as a fully symmetric mean-field system. The paper proves that at the 1/sqrt(N) scale the ordering remains visible: the averaged fluctuation field couples not to itself but to a field weighted by log(N/i), which couples to the next logarithmic weight, and so on. The whole countable family converges jointly to a unique linear hierarchy, with explicit covariances. If correct, this shows that fluctuations encode interaction geometry that the deterministic limit washes out.

Core claim

Under smooth drift, a convolution kernel, and i.i.d. initial conditions, the paper establishes Theorem 1.3: the family Y^{N,n}_t = N^{-1/2} sum_i ((log(N/i))^n / n!) (delta_{X^i_t} - rho_bar_t), n >= 0, converges jointly in a countable product of weighted path spaces to the unique probabilistically strong solution of a linear hierarchy in which each level n satisfies d<Y^n,phi> = <Y^n,L phi> dt + <rho_bar_t,(K*Y^{n+1}).grad phi> dt + dM^n(phi). The coupling is the predecessor-summation limit: reversing the order of summation turns the interaction with earlier particles into a cumulative weight that converges to log(1/u), and iterating produces (log(1/u))^n / n!, so no finite block of equatio

What carries the argument

The central object is the logarithmic fluctuation ladder Y^{N,n} = Y^N(h_n) with h_n(u) = (log(1/u))^n / n!, together with the discrete predecessor-sum operator (T_N f)(j/N) = sum_{i=j+1}^N f(i/N)/(i-1). Reversing the order of the lower-triangular interaction sum rewrites the drift of level n as a column-sum weight (T_N h_n)(j/N) on particle j, and the deterministic lemma T_N h_n -> h_{n+1} shows the level-n equation depends on level n+1. The ladder never closes; the proof controls the unbounded weights near u=0 by weighted Sobolev norms and q^n-summed energy bounds.

Load-bearing premise

The whole proof depends on imported quantitative estimates that each particle's conditional law is within about 1/sqrt(i) of the mean-field law in total variation and that centered interaction errors have a sub-Gaussian tail; if either rate fails, the tightness and nonlinear-remainder steps collapse.

What would settle it

Simulate the lower-triangular system in one dimension with a smooth kernel and estimate the finite-N cross-covariance of the unweighted field Y^{N,0} and the log-weighted field Y^{N,1} at a fixed time. The hierarchy predicts a nonzero limiting coupling between the two levels, whereas the classical closed equation predicts that Y^{N,1} is asymptotically irrelevant to the drift of Y^{N,0}; large-N agreement with the paper's covariance supports the hierarchy, and agreement with the closed equation would refute it.

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

If this is right

  • If the theorem is right, the classical closed fluctuation SPDE is not the universal second-order description of mean-field diffusion: two systems with the same deterministic limit can have different Gaussian fluctuations.
  • Fluctuation limits distinguish interaction architectures: balanced weights give constant column sums and the classical limit, while uniform sequential weights give a logarithmic profile, with an explicit L2 gap separating the regimes.
  • Every finite collection of levels is non-closed; any approximation of the fluctuation field must either carry the whole ladder or introduce an error controlled by the q^n weights.
  • Strong well-posedness plus the uniqueness argument means the full sequence converges, not just subsequences, and the limiting Gaussian field is a well-defined statistical object.
  • The explicit covariance formula ((n+k)!/n!k!) gives a directly testable signature of the hierarchy.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • By the same column-sum mechanism, other non-exchangeable graphs should produce hierarchies generated by their own cumulative-weight profile; the logarithmic ladder is the special case of uniform sequential order, so the method suggests a way to read interaction geometry from fluctuation covariances.
  • The combinatorial factor ((n+k)!/n!k!) equals moments of a standard exponential variable, hinting at a limiting log-time representation; one could test whether the joint law of the hierarchy matches a Gaussian field built from iterated integrals of a single noise.
  • A practical corollary is that early particles are informationally dominant at the fluctuation scale: their cumulative column weights diverge, so statistical estimators for the mean-field limit should down-weight early labels less than exchangeability would suggest.
  • Because the level-0 drift coefficient is literally the column-sum profile, one could in principle estimate the interaction ordering from time-series data of fluctuations; a testable prediction is that the cross-covariance between Y^0 and Y^1 vanishes only under column balance.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the lower-triangular (sequential) interacting particle system (1.1), in which particle i interacts only with its predecessors. It introduces a countable family of logarithmically weighted empirical fluctuation fields Y^{N,n}, n≥0, and proves (Theorem 1.3) that, under a smooth convolutional interaction condition, the entire family converges jointly in the countable product of weighted negative Sobolev path spaces to the unique probabilistically strong solution of a linear hierarchy in which level n couples to level n+1. The limiting interaction is not the classical closed McKean–Vlasov fluctuation equation but rather a logarithmic hierarchy; the paper also identifies the limiting Gaussian initial law and martingale covariances explicitly. The proof combines exact finite-N identities, entropy and conditional-law estimates from the companion paper [35], deterministic Riemann-sum asymptotics for the logarithmic weights, tightness, conditional replacement for the nonlinear remainder, and a weighted Volterra Gronwall argument for uniqueness.

Significance. If the result holds, it is a substantial contribution to the fluctuation theory of non-exchangeable interacting diffusions. The contrast with the column-balanced universal CLT of Shkolnikov–Yeung is clearly demonstrated and is conceptually interesting: the law-of-large-numbers limit is the same as in the exchangeable case, but the N^{-1/2} fluctuations reveal the sequential structure through the nonclosed hierarchy of logarithmic weights. The paper contains several strong, explicitly checkable ingredients: exact finite-N identities (Lemmas 4.1 and 4.2), explicit limiting covariances via logarithmic Riemann sums (Lemma 2.6 and Proposition 4.6), a conditional-replacement estimate that removes the nonlinear remainder (Proposition 5.2), and a pathwise uniqueness proof for the limiting hierarchy (Proposition 6.1). The exposition is transparent about the main external input, Lemma 2.1(i), which is imported from the same authors' companion paper [35].

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 2.2, Lemma 2.1(i)] The two estimates R_i(T) ≤ C_T/(i−1) and E∫_0^T |Δ_i|^2 dt ≤ C_T/(i−1) are load-bearing: they enter the tightness bound (Proposition 3.3), the replacement of T_N h_n by h_{n+1} (Lemma 4.3), the martingale covariance identification (Lemma 4.5), and the vanishing of all four terms in the nonlinear remainder (Proposition 5.2). The proof of Lemma 2.1(i) here is only a citation to [35, Theorem 1 and Lemma 3.1], and the statement of the exact theorem from [35] is not reproduced. This is a disclosed, non-circular dependency, but it is nevertheless the quantitative foundation of the paper. I recommend that the authors either state precisely which result in [35] yields the decay and include its main assumptions, or reproduce a proof sketch in an appendix; otherwise the referee and readers cannot independently verify the core convergence argument.
  2. [Section 4.2, Eq. (4.8)–(4.9)] The proof of Lemma 4.4 relies on the assertion that K ∈ C_b^∞ ∩ L^1 implies K ∈ H^r for every r ≥ 0, via Gagliardo–Nirenberg interpolation. This is plausible but is stated in one sentence and is important: the bound (4.9) is used to show that the interaction kernel Γ_s^φ is in H^{β*} and to control the cutoff error with (1−χ_R)Γ_s^φ. Please provide the precise interpolation inequality being applied, including the role of the uniform bounds on all derivatives of K, so that the reader can verify that the needed H^r regularity does not require additional decay assumptions on K.
minor comments (5)
  1. [General typesetting] The text contains several OCR-like typesetting artifacts (e.g., 'N −1/2', 'D M N,n', 'M N n', 'R i(s)'). The final version should be carefully typeset.
  2. [Lemma 2.7, proof of the predecessor-weighted L1 bound] In the part j > εN, the text says that (1/√N) Σ_{j>εN} j^{−1/2} → 0; in fact this factor is bounded by 2(1−√ε)+o(1), not o(1). The conclusion still follows because sup_{j>εN}|e_N(j)| → 0, but the wording should be clarified.
  3. [Definition 1.2, Eq. (1.4)] The condition q ∈ (0,1/4) is used to absorb the 4^n energy bound from Proposition 3.3. It would be helpful to say explicitly that any q < 1/4 is admissible, since Proposition 6.1 again chooses such a q.
  4. [References] References [29] and [35] are 2026 arXiv preprints. Please update them to published versions if available, and confirm that [35] is publicly accessible and contains the exact theorem cited in Lemma 2.1(i).
  5. [Author line] There is a typo in the affiliation block: 'Zhenfu W ang' should be 'Zhenfu Wang'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Central fluctuation-hierarchy result is non-circular; the only caveat is disclosed reliance on the authors' companion paper for entropy inputs, which is a dependency rather than a circular reduction.

full rationale

No load-bearing step in the derivation reduces to its own inputs. The logarithmic hierarchy is obtained from exact finite-N algebra: the predecessor-sum identity (1.3), Lemma 4.2, and Lemma 4.3 replace T_N h_n by h_{n+1}; the covariance factors (n+k)!/n!k! are computed Riemann sums (Lemmas 2.2, 2.6, 4.5, 4.6), not fitted parameters. Tightness, the vanishing nonlinear remainder, and the Volterra uniqueness argument are carried out in the paper. The only input not re-derived here is Lemma 2.1, whose entropy and conditional-law estimates are quoted from the authors' companion paper [35]: 'The following lemma gives the estimates from [35] used below in the smooth convolutional setting with identity diffusion' and 'The incremental entropy estimate in (i) is the i.i.d. specialization of [35, Theorem 1]'. This is load-bearing: it enters Proposition 3.3, Lemma 4.3, and Proposition 5.2. But it is a separate LLN-scale theorem, not the fluctuation limit being proved, and no equation in the present paper is equivalent by construction to the target result. Part (iv) of Lemma 2.1 is actually proved in Section 2.2, so the unproved imported core is smaller than the broad wording suggests. Under hard-rule 4, this self-citation is independent support for its stated assumptions; therefore the appropriate finding is a small score reflecting disclosed dependence, not a circularity finding.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central theorem is mostly self-contained once Assumption A is granted. The largest imported block is Lemma 2.1, the quantitative conditional-law/entropy technology from the authors' companion [35], cited rather than proved here. The technical Sobolev exponents beta, m, beta*, and q are chosen by hand to make the function-space arguments work. No fitted values or invented physical entities enter; the logarithmic weights h_n and the hierarchy itself are derived explicitly from finite-N identities.

free parameters (4)
  • beta (path-space regularity exponent) = beta > d/2 + 4
    Chosen by hand so that compact embeddings and Sobolev multiplier estimates hold in the energy/tightness argument; the convergence statement is in E = C([0,T]; H^{-beta,-m}).
  • m (weight exponent) = m > d/2 + 1
    Chosen to make the weighted negative Sobolev spaces admit the required compact embedding (2.1) and to control the probability-law weights.
  • beta* (intermediate Sobolev exponent) = d/2 + 2 < beta* < beta - 2
    Chosen for the energy estimates in Proposition 3.3 and for boundedness of the delta kernels; it is a technical interpolating exponent, not a physical parameter.
  • q (weighted summability exponent in Definition 1.2) = q in (0, 1/4)
    An arbitrary technical parameter used to make the countable hierarchy summable in the uniqueness estimate; the result holds for any q in that interval.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Assumption A: b in C_b^infty([0,T]xR^d), K in C_b^infty(R^d) ∩ L^1(R^d), i.i.d. initial variables with law rho_0, independent Brownian motions.
    Invoked throughout the paper to ensure existence and regularity of the McKean–Vlasov limit, validity of the Itô computations, and the entropy estimates. The authors explicitly note this is a convenience assumption that can be relaxed.
  • domain assumption Lemma 2.1: quantitative conditional-law/entropy estimates from the companion paper [35], including entropy decay R_i(T) ≤ C_T/(i-1) and the exponential martingale-difference MGF bound.
    Load-bearing: used in the tightness estimate (Prop. 3.3), the replacement of T_N h_n by h_{n+1} (Lemma 4.3), and the vanishing of the nonlinear remainder (Prop. 5.2). These estimates are cited from [35] but not proved in this manuscript.
  • standard math Standard infinite-dimensional stochastic analysis tools: Hilbert-space Itô formula, BDG inequality, martingale CLT, Yamada–Watanabe theorem, and Volterra–Gronwall lemma.
    Used as black boxes: [23, Theorem 6.1.1], [8], [17, Theorem VIII.3.11], [19, Theorem 1.5], and [37, Lemma 2.2].
  • domain assumption The McKean–Vlasov equation (1.2) has a unique smooth solution rho_t under Assumption A, and the operators L_t and V_s = b + K*rho_s have the required regularity.
    Needed to define the limiting hierarchy and to justify the Sobolev multiplier estimates in Proposition 3.3 and the uniqueness proof. Standard under the smoothness assumptions but not proved in the paper.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 27231 in / 13090 out tokens · 135849 ms · 2026-08-01T04:36:49.023351+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We study Gaussian fluctuations for a lower-triangular system of interacting diffusions in which particle $i$ interacts only with its predecessors. Although the empirical measure of this system converges to the same McKean--Vlasov limit as in the corresponding exchangeable mean-field system, the sequential structure remains visible at the $N^{-1/2}$ fluctuation scale. We introduce the logarithmically weighted fluctuation fields \[ Y_t^{N,n} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}} \sum_{i=1}^N \frac{\bigl(\log(N/i)\bigr)^n}{n!} (\delta_{X_t^i}-\bar\rho_t), \qquad n\ge 0, \] and prove joint convergence of the entire family in a countable product of weighted negative Sobolev path spaces to the unique probabilistically strong solution of a linear hierarchy in which $Y^n$ couples to $Y^{n+1}$. In particular, the limit of the empirical fluctuation field $\sqrt{N}(\mu_t^N-\bar\rho_t)=Y_t^{N,0}$ is not governed by the closed fluctuation SPDE arising in the classical exchangeable case. The proof combines conditional-measure replacement, deterministic estimates for the logarithmic weights, a martingale argument, and a weighted Volterra estimate.

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 5 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Graphon mean field systems.The Annals of Applied Probability, 33(5):3587–3619, 2023

    Erhan Bayraktar, Suman Chakraborty, and Ruoyu Wu. Graphon mean field systems.The Annals of Applied Probability, 33(5):3587–3619, 2023

    2023

  2. [2]

    Weakly interacting particle systems on inhomogeneous random graphs.Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 129(6):2174–2206,

    Shankar Bhamidi, Amarjit Budhiraja, and Ruoyu Wu. Weakly interacting particle systems on inhomogeneous random graphs.Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 129(6):2174–2206,

  3. [3]

    The vlasov dynamics and its fluctuations in the 1/n limit of interacting classical particles.Communications in mathematical physics, 56(2):101–113, 1977

    Werner Braun and K Hepp. The vlasov dynamics and its fluctuations in the 1/n limit of interacting classical particles.Communications in mathematical physics, 56(2):101–113, 1977

    1977

  4. [4]

    Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG, 2018

    Dominic Breit, Eduard Feireisl, and Martina Hofmanov´ a.Stochastically forced compressible fluid flows, volume 3. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG, 2018

    2018

  5. [5]

    Some fluctuation results for weakly interacting multi-type particle systems.Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 126(8):2253–2296, 2016

    Amarjit Budhiraja and Ruoyu Wu. Some fluctuation results for weakly interacting multi-type particle systems.Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 126(8):2253–2296, 2016

    2016

  6. [6]

    A law of large numbers and large deviations for interacting diffusions on Erd˝ os–R´ enyi graphs.Stochastics and Dynam- ics, 20(2):2050010, 2020

    Fabio Coppini, Helge Dietert, and Giambattista Giacomin. A law of large numbers and large deviations for interacting diffusions on Erd˝ os–R´ enyi graphs.Stochastics and Dynam- ics, 20(2):2050010, 2020. arXiv:1807.10921

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  7. [7]

    Central limit theorems for global and local empirical measures of diffusions on erd˝ os-r´ enyi graphs.Electronic Journal of Probability, 28:1–63, 2023

    Fabio Coppini, Eric Lucon, and Christophe Poquet. Central limit theorems for global and local empirical measures of diffusions on erd˝ os-r´ enyi graphs.Electronic Journal of Probability, 28:1–63, 2023. 37

    2023

  8. [8]

    Cambridge university press, 2014

    Giuseppe Da Prato and Jerzy Zabczyk.Stochastic equations in infinite dimensions. Cambridge university press, 2014

    2014

  9. [9]

    A note on dynamical models on random graphs and fokker–planck equations.Journal of Statistical Physics, 165(4):785–798, 2016

    Sylvain Delattre, Giambattista Giacomin, and Eric Lucon. A note on dynamical models on random graphs and fokker–planck equations.Journal of Statistical Physics, 165(4):785–798, 2016

    2016

  10. [10]

    Sequential propagation of chaos.arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.09913, 2023

    Kai Du, Yifan Jiang, and Xiaochen Li. Sequential propagation of chaos.arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.09913, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  11. [11]

    John Wiley & Sons, 2011

    Paul Dupuis and Richard S Ellis.A weak convergence approach to the theory of large deviations. John Wiley & Sons, 2011

    2011

  12. [12]

    A hilbertian approach for fluctuations on the mckean- vlasov model.Stochastic processes and their applications, 71(1):33–53, 1997

    Bego˜ na Fernandez and Sylvie M´ el´ eard. A hilbertian approach for fluctuations on the mckean- vlasov model.Stochastic processes and their applications, 71(1):33–53, 1997

    1997

  13. [13]

    Propagation of chaos for the 2d viscous vortex model.Journal of the European Mathematical Society, 16(7):1423–1466, 2014

    Nicolas Fournier, Maxime Hauray, and St´ ephane Mischler. Propagation of chaos for the 2d viscous vortex model.Journal of the European Mathematical Society, 16(7):1423–1466, 2014

    2014

  14. [14]

    A review of the mean field limits for vlasov equations.Kinetic & Related Models, 7(4):661, 2014

    Pierre-Emmanuel Jabin. A review of the mean field limits for vlasov equations.Kinetic & Related Models, 7(4):661, 2014

    2014

  15. [15]

    Mean-field limit of non-exchangeable systems.Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics, 78(4):651–741, 2025

    Pierre-Emmanuel Jabin, David Poyato, and Juan Soler. Mean-field limit of non-exchangeable systems.Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics, 78(4):651–741, 2025

    2025

  16. [16]

    Quantitative estimates of propagation of chaos for stochastic systems withw −1,∞ kernels.Inventiones mathematicae, 214(1):523–591, 2018

    Pierre-Emmanuel Jabin and Zhenfu Wang. Quantitative estimates of propagation of chaos for stochastic systems withw −1,∞ kernels.Inventiones mathematicae, 214(1):523–591, 2018

    2018

  17. [17]

    Shiryaev.Limit Theorems for Stochastic Processes

    Jean Jacod and Albert N. Shiryaev.Limit Theorems for Stochastic Processes. Springer, Berlin, 2 edition, 2003

    2003

  18. [18]

    Courier Dover Publications, 2017

    John L Kelley.General topology. Courier Dover Publications, 2017

    2017

  19. [19]

    Weak and strong solutions of general stochastic models.Electronic Commu- nications in Probability, 19, 2014

    Thomas Kurtz. Weak and strong solutions of general stochastic models.Electronic Commu- nications in Probability, 19, 2014

    2014

  20. [20]

    Hierarchies, entropy, and quantitative propagation of chaos for mean field diffusions.Probability and mathematical physics, 4(2):377–432, 2023

    Daniel Lacker. Hierarchies, entropy, and quantitative propagation of chaos for mean field diffusions.Probability and mathematical physics, 4(2):377–432, 2023

    2023

  21. [21]

    Quantitative propagation of chaos for non-exchangeable diffusions via first-passage percolation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.08882, 2024

    Daniel Lacker, Lane Chun Yeung, and Fuzhong Zhou. Quantitative propagation of chaos for non-exchangeable diffusions via first-passage percolation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.08882, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  22. [22]

    On the fluctuations about the vlasov limit for n-particle systems with mean- field interactions.Journal of Statistical Physics, 136(4):643–665, 2009

    Carlo Lancellotti. On the fluctuations about the vlasov limit for n-particle systems with mean- field interactions.Journal of Statistical Physics, 136(4):643–665, 2009

    2009

  23. [23]

    Springer, 2015

    Wei Liu and Michael R¨ ockner.Stochastic partial differential equations: an introduction. Springer, 2015

    2015

  24. [24]

    Transition from gaussian to non-gaussian fluctuations for mean-field diffusions in spatial interaction.The Annals of Applied Probability, 26(6):3840–3909, 2016

    Eric Lucon and Wilhelm Stannat. Transition from gaussian to non-gaussian fluctuations for mean-field diffusions in spatial interaction.The Annals of Applied Probability, 26(6):3840–3909, 2016. 38

    2016

  25. [25]

    Henry P McKean. Propagation of chaos for a class of non-linear parabolic equations.Stochastic Differential Equations (Lecture Series in Differential Equations, Session 7, Catholic Univ., 1967), pages 41–57, 1967

    1967

  26. [26]

    Fluctuations in the kinetic theory of gases.Communications on pure and applied mathematics, 28(4):435–455, 1975

    HP McKean. Fluctuations in the kinetic theory of gases.Communications on pure and applied mathematics, 28(4):435–455, 1975

    1975

  27. [27]

    Asymptotic behaviour of some interacting particle systems; mckean-vlasov and boltzmann models

    Sylvie M´ el´ eard. Asymptotic behaviour of some interacting particle systems; mckean-vlasov and boltzmann models. InProbabilistic models for nonlinear partial differential equations, pages 42–95. Springer, 1996

    1996

  28. [28]

    Mean field limit for coulomb-type flows.Duke Mathematical Journal, 169(15):2887–2935, 2020

    Sylvia Serfaty. Mean field limit for coulomb-type flows.Duke Mathematical Journal, 169(15):2887–2935, 2020

    2020

  29. [29]

    Universal central limit theorem for non- exchangeable interacting diffusions, 2026

    Mykhaylo Shkolnikov and Lane Chun Yeung. Universal central limit theorem for non- exchangeable interacting diffusions, 2026. arXiv:2607.07598

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  30. [30]

    Topics in propagation of chaos

    Alain-Sol Sznitman. Topics in propagation of chaos. InEcole d’´ et´ e de probabilit´ es de Saint- Flour XIX—1989, pages 165–251. Springer, 1991

    1989

  31. [31]

    Limit theorems for certain diffusion processes with interaction

    Hiroshi Tanaka. Limit theorems for certain diffusion processes with interaction. InNorth- Holland Mathematical Library, volume 32, pages 469–488. Elsevier, 1984

    1984

  32. [32]

    Central limit theorem for a simple diffusion model of interacting particles.Hiroshima Mathematical Journal, 11(2):415–423, 1981

    Hiroshi Tanaka and Masuyuki Hitsuda. Central limit theorem for a simple diffusion model of interacting particles.Hiroshima Mathematical Journal, 11(2):415–423, 1981

    1981

  33. [33]

    Birkh¨ auser, Basel, 1992

    Hans Triebel.Theory of Function Spaces II. Birkh¨ auser, Basel, 1992

    1992

  34. [34]

    Cambridge University Press, 2018

    Roman Vershynin.High-Dimensional Probability: An Introduction with Applications in Data Science. Cambridge University Press, 2018

    2018

  35. [35]

    Quantitative convergence for sequential interacting diffu- sions via incremental relative entropy, 2026

    Zhenfu Wang and Xianliang Zhao. Quantitative convergence for sequential interacting diffu- sions via incremental relative entropy, 2026. arXiv:2602.01641

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  36. [36]

    Gaussian fluctuations for interacting par- ticle systems with singular kernels.Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 247(5):101, 2023

    Zhenfu Wang, Xianliang Zhao, and Rongchan Zhu. Gaussian fluctuations for interacting par- ticle systems with singular kernels.Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 247(5):101, 2023

    2023

  37. [37]

    Stochastic volterra equations in banach spaces and stochastic partial differ- ential equation.Journal of Functional Analysis, 258(4):1361–1425, 2010

    Xicheng Zhang. Stochastic volterra equations in banach spaces and stochastic partial differ- ential equation.Journal of Functional Analysis, 258(4):1361–1425, 2010. Zhenfu W ang Beijing International Center for Mathematical Research, Peking University, 5 Yiheyuan Road, Beijing 100871, China Email address:zwang@bicmr.pku.edu.cn Xianliang Zhao Beijing Inter...

    2010