Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Incipient infinite clusters and volume growth for Gaussian free fields and loop soups on metric graphs

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Four critical-cluster conditionings converge to one infinite, one-ended cluster for d≥3, d≠6, with volume M^min(d/2+1,4).

desk verdict Strong paper: first IIC construction for GFF level sets and loop soups, with volume growth matching Werner's conjecture, but the proof leans heavily on a companion paper's quasi-multiplicativity that a referee must verify. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.05709 v2 pith:QDUJ3XAB submitted 2024-12-07 math.PR

Zhenhao Cai , Jian Ding This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.PR MSC 60K3560G6082B43
keywords incipientinfiniteclusterGaussianfreefieldmetricgraphloopsoupquasi-multiplicativityone-armexponentvolumegrowthfractaldimension
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

At criticality the cluster containing the origin is almost surely finite, so "the cluster that manages to percolate" cannot be obtained by a direct conditioning. The paper proves that four standard approximations of this impossible event — conditioning on connection to the boundary of a growing box, on being in an infinite cluster just above criticality, on connection to a lattice point tending to infinity, or on the capacity of the cluster exceeding a large threshold — each have a limit, and that the four limits are the same probability measure, for every dimension $d\ge3$ except $d=6$. Under this common incipient infinite cluster law the critical cluster is almost surely infinite and one-ended. The same statement holds for the critical loop soup, by the isomorphism coupling with the Gaussian free field. If the result is right, it gives a canonical object on which to study the conjectured scaling limit of critical clusters, and the paper's volume estimate of order $M^{\min(d/2+1,4)}$ matches the conjectured fractal dimension.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing input is quasi-multiplicativity, bound (1.18): for sets inside $B(cN^{1\boxdot 2/(d-4)})$ and outside $B(CN^{1\boxdot (d-4)/2})$, the probability of a connection through an intermediate box factorizes into the product of the two one-sided connection probabilities up to a constant and a correction factor $N^{0\boxdot(6-d)}$. This factorization, proved in the companion paper and quoted as a black box, lets the authors decompose a large critical cluster into approximately independent annular pieces. The proof of uniform convergence then runs through a contraction theorem for positive integral operators, exactly as in the classical percolation framework the paper adapts, and the loop-soup IIC is transferred to the Gaussian free field by the isomorphism theorem identifying squared local times of the loop soup with the squared field.

What would settle it

Choose a dimension $d\ne6$ and an increasing cylinder event, and compute the four limiting conditional probabilities in (1.12), (1.13), (1.14), and (1.17) on that event; if any two limits differ, Theorem 1.1 is false. A cheaper check is the excluded case $d=6$: showing there that the four limits already fail to coincide, or that the conditioned volume has a power of $M$ different from $M^4$ up to polylogarithmic factors, would locate the boundary of the result.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, Theorem 1.1, is that for any $d\ge3$ with $d\neq6$, the four limiting measures displayed in (1.12)--(1.14) and (1.17) exist and are equivalent. Under their common law $P_{d,\mathrm{IIC}}$, the incipient infinite cluster $C^{\ge0}$ is almost surely infinite and one-ended: for every $N$, $C^{\ge0}\setminus B(N)$ contains exactly one infinite cluster. Theorem 1.2 adds a quantitative self-similarity statement: conditioned on $\{0\leftrightarrow\partial B(N)\}$, the volume of $C^{\ge0}\cap B(M)$ lies between two constants times $M^{\min(d/2+1,4)}$ with probability at least $1-\epsilon$, provided $N\gg M$; Theorem 1.3 shows this volume has a non-degenerate lower tail, so the scaling limit, if it exists, is not deterministic. Along the way the paper obtains, in Theorem 1.4, that under the same conditioning the connection probability to a point $y\in\partial B(M)$ is of order $M^{-[(d/2-1)\boxdot(d-4)]}$.

Load-bearing premise

The argument takes as a black box the companion paper's quasi-multiplicativity bound: the probability that two far-apart sets are connected is within constants, times a correction factor $N^{0\boxdot(6-d)}$, of the product of the probabilities that each set reaches the boundary of an intermediate box; if that factorization fails in some dimension, the existence and equivalence of the IICs and the volume estimates collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The four IIC definitions in (1.12), (1.13), (1.14), and (1.17) can be used interchangeably for $d\ge3$, $d\neq6$; whichever conditioning is analytically most convenient is legitimate.
  • Under $P_{d,\mathrm{IIC}}$, every truncation $C^{\ge0}\setminus B(N)$ contains a unique infinite component, so radial exploration of the incipient cluster is well defined.
  • Conditioned on the critical cluster reaching $\partial B(N)$, its volume inside $B(M)$ is with high probability of order $M^{\min(d/2+1,4)}$ for $N\gg M$; that is the same exponent as the conjectured fractal dimension of the scaling limit.
  • The anti-concentration estimate (Theorem 1.3) implies that any scaling limit obtained from these IICs is stochastic rather than a deterministic fractal.
  • The normalized two-point function under the connection conditioning decays as $M^{-[(d/2-1)\boxdot(d-4)]}$ (Corollary 1.5), providing a quantitative test for the IIC measure.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural next test is the remaining dimension $d=6$: the paper's Remark 1.6 already obtains volume bounds with error exponent $\varsigma(M)=\ln\ln M/\sqrt{\ln M}$, but the four IIC limits are not compared there; a polylogarithmic version of quasi-multiplicativity would likely be the missing ingredient.
  • Because Type (4) (capacity) and Type (1) (diameter) conditionings coincide, capacity behaves like a robust proxy for the size of the critical cluster; I conjecture that a volume-based conditioning, if a usable estimate for the volume tail becomes available, will also produce the same measure.
  • The framework suggests extensions to other transient graphs on which the GFF level-set has the same one-arm and quasi-multiplicativity estimates, where the same four-conditioning equivalence should hold.
  • The one-endedness plus volume growth exponent could feed random-walk and spectral-dimension questions on the IIC, in analogy with random-walk results on the high-dimensional percolation IIC.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper establishes, for the critical Gaussian free field level-set and the critical loop soup on the metric graph \tilde Z^d with d ≥ 3 and d ≠ 6, the existence and equivalence of four incipient infinite cluster (IIC) constructions: conditioning on connection to ∂B(N), on supercritical connection to infinity as the parameter tends to criticality, on connection to a distant lattice point, and on the capacity of the critical cluster exceeding T. The common IIC is shown to be almost surely infinite and one-ended. The paper further proves that under the conditioning {0 ↔ ∂B(N)} with N ≫ M, the volume of the critical cluster inside B(M) is typically of order M^{(d/2+1) ∧ 4}, and that the tail probability for large volume is bounded below by a constant depending only on d and the multiplier; these results are transferred to the IIC measure by taking N → ∞. The proofs adapt the Basu–Sapozhnikov framework to the loop-soup representation, with the key quasi-multiplicativity estimate imported from the authors' companion paper [5].

Significance. If correct, the paper is a substantial advance: it unifies four natural IIC notions in a strongly correlated, non-Bernoulli percolation model, gives the first rigorous volume-growth order for the critical cluster under a large-diameter conditioning, and provides evidence consistent with Werner's conjectured fractal dimension. The paper contains no fitted constants; the exponents and the high-dimensional correction factor N^{6-d} are explicit and parameter-free. The proof architecture is coherent, with the main probabilistic inputs cleanly separated into Proposition 3.2 and Lemmas 5.1–5.3. The most important caveat is that the quasi-multiplicativity bound (1.18) from the companion paper [5] is load-bearing for both main theorems; this is not circular, but it makes the present manuscript conditional on an external result.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.3, Eqs. (3.95)–(3.100); §5.1, Eq. (5.48)] The central input (1.18), quoted from the companion paper [5, Theorem 1.1], is not proved in this manuscript. It is used in two load-bearing places: it supplies the uniform contraction ratio in the Hopf argument of Proposition 3.2 (Case 2), and it enters the volume lower bound through the final line of (5.48) in Lemma 5.1. I do not regard this as circular, since (1.18) is a parameter-free two-point factorization whose statement does not mention IICs, but the dependence is structural rather than cosmetic. The authors should state the publication status of [5] and verify explicitly that the absorbing boundaries qD_k ∪ qD_{k+1} satisfy the hypotheses of (1.18) at every scale k, uniformly in the construction of Section 3.2.
  2. [§3.3, last paragraph] The text says it completes the proof of 'Proposition 3.3', but the proposition proved in this section is Proposition 3.2; this should be corrected.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§1, after Eq. (1.3)] The phrase 'sigh cluster' should read 'sign cluster'.
  2. [§1, Conjecture 1 and Abstract] Werner's conjecture is referred to as 'Werner (2016)' in the abstract and around Conjecture 1, while the reference [42] is dated 2021; the citation should be made internally consistent.
  3. [§5.1, after Eq. (5.7)] The assertion that setting m = M yields n0 ≥ c_*(d,ε)M is terse: with the recurrence (3.65), n0 is related to M by a product depending on λ and K, so c_* must absorb that product. Please spell out this dependence or choose n0 first and then define m accordingly.
  4. [§5.1, paragraph before Lemma 5.1] 'Conseuqently' is a typo for 'Consequently'.
  5. [§3.1, notation after Eq. (3.6)] The discussion explaining the bold-font superscripts N, x, T is more confusing than helpful; a simpler statement that these are labels, not numerical parameters, would suffice.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the load-bearing quasi-multiplicativity input is an independent parameter-free theorem, and the IIC/volume conclusions do not reduce to their own hypotheses.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are existence and equivalence of four IIC limits (Theorem 1.1) and a conditional volume-growth estimate (Theorem 1.2). The main external input is quasi-multiplicativity (1.18), quoted from the authors' companion paper [5, Theorem 1.1]: for d >= 3 with d != 6, PD1∪D2(A1 <-> A2) is comparable to N^{0⊡(6-d)} PD1(A1 <-> ∂B(N)) PD2(A2 <-> ∂B(N)). This is a parameter-free statement about two-point connecting probabilities with absorbing boundary conditions; it contains no IIC measure, no fitted constant, and its hypotheses do not include the target limiting measures. It is therefore independent evidence under the review rules, even though [5] is by the same authors. The same holds for the one-arm and crossing bounds (1.5)–(1.8), cited from [3], [4], [7], [10], [11], and [13], and for the capacity tail (1.16), cited from [11]: these are prior theorems, not derived from the IIC, and none is stated in terms of the IIC. The Hopf-contraction step in Section 3.3 applies (1.18) to the kernels P(Dk <-> Dk+1) to prove uniform convergence; this is a legitimate use of an independent hypothesis, not a circular reduction. The volume theorem is not a fitted prediction: Theorem 1.4 and Lemma 5.1 derive the exponent M^{(d/2+1)⊡4} from two-point estimates, harmonic-average bounds, and the quasi-multiplicativity input, while constants depend only on d, epsilon, or lambda and are not tuned to force the stated exponent. The proof that the IIC is almost surely infinite and one-ended uses the established convergence and the known uniqueness of the infinite cluster, not a circular definition. The paper is admittedly not self-contained and relies heavily on companion results, but self-citation without a demonstrated reduction of the conclusion to the cited input is not circularity. No equation in the paper reduces a claimed prediction to its own input, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Therefore the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to data. The constants in the paper are generic and depend only on dimension or auxiliary parameters, with no fitting to observations. The non-standard input is the quasi-multiplicativity theorem from the same authors' companion paper, which is an axiom from the perspective of this paper. No new physical or mathematical entities are postulated; the IIC is a limiting probability measure, not a separately evidenced object.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Isomorphism theorem between the GFF and the critical loop soup (Lupu 2016, Proposition 2.1).
    Used throughout, e.g., in Eqs (1.3), (2.27), and (2.30), to transfer statements between GFF level sets and loop soup clusters.
  • domain assumption One-arm exponent estimates: theta_d(N) is of order N^{-d/2+1} for 3 <= d < 6 and N^{-2} for d > 6.
    Imported from [3], [4], and [13]; used in many comparisons, including (1.5) and (1.6).
  • domain assumption Quasi-multiplicativity bound (1.18) with correction factor N^{0 or (6-d)} from companion paper [5, Theorem 1.1].
    Central input for the Hopf contraction argument in Proposition 3.2 and for volume estimates in Lemma 5.1; not proved in this paper.
  • standard math Decoupling inequality for the metric graph GFF (Lemma 2.2).
    Imported from [34] and [15]; used in the proof of Lemma 3.3 and in comparison arguments.
  • standard math BKR inequality and local uniqueness of random interlacements.
    Used in Lemma 3.5, Proposition 3.2, and the upper-bound proofs in Section 4.
  • standard math Uniqueness of the infinite cluster for supercritical level sets.
    Used in (2.25) and (2.26) and in the one-endedness argument in Theorem 1.1.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Incipient infinite clusters and volume growth for Gaussian free fields and loop soups on metric graphs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QDUJ3XAB

@misc{pith2026241205709,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Incipient infinite clusters and volume growth for Gaussian free fields and loop soups on metric graphs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QDUJ3XAB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.05709}
}
abstract

In this paper, we establish the existence and equivalence of four types of incipient infinite clusters (IICs) for the critical Gaussian free field (GFF) level-set and the critical loop soup on the metric graph $\widetilde{\mathbb{Z}}^d$ for all $d\ge 3$ except the critical dimension $d=6$. These IICs are defined as four limiting conditional probabilities, involving different conditionings and various ways of taking limits: (1) conditioned on $\{0 \leftrightarrow{} \partial B(N)\}$ at criticality (where $0$ is the origin of $\mathbb{Z}^d$, and $\partial B(N)$ is the boundary of the box $B(N)$ centered at $0$ with side length $2N$), and letting $N\to \infty$; (2) conditioned on $\{0\leftrightarrow{} \infty\}$ at super-criticality, and letting the parameter tend to the critical threshold; (3) conditioned on $\{0 \leftrightarrow{} x\}$ at criticality (where $x\in \mathbb{Z}^d$ is a lattice point), and letting $x\to \infty$; (4) conditioned on the event that the capacity of the critical cluster containing $0$ exceeds $T$, and letting $T\to \infty$. Our proof employs a robust framework of Basu and Sapozhinikov (2017) for constructing IICs as in (1) and (2) for Bernoulli percolation in low dimensions (i.e., $3\le d\le 5$), where a key hypothesis on the quasi-multiplicativity is proved in our companion paper. We further show that conditioned on $\{0 \leftrightarrow{} \partial B(N)\}$, the volume of the critical cluster containing $0$ within $B(M)$ is typically of order $M^{(\frac{d}{2}+1)\land 4}$, as long as $N\gg M$. This phenomenon indicates that the critical cluster of the GFF or the loop soup exhibits self-similarity, which supports Werner's conjecture (2016) that such cluster has a scaling limit. Moreover, the exponent of $M^{(\frac{d}{2}+1)\land 4}$ matches the conjectured fractal dimension of the scaling limit proposed by Werner (2016).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.05709 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. In this illustration, we consider the case ⋄ = x. The two pink regions represent CpK−1 and CpK respectively, where CpK in￾tersects x. The union of the green and pink regions inside B(n6K−2) (resp. outside B(n6K)) represents CpK−1 (resp. CpK). The two regions surrounded by dashed curves represent CqK−1 and CqK respectively. Given CpK−1 and CpK−1, the dashed curves serve as absorbing bound￾aries for loops. The red reg… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. A switching identity for cable-graph loop soups and Gaussian free fields

    math.PR 2025-02 accept novelty 8.0 of 10

    Conditioning two cable-graph points to lie in the same Brownian loop-soup cluster adds an odd-numbered Poisson cloud of Brownian excursions between them, yielding an exact law for the conditional cluster and its GFF analogue.

  2. Quasi-multiplicativity and regularity for metric graph Gaussian free fields

    math.PR 2024-12 accept novelty 8.0 of 10

    For all d≥3 except d=6, the probability that the critical metric-graph GFF level set connects two sets across an annulus equals, up to constants, N^{(6-d)∧0} times the product of the two one-sided connection probabilities.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [5]

    Cai and J

    Z. Cai and J. Ding. Quasi-multiplicativity and regularity for metric graph Gaussian free fields. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.05706, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    fractons

    S. Alexander and R. Orbach. Density of states on fractals: “fractons”. Journal de Physique Lettres, 43(17):625–631, 1982

    work page 1982

  3. [2]

    Basu and A

    D. Basu and A. Sapozhnikov. Kesten’s incipient infinite cluster and quasi-multiplicativity of crossing probabilities. Electronic Communications in Probability, 22:1–12, 2017

    work page 2017

  4. [3]

    Cai and J

    Z. Cai and J. Ding. One-arm exponent of critical level-set for metric graph Gaussian free field in high dimensions. Probability Theory and Related Fields, pages 1–86, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [4]

    Cai and J

    Z. Cai and J. Ding. One-arm probabilities for metric graph Gaussian free fields below and at the critical dimension. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.02397, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Chang, H

    Y. Chang, H. Du, and X. Li. Percolation threshold for metric graph loop soup. Bernoulli, 30(4):3324–3333, 2024

    2024

  7. [7]

    Ding and M

    J. Ding and M. Wirth. Percolation for level-sets of gaussian free fields on metric graphs. The Annals of Probability, 48(3):1411–1435, 2020

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Drewitz, A

    A. Drewitz, A. Pr´ evost, and P.-F. Rodriguez. The sign clusters of the massless Gaussian free field percolate on Zd, d ≥ 3 (and more). Communications in Mathematical Physics, 362:513–546, 2018. 54

    work page 2018

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Drewitz, A

    A. Drewitz, A. Pr´ evost, and P.-F. Rodriguez. Cluster capacity functionals and isomorphism theorems for Gaussian free fields. Probability Theory and Related Fields, 183(1):255–313, 2022

    2022

  2. [10]

    Drewitz, A

    A. Drewitz, A. Pr´ evost, and P.-F. Rodriguez. Arm exponent for the Gaussian free field on metric graphs in intermediate dimensions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.10030, 2023

    2023

  3. [11]

    Drewitz, A

    A. Drewitz, A. Pr´ evost, and P.-F. Rodriguez. Critical exponents for a percolation model on transient graphs. Inventiones mathematicae, 232(1):229–299, 2023

    2023

  4. [12]

    Drewitz, A

    A. Drewitz, A. Pr´ evost, and P.-F. Rodriguez. Cluster volumes for the Gaussian free field on metric graphs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.06772, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Drewitz, A

    A. Drewitz, A. Pr´ evost, and P.-F. Rodriguez. Critical one-arm probability for the metric Gaussian free field in low dimensions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.17417, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Drewitz, B

    A. Drewitz, B. R´ ath, and A. Sapozhnikov. An introduction to random interlacements. Springer, 2014

    2014

  7. [15]

    Drewitz, B

    A. Drewitz, B. R´ ath, and A. Sapozhnikov. On chemical distances and shape theorems in percolation models with long-range correlations. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 55(8), 2014

    2014

  8. [16]

    Fitzner and R

    R. Fitzner and R. van der Hofstad. Mean-field behavior for nearest-neighbor percolation in d >10. Electronic Journal of Probability, 22:43, 2017

    2017

  9. [17]

    Gandolfi, M

    A. Gandolfi, M. S. Keane, and C. M. Newman. Uniqueness of the infinite component in a random graph with applications to percolation and spin glasses. Probability Theory and Related Fields, 92:511–527, 1992

    1992

  10. [18]

    Ganguly and K

    S. Ganguly and K. Jing. Critical level set percolation for the GFF in d > 6: comparison principles and some consequences. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.17768, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Ganguly and K

    S. Ganguly and K. Nam. The ant on loops: Alexander-Orbach conjecture for the critical level set of the Gaussian free field. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.02318, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Hara and G

    T. Hara and G. Slade. The incipient infinite cluster in high-dimensional percolation. Electronic Research Announcements of the American Mathematical Society, 4(8):48–55, 1998

    1998

  13. [21]

    Hara and G

    T. Hara and G. Slade. The scaling limit of the incipient infinite cluster in high-dimensional percolation. I. Critical exponents. Journal of Statistical Physics, 99:1075–1168, 2000

    2000

  14. [22]

    Hara and G

    T. Hara and G. Slade. The scaling limit of the incipient infinite cluster in high-dimensional percolation. II. Integrated super-Brownian excursion. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 41(3):1244–1293, 2000

    2000

  15. [23]

    Heydenreich, R

    M. Heydenreich, R. van der Hofstad, and T. Hulshof. High-dimensional incipient infinite clusters revisited. Journal of Statistical Physics, 155:966–1025, 2014

    2014

  16. [24]

    Heydenreich, R

    M. Heydenreich, R. van der Hofstad, and T. Hulshof. Random walk on the high-dimensional IIC. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 329:57–115, 2014

    2014

  17. [25]

    E. Hopf. An inequality for positive linear integral operators. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics, 12(5):683–692, 1963

    1963

  18. [26]

    H. Kesten. The incipient infinite cluster in two-dimensional percolation. Probability theory and related fields, 73:369–394, 1986

    1986

  19. [27]

    Kozma and A

    G. Kozma and A. Nachmias. The Alexander-Orbach conjecture holds in high dimensions. Inventiones mathematicae, 178(3):635–654, 2009

    2009

  20. [28]

    G. F. Lawler and V. Limic. Random walk: a modern introduction, volume 123. Cambridge University Press, 2010

    2010

  21. [29]

    T. Lupu. From loop clusters and random interlacements to the free field. Annals of Probability, 44(3):2117–2146, 2016

    2016

  22. [30]

    T. Lupu. An equivalence between gauge-twisted and topologically conditioned scalar Gauss- ian free fields. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.07901, 2022. 55

    2022 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Lupu and W

    T. Lupu and W. Werner. The random pseudo-metric on a graph defined via the zero-set of the Gaussian free field on its metric graph. Probability Theory and Related Fields, 171:775– 818, 2018

    2018

  24. [32]

    M¨ orters and Y

    P. M¨ orters and Y. Peres.Brownian motion, volume 30. Cambridge University Press, 2010

    2010

  25. [33]

    R. Panis. The incipient infinite cluster of the FK-ising model in dimensions d ≥ 3 and the susceptibility of the high-dimensional Ising model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.15243, 2024

    2024

  26. [34]

    Popov and B

    S. Popov and B. R´ ath. On decoupling inequalities and percolation of excursion sets of the Gaussian free field. Journal of Statistical Physics, 159(2):312–320, 2015

    2015

  27. [35]

    Rath and A

    B. Rath and A. Sapozhnikov. On the transience of random interlacements. Electronic Communications in Probability, 16:379–391, 2011

    2011

  28. [36]

    Rodriguez and A.-S

    P.-F. Rodriguez and A.-S. Sznitman. Phase transition and level-set percolation for the Gauss- ian free field. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 320:571–601, 2013

    2013

  29. [37]

    Sznitman

    A.-S. Sznitman. Vacant set of random interlacements and percolation. Annals of mathematics, pages 2039–2087, 2010

    2010

  30. [38]

    Sznitman

    A.-S. Sznitman. Coupling and an application to level-set percolation of the Gaussian free field. Electronic Journal of Probability, 21:35, 2016

    2016

  31. [39]

    Cames van Batenburg

    W. Cames van Batenburg. The dimension of the incipient infinite cluster. Electronic Communications in Probability, 20:1 – 10, 2015

    2015

  32. [40]

    Van der Hofstad and A

    R. Van der Hofstad and A. A. J´ arai. The incipient infinite cluster for high-dimensional unoriented percolation. Journal of statistical physics, 114(3):625–663, 2004

    2004

  33. [41]

    Vershynin

    R. Vershynin. High-dimensional probability: An introduction with applications in data science, volume 47. Cambridge university press, 2018

    2018

  34. [42]

    W. Werner. On clusters of Brownian loops in d dimensions. In and Out of Equilibrium 3: Celebrating Vladas Sidoravicius, pages 797–817, 2021. (Zhenhao Cai) F aculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Weizmann Insti- tute of Science Email address: zhenhao.cai@weizmann.ac.il (J...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.