Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

Scaling limit and tail bounds for a random walk model of SOS level lines

T0 review · 1 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Random-walk SOS level lines converge under 1:2:3 scaling

desk verdict Solid, technically demanding paper that resolves the scaling limit for area-tilted random walk line ensembles with diverging number of curves; deserves a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.10384 v1 pith:EW3P6O2S submitted 2025-02-14 math.PR math-phmath.MP

Milind Hegde , Yujin H. Kim , Christian Serio This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.PRmath-phmath.MP MSC 60K3560G5082B4160F05
keywords solid-on-solidmodelentropicrepulsionlevellinesarea-tiltedrandomwalkslineensemble1:2:3scalingTracy-Widomtailballottheorem
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

The paper establishes the 1:2:3 edge scaling limit for a line ensemble of non-crossing, area-tilted random walk bridges, a discrete model of the level lines of the (2+1)-dimensional solid-on-solid interface above a hard wall. It proves that after rescaling heights by $N^{1/3}$ and horizontal distances by $N^{2/3}$, the whole ensemble converges to the same infinite-volume Gibbs state $\mu_{a,b}$ that arises as the continuum Brownian polymer limit, answering a question posed by Caputo, Ioffe, and Wachtel. Along the way it obtains upper tail bounds with the Tracy--Widom exponent $3/2$ and the optimal per-curve scale $a^{-1/3}b^{-(j-1)/3}N^{1/3}$, together with a ballot theorem valid for boundary conditions beyond the diffusive range. If right, the random-walk model is a valid discrete pre-limit for the SOS level lines in the regime where the number of lines grows like $\log N$ and boundary heights reach $N^{1/3+\varepsilon}$.

What carries the argument

The central object is the non-crossing line ensemble $\mathbb{P}^{a,b;u,v}_{n,N;0}$ obtained by tilting independent random walk bridges with the factor $\exp(-(a/N)\sum_i b^{i-1}A(X_i))$ and imposing the hard-wall constraint. The argument is carried by the stochastic monotonicity lemma (Lemma 3.2), which under the convex Hamiltonian assumption (log-concave increments) allows the proof to replace lower curves by deterministic floors and remove upper curves, reducing the multi-curve problem to single-curve estimates. The proof then builds deterministic ceiling functions $\mathrm{Cl}_j$ on the fluctuation scale $H_j=(ab^{j-1})^{-1/3}N^{1/3}$; a dropping lemma converts the area tilt into a forced near-parabolic descent from high boundary values, one-point bounds with exponent $3/2$ control the top curve, and a new ballot theorem for bridges with boundary values beyond the diffusive scale supplies the partition-function lower bounds. Tightness comes from transferring the Brownian modulus of continuity through the Gibbs property and an invariance principle, and the limit is identified as $\mu_{a,b}$ by the uniqueness characterization of such tilted Gibbs states.

What would settle it

Simulate the area-tilted line ensemble for a log-concave increment law with $n\approx \log N$ curves and boundary conditions around $N^{1/3+0.1}$, then compare the empirical law of $\sigma^{-2/3}N^{-1/3}X_j(t\sigma^{-2/3}N^{2/3})$ with the prediction of Theorem 2.13. If, for fixed $K$ and $t$, the probability of exceeding $K a^{-1/3}b^{-(j-1)/3}N^{1/3}$ is not bounded by $Ce^{-cK^{3/2}}$ uniformly, or if finite-dimensional marginals fail to approach the Brownian Gibbs kernels of $\mu_{a,b}$, then the main convergence and tail theorems are false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On intervals $I=[-LN^{2/3},LN^{2/3}]$ with $L$ between $(\log N)^{1/3+\gamma}$ and $N^{1/3}$, and with boundary conditions up to $L^{2-\kappa}N^{1/3}$, the paper proves that the rescaled line ensemble defined by $x^N_i(t)=\sigma^{-2/3}N^{-1/3}X_i(t\sigma^{-2/3}N^{2/3})$ converges weakly to the unique infinite-volume $(a,b)$-tilted Brownian Gibbs measure $\mu_{a,b}$, as long as the number of curves $n$ grows at most like $N^\delta$. The convergence is in the topology of uniform convergence on compact sets. The paper also proves a quantitative one-point tail bound for each curve of the form $\mathbb{P}(X_j(tN^{2/3})>K a^{-1/3}b^{-(j-1)/3}N^{1/3})\le e^{-cK^{3/2}}$ for $K$ up to $N^{2/3-\varepsilon}$, with the scale shown to be optimal for a single area-tilted walk. Together these results give the 1:2:3 edge scaling law with the expected $3/2$ tail exponent for the whole line stack.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the increment distribution is log-concave (convex Hamiltonian), because that yields the stochastic monotonicity lemma that lets the proof replace all other curves by floors and study one curve at a time; without it, the recursive ceiling argument has no footing.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The convergence question for the Brownian polymer model is resolved for its discrete random-walk analogue: the limit is the unique $(a,b)$-tilted Brownian Gibbs state $\mu_{a,b}$.
  • The upper tail of the $j$-th curve obeys $e^{-cK^{3/2}}$ with scale $a^{-1/3}b^{-(j-1)/3}N^{1/3}$, so the 1:2:3 edge scaling covers the full stack of curves, not just the top one.
  • The model accommodates a diverging number of curves ($n\le N^\delta$) and boundary conditions as high as $N^{1-\varepsilon}$, enough to include the known $N^{1/3+\varepsilon}$ upper bound on SOS level-line fluctuations.
  • On short intervals of length $(\log N)^{1/3+\gamma}N^{2/3}$, the ensemble still equilibrates: curves descend from $L^{2-\kappa}N^{1/3}$ to $O(N^{1/3})$ within scaled time $L$, the parabolic relaxation expected from Brownian analogues.
  • The new ballot theorem extends to boundary values with $\max(x,y)\gg N^{1/2}$ provided $xy\ll N$, giving an independent tool for random-walk bridges above a wall.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If a coupling of the actual SOS interface to these area-tilted walks can be supplied, this result predicts that the true SOS level lines fluctuate at scale $N^{1/3}$ on windows of size $N^{2/3}$, closing the open matching upper bound of $N^{1/3+\varepsilon}$ from above.
  • The uniqueness of the limiting state $\mu_{a,b}$ suggests that the discrete ensemble forgets boundary data up to the parabolic scale, so boundary-condition dependence should be washed out in the edge scaling limit.
  • The $3/2$ tail exponent for every curve hints that the top level lines behave like Tracy--Widom extremes of nonintersecting paths; a testable finite-$N$ prediction is that the maximum of the top curve over $N^{2/3}$-windows has fluctuations of order $N^{1/3}$ with this same tail shape.
  • The ballot theorem's range $xy\ll N$ with $\max(x,y)\gg \sqrt{N}$ may apply to other hard-wall interface problems where bridges start and end far above the wall but their product is subdiffusive.
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

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes a line ensemble of non-crossing area-tilted random walk bridges on an interval of length 2L N^{2/3}, with geometrically growing area tilts a b^{i-1}/N, and proves that under 1:2:3 scaling the ensemble converges to the unique infinite-volume (a,b)-tilted Brownian Gibbs measure μ_{a,b} constructed in previous work. The main theorems are a scaling limit (Theorem 2.13) and Tracy–Widom-type upper tail bounds for the j-th curve (Theorem 2.14). The proof develops several substantial ingredients: a ballot theorem for random walk bridges with high boundary conditions, a partition-function lower bound and dropping lemma for area-tilted walks, a recursive ceiling construction that reduces the multi-curve problem to single-curve estimates, and a tightness argument for the rescaled ensemble. The paper is technically dense and, apart from the issues discussed below, the main lines of the argument appear coherent.

Significance. If the result is accepted, it resolves a question posed by Caputo–Ioffe–Wachtel and provides the first scaling limit for the random walk model of SOS level lines with a diverging number of curves and boundary conditions far above the typical N^{1/3} scale. The paper's tools are of independent interest: the ballot theorem covers boundary values beyond the diffusive scale, and the tightness proof avoids KMT couplings, thereby applying to exponential-type increment distributions relevant to low-temperature SOS approximations. The proofs are unusually detailed and the structural dependence on the stochastic monotonicity lemma is explicitly isolated, which is a noteworthy strength.

major comments (1)
  1. [§2.3, proof of Theorem 2.13] The verification of the uniform tightness condition (2.5) is not justified as written. The proof asserts that Theorem 2.14 yields lim_{M→∞} sup_{t∈R} lim sup_{N→∞} P(x_1^N(t)>M)=0, but Theorem 2.14 is a one-point bound with N0=N0(a0,b0,γ,κ,t,T) depending on t, and a pointwise-in-t tail bound does not control sup_{t∈R} for a limiting process on R. Since (2.5) is one of the hypotheses of the uniqueness theorem (Theorem 2.12), this is a load-bearing step. Please add an argument, for example by proving spatial stationarity of any subsequential limit (or of μ_{a,b}) and reducing the supremum over t to t=0, or by proving a tail bound uniform in t with constants independent of t and a single N0.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Proof of Theorems 1 and 2, after Theorem 2.14] The statement says that the condition j ≤ ε/10 log_b N implies j ≤ κ/30 log_b N whenever κ ≥ 2ε, but this requires κ ≥ 3ε; if the intended comparison is with the κ/20 log_b N condition in Theorem 2.14, then κ ≥ 2ε is correct and the displayed κ/30 should be κ/20.
  2. [§5, proof of Theorem 5.1, Step 2] Lemma 3.5 is applied to a bridge on the interval J whose length |J| may be smaller than the N0 in Lemma 3.5; for very short intervals, the statement of Lemma 3.5 does not apply directly. This can be repaired by a separate single-increment exponential tail bound when |J| is bounded, so the issue is local but should be addressed.
  3. [§8.2, Lemma 8.3] The proof of Lemma 8.3 is only a sketch and refers to [ACH24, Lemma 11.1] for the main argument. Since this lemma is a key input to the partition-function lower bound and hence to tightness, please either give a complete proof or state explicitly which parts are being imported from [ACH24] and verify the modifications needed for the present setting.
  4. [Definition 2.4 and Remark 2.5] The notation '1 NC(X)' for the non-crossing indicator is introduced without a subscripted event symbol; using e.g. '1_{NC}(X)' would eliminate ambiguity with the partition function notation.
  5. [Theorem 2.13] The phrase 'extend to all t∈R and i∈N as continuous functions in an arbitrary fashion' is potentially confusing, since the resulting law on C(N×R) may depend on the extension for finitely many initial indices if the extension is uncontrolled near the endpoints of the original interval; for large N the original interval covers every fixed compact set, so the convergence statement is unaffected, but this should be stated explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main convergence theorem is derived from self-contained tail and tightness estimates together with an external uniqueness theorem for the target Gibbs measure.

full rationale

The central theorem (Theorem 2.13) is not circular. Its proof combines the upper-tail estimates of Theorem 2.14, tightness (Proposition 2.15), convergence of the discrete Gibbs property to the Brownian Gibbs property (Proposition 2.16), and the uniqueness/characterization Theorem 2.12. Theorem 2.12 comes from the independent works of Caputo--Ioffe--Wachtel and Caputo--Ganguly, not from the present authors, and it is applied only after the paper has derived uniform tightness and asymptotic pinning from its own quantitative estimates. The tail bounds in Sections 5-7 are derived from ballot theorems, partition-function lower bounds, and stochastic monotonicity; Lemma 3.2 is proved in Appendix A under the explicitly stated convexity assumption, and the text notes that one could assume the lemma's conclusion instead. The apparent mutual use of Proposition 8.1 and Lemma 8.4 is a correctly indexed induction: Lemma 8.4 at level k uses Proposition 8.1 only at level k-1, so there is no cycle. The only self-citation close to the proof, [Ser23a], is used in Lemma 8.6 as a convenient citation for an invariance principle for area-tilted bridges; the paper states that the proof uses only the classical invariance principle and is adaptable to the non-lattice and nonzero-floor cases, so the argument does not rest on that self-citation. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and the target measure mu_{a,b} is constructed and characterized in prior independent work rather than being defined by the random-walk data it is used to predict.

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

The model parameters a and b are fixed inputs, not fitted values; all other constants are universal. The central claim rests on previously established uniqueness of μ_{a,b} (CIW19b, CG25), standard invariance principles, and explicit new lemmas proven in the paper. No new physical entities are postulated.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Convex Hamiltonian H_RW (Assumption 2.1) ensuring log-concave increment distributions.
    Used solely to establish stochastic monotonicity Lemma 3.2, which is the engine for reducing the multi-curve problem to single-curve estimates. The authors note it can be replaced by the conclusion of Lemma 3.2.
  • domain assumption Finite exponential moments and zero mean for increments (Assumption 2.2).
    Needed for the invariance principle, tail bounds, and local limit theorems; standard for random walk bridges.
  • standard math Uniqueness of the infinite-volume area-tilted Brownian Gibbs measure μ_{a,b} (Theorem 2.12, from CIW19b and CG25).
    The proof uses this characterization to conclude all subsequential limits equal μ_{a,b}. It is a published theorem, not derived here.
  • standard math Ballot theorem estimates from Pemantle and Peres (Lemma 3.10).
    Used to prove the new ballot theorem for high boundary conditions (Theorem 3.6).
  • standard math Local limit theorem of Richter (1957).
    Used in Lemma 4.3 to control ratios of transition probabilities for high boundary values.
  • standard math Donsker invariance principle for bridges (Liggett, Borisov).
    Used throughout for tightness and for convergence of the Gibbs property in the limit.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Scaling limit and tail bounds for a random walk model of SOS level lines." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EW3P6O2S

@misc{pith2026250210384,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Scaling limit and tail bounds for a random walk model of SOS level lines},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EW3P6O2S}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.10384}
}
abstract

This paper analyzes a random walk model for the level lines appearing in the entropic repulsion phenomena of three-dimensional discrete random interfaces above a hard wall; we are particularly motivated by the low-temperature (2+1)D solid-on-solid (SOS) model, where the emergence of these level lines has been rigorously established. The model we consider is a line ensemble of non-crossing random walk bridges above a wall with geometrically growing area tilts. Our main result, which in particular resolves a question of Caputo, Ioffe, and Wachtel (2019), is an edge 1:2:3 scaling limit for this ensemble as the domain size $N$ diverges, with a growing number of walks (including the number of level lines of the SOS model) and high boundary conditions (covering the maximum upper deviation of the SOS level lines). As a key input, we establish Tracy--Widom-type upper tail bounds for each of the relevant curves in the line ensemble. An ingredient which may be of independent interest is a ballot theorem for random walk bridges under a broader range of boundary values than available in the literature.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.10384 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Left: an illustration of the limit shape of the SOS level lines after rescaling to [−1, 1]2 . The loops 1 N γi converge to the nested Wulff shapes shown here. The limit shape is flat for all level lines on central (1 − δβ)-portions of each side of the box (cyan), where δβ ↓ 0 as β ↑ ∞. Right: the effective random walk model (1.2) of the level line fluctuations about their flat limit shape, as seen by zooming in on t… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. To lower bound P AHλ,AHλ I;0 (X(J −JA) ≤ Hλ), we force the path to fall linearly as depicted above. Note that across the interval of size JA = A1/2H2 λ , the path then falls by an amount AHλ, which is not diffusive with respect to the interval length. However, the path does fall by an on-scale amount on the smaller scale subintervals of length A−1/2Hλ, which allows us to make use of invariance principles. We expect … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. For j ≤ m, Clj+1 (red) features a very high portion outside Ij+1, coming from a global max bound, and a portion that grows like ε −2 j Hj+1(log |x| K1/2H2 j+1 ) 2/3 inside Ij+1. The random walk bridge (orange) with area tilt λj , boundary conditions uj , vj ≤ BN1/3 , and floor at Clj+1 is shown in Proposition 6.4 to stay below Clj (blue) with high probability. constant fraction of |I| = 2LN2/3 (see (6.10)). Thus, wh… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: An illustration of the application of Lemma 7.3 to Proposition 6.4 and the proof of Lemma 7.3. The floor at Clj+1 features a potentially large gap at x L j+1 and x R j+1. The first step is to show that, within [x L j+1, xL j ] and [x R j , xR j+1], the random walk drop…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Step 1 involves bounding the walk X at a sequence of mesh points x(0) > x(1) > · · · and −x(0) < −x(1) < · · · by a quantity Bj (k) at ±x(k). Suppose we have already shown X(−x(k)) ∨ X(x(k)) ≤ Bj (k), for some k (outermost red dots). Restrict the walk to I(k) = [−x(k),…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: An illustration of the proof of Lemma 8.3. The two dashed lines at ℓN2/3 and rN2/3 have slope P N1/3 and −P N1/3 respectively. The rectangular corridors have width ηN1/3 , and Corr(η) is the event that the curves remain within these corridors. The partition function is…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: An illustration of the proof of Lemma 8.4. We have conditioned on the blue ceiling Xk−1, the green floor Xk+1, and the boundary conditions of the yellow curve Xk. The proof amounts to arguing that for a sufficiently small η > 0, at time UN2/3 the yellow curve will rema…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Correlation decay in area-tilted line ensembles

    math.PR 2026-08 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    For large area-tilt strength lambda, correlations in the infinite lambda-tilted line ensemble decay exponentially in time, and the finite-line diffusion has a uniformly positive spectral gap.

  2. The limiting law of the Discrete Gaussian level lines

    math.PR 2025-09 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    The top level-line of the low-temperature Discrete Gaussian surface above a floor converges, after L^(1/3) rescaling, to a Ferrari-Spohn diffusion, and multiple top level-lines converge to independent copies.

  3. The law of (1+1)D SOS with an area tilt in a wedge

    math.PR 2026-08 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    For wedge-tilted (1+1)D SOS curves, the non-separated lower curves converge to a Brownian GATE with cube-root fluctuations while the separated upper curves converge to independent Brownian bridges at explicit critical points.

  4. The half-space KPZ line ensemble and its scaling limit

    math.PR 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The half-space KPZ line ensemble is constructed, proven tight under 1:2:3 scaling in critical and supercritical regimes, and shown to have subsequential limits with a one-sided Gibbs property, including pairwise pinne...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Ballot theorems for random walks with finite variance

    L. Addario-Berry and B. A. Reed. Ballot theorems for random walks with finite variance, 2008. Preprint, arXiv:0802.2491

    work page Pith review arXiv 2008

  2. [2]

    Aggarwal, I

    A. Aggarwal, I. Corwin, and M. Hegde. Scaling limit of the colored ASEP and stochastic six-vertex models, 2024. Preprint, arXiv:2403.01341

    arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    W. K. Burton, N. Cabrera, and F. C. Frank. The growth of crystals and the equilibrium structure of their surfaces. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A , 243:299--358, 1951

    work page 1951

  4. [4]

    Bricmont, A

    J. Bricmont, A. El Mellouki, and J. Fr\" o hlich. Random surfaces in statistical mechanics: roughening, rounding, wetting, \, . J. Statist. Phys. , 42(5-6):743--798, 1986

    work page 1986

  5. [5]

    I. S. Borisov. On the rate of convergence in the ``conditional'' invariance principle. Theory Probab. Appl. , XXIII(1):63--76, 1978

    work page 1978

  6. [6]

    Characterizing Gibbs states for area-tilted Brownian lines

    M. Basu Roy Chowdhury, P. Caputo, and S. Ganguly. Characterizing G ibbs states for area-tilted B rownian lines, 2023. To appear in Ann. Probab., available at arXiv:2310.06817

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Brandenberger and C

    R. Brandenberger and C. E. Wayne. Decay of correlations in surface models. J. Stat. Phys. , 27(3):425--440, 1982

    work page 1982

  8. [8]

    Caravenna and L

    F. Caravenna and L. Chaumont. An invariance principle for random walk bridges conditioned to stay positive. Electron. J. Probab , 18(60):1--32, 2013

    work page 2013

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    Caputo and S

    P. Caputo and S. Ganguly. Uniqueness, mixing, and optimal tails for B rownian line ensembles with geometric area tilt. Probab. Math. Phys. , 6(1):195--239, 2025

    2025

  2. [10]

    Corwin and A

    I. Corwin and A. Hammond. Brownian G ibbs property for A iry line ensembles. Invent. Math. , 195(2):441--508, 2014

    2014

  3. [11]

    Corwin and A

    I. Corwin and A. Hammond. KPZ line ensemble. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields , 166(1):67--185, 2016

    2016

  4. [12]

    Campanino and D

    M. Campanino and D. Ioffe. Ornstein-- Z ernike theory for the B ernoulli bond percolation on Z ^d . Ann. Probab. , 30(2):652--682, 2002

    2002

  5. [13]

    Campanino, D

    M. Campanino, D. Ioffe, and Y. Velenik. Ornstein-- Z ernike theory for finite range I sing models above T_c . Probab. Theory Relat. Fields , 125(3):305--349, 2003

    2003

  6. [14]

    Campanino, D

    M. Campanino, D. Ioffe, and Y. Velenik. Fluctuation theory of connectivities for subcritical random cluster models. Ann. Probab. , 36(4):1287--1321, 2008

    2008

  7. [15]

    Caputo, D

    P. Caputo, D. Ioffe, and V. Wachtel. Confinement of B rownian polymers under geometric area tilts . Electron. J. Probab. , 24:1--21, 2019

    2019

  8. [16]

    Caputo, D

    P. Caputo, D. Ioffe, and V. Wachtel. Tightness and line ensembles for B rownian polymers under geometric area tilts. In Statistical M echanics of C lassical and D isordered S ystems , pages 241--266. Springer, 2019

    2019

  9. [17]

    Caddeo, Y

    P. Caddeo, Y. H. Kim, and E. Lubetzky. On level line fluctuations of SOS surfaces above a wall. Forum Math. Sigma , 12:e91 1--59, 2024

    2024

  10. [18]

    Caputo, E

    P. Caputo, E. Lubetzky, F. Martinelli, A. Sly, and F. L. Toninelli. The shape of the (2+1)D SOS surface above a wall. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris , 350(13-14):703--706, 2012

    2012

  11. [19]

    Caputo, E

    P. Caputo, E. Lubetzky, F. Martinelli, A. Sly, and F. L. Toninelli. Dynamics of (2+1) -dimensional SOS surfaces above a wall: S low mixing induced by entropic repulsion. Ann. Probab. , 42(4):1516--1589, 2014

    2014

  12. [20]

    Caputo, E

    P. Caputo, E. Lubetzky, F. Martinelli, A. Sly, and F. L. Toninelli. Scaling limit and cube-root fluctuations in SOS surfaces above a wall. J. Eur. Math. Soc. , 18(5):931--995, 2016

    2016

  13. [21]

    Dimitrov, X

    E. Dimitrov, X. Fang, L. Fesser, C. Serio, C. Teitler, A. Wang, and W. Zhu. Tightness of B ernoulli G ibbsian line ensembles. Electron. J. Probab. , 26:1--93, 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    Dembo, E

    A. Dembo, E. Lubetzky, and O. Zeitouni. On the limiting law of line ensembles of B rownian polymers with geometric area tilts . Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar\'e Probab. Stat. , 60(1):113--125, 2024

    2024

  15. [23]

    Dimitrov and C

    E. Dimitrov and C. Serio. Uniform convergence of D yson F errari-- S pohn diffusions to the A iry line ensemble. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar\'e Probab. Stat , 61(1):385--402, 2025

    2025

  16. [24]

    R. Durrett. Probability: T heory and E xamples . Cambridge Univ. Press, 4th edition, 2010

    2010

  17. [25]

    Dimitrov and X

    E. Dimitrov and X. Wu. KMT coupling for random walk bridges. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields , 179:649--732, 2021

    2021

  18. [26]

    Dimitrov and X

    E. Dimitrov and X. Wu. Tightness of ( H , H ^ RW ) - G ibbsian line ensembles. 2021. To appear in J. d'Anal. Math., available at arXiv:2108.07484

    2021 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Fr \"o hlich and T

    J. Fr \"o hlich and T. Spencer. Kosterlitz-- T houless transition in the two-dimensional plane rotator and C oulomb gas. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 46(15):1006--1009, 1981

    1981

  20. [28]

    Fr \"o hlich and T

    J. Fr \"o hlich and T. Spencer. The K osterlitz- T houless transition in two-dimensional abelian spin systems and the C oulomb gas. Comm. in Math. Phys. , 81(4):527--602, 1981

    1981

  21. [29]

    P. L. Ferrari and H. Spohn. Constrained B rownian motion: fluctuations away from circular and parabolic barriers. Ann. Probab. , 33(4):1302--1325, 2005

    2005

  22. [30]

    P. L. Ferrari and S. Shlosman. The Airy_2 process and the 3 D I sing model. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. , 56(1):1--15, 2023

    2023

  23. [31]

    Ganguly and R

    S. Ganguly and R. Gheissari. Local and global geometry of the 2 D I sing interface in critical prewetting. Ann. Probab. , 2021

    2021

  24. [32]

    Hryniv and Y

    O. Hryniv and Y. Velenik. Universality of critical behaviour in a class of recurrent random walks. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields , 130:222--258, 2004

    2004

  25. [33]

    Ioffe, S

    D. Ioffe, S. Ott, S. Shlosman, and Y. Velenik. Critical prewetting in the 2 D I sing model. Ann. Probab. , 50(3):1127--1172, 2022

    2022

  26. [34]

    Ioffe, S

    D. Ioffe, S. Shlosman, and F. L. Toninelli. Interaction versus entropic repulsion for low temperature I sing polymers. J. Stat. Phys. , 158(5):1007--1050, 2015

    2015

  27. [35]

    Ioffe, S

    D. Ioffe, S. Shlosman, and Y. Velenik. An invariance principle to F errari-- S pohn diffusions. Comm. Math. Phys. , 336(2):905--932, 2015

    2015

  28. [36]

    Ioffe and Y

    D. Ioffe and Y. Velenik. Ballistic phase of self-interacting random walks. In Analysis and S tochastics of G rowth P rocesses and I nterface M odels , pages 55--79. Oxford Univ. Press, 2008

    2008

  29. [37]

    Ioffe and Y

    D. Ioffe and Y. Velenik. Low-temperature interfaces: P rewetting, layering, faceting, and F errari-- S pohn diffusions. Markov Process. Relat. Fields , 24(3):487--537, 2018

    2018

  30. [38]

    Ioffe, Y

    D. Ioffe, Y. Velenik, and V. Wachtel. Dyson F errari-- S pohn diffusions and ordered walks under area tilts. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields , 170:11--47, 2018

    2018

  31. [39]

    P. Lammers. A dichotomy theory for height functions, 2022. Preprint, arXiv:2211.14365

    2022 arXiv

  32. [40]

    T. M. Liggett. An invariance principle for conditioned sums of independent random variables. J. Math. Mech. , 18(6):559--570, 1968

    1968

  33. [41]

    G. F. Lawler and V. Limic. Random W alk: A M odern I ntroduction . Cambridge Univ. Press, 2010

    2010

  34. [42]

    Pemantle and Y

    R. Pemantle and Y. Peres. Critical random walk in random environment on trees. Ann. Probab , 23(1):105--140, 1995

    1995

  35. [43]

    W. Richter. Local limit theorems for large deviations. Theory Probab. Appl. , 2(2):206--220, 1957

    1957

  36. [44]

    C. Serio. Scaling limit for line ensembles of random walks with geometric area tilts. Electron. J. Probab. , 28:1--14, 2023

    2023

  37. [45]

    C. Serio. Tightness of discrete G ibbsian line ensembles. Stoch. Process. Their Appl. , 159:225--285, 2023

    2023

  38. [46]

    H. N. V. Temperley. Statistical mechanics and the partition of numbers II . T he form of crystal surfaces. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. , 48:683--697, 1952

    1952

  39. [47]

    M. J. Wainwright. High- D imensional S tatistics . Cambridge Univ. Press, 2019

    2019

  40. [48]

    X. Wu. Tightness of discrete G ibbsian line ensembles with exponential interaction H amiltonians. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar\'e Probab. Stat. , 59(4):2106--2150, 2023

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.