Math-13168 · mathematics · Probability

Math-13168

Exponential intersection tails in three-dimensional slabs

Status Open · unsolvedmath.comLLM status Open unverified

Top Open Problems Not reported cataloguedOpenOpen

Statement

Definitions and mathematical statement

Let $f,g:\mathbb N\to\mathbb Z$ and retain the literal set in the source: \[ S=\{(n,f(n),g(n)):n\in\mathbb N\}\subset\mathbb Z^3. \] A usual exponential-intersection-tails property asks for a probability law $\mu$ on infinite self-avoiding nearest-neighbor paths from a fixed vertex such that, for independent paths $\gamma,\gamma'$ with law $\mu$, there are constants $C<\infty$ and $a>0$ satisfying \[ \Pr\left(|\operatorname{range}(\gamma)\cap\operatorname{range}(\gamma')|\geq m\right) \leq Ce^{-am}\qquad(m\geq1). \] The constants do not depend on $m$. The source does not specify this path/root convention or whether intersections count vertices or edges, so this is explicit standard context.

Characterize the functions $f,g$ for which the intended path law exists. There is a serious geometric ambiguity: the displayed $S$ has exactly one vertex at each first-coordinate level, whereas the title describes three-dimensional slabs. In its induced nearest-neighbor graph, two distinct vertices can be adjacent only at consecutive levels where both $f$ and $g$ are unchanged. Thus this literal set is not a thick slab and cannot silently be treated as one. The intended subset/adjacency, path class, and starting-point convention must be checked before deriving a slab-growth criterion.

Short English statement

Determine when the source's subset supports a law of infinite paths with exponentially decaying pairwise intersection tails. The displayed one-point-per-level set conflicts with the slab description, and path/adjacency conventions are missing.

Sources

Catalogue entry

Statement licence: CC-BY-4.0 · Source file

Contributions 0

No attempts yet. Significant partial results and substantial reductions are welcome. Contribute an attempt.