Uniqueness and non-uniqueness in percolation theory

This paper is an up-to-date introduction to the problem of uniqueness versus non-uniqueness of infinite clusters for percolation on ${\mathbb{Z}}^d$ and, more generally, on transitive graphs. For iid percolation on ${\mathbb{Z}}^d$, uniqueness of the infinite cluster is a classical result, while on certain other transitive graphs uniqueness may fail. Key properties of the graphs in this context turn out to be amenability and nonamenability. The same problem is considered for certain dependent percolation models -- most prominently the Fortuin--Kasteleyn random-cluster model -- and in situations where the standard connectivity notion is replaced by entanglement or rigidity. So-called simultaneous uniqueness in couplings of percolation processes is also considered. Some of the main results are proved in detail, while for others the proofs are merely sketched, and for yet others they are omitted. Several open problems are discussed.Comment: Published at http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/154957806000000096 in the Probability Surveys (http://www.i-journals.org/ps/) by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (http://www.imstat.org

Uniqueness and Non-uniqueness in the Einstein Constraints

The conformal thin sandwich (CTS) equations are a set of four of the Einstein equations, which generalize the Laplace-Poisson equation of Newton's theory. We examine numerically solutions of the CTS equations describing perturbed Minkowski space, and find only one solution. However, we find {\em two} distinct solutions, one even containing a black hole, when the lapse is determined by a fifth elliptic equation through specification of the mean curvature. While the relationship of the two systems and their solutions is a fundamental property of general relativity, this fairly simple example of an elliptic system with non-unique solutions is also of broader interest.Comment: 4 pages, 4 figures; abstract and introduction rewritte

String Synchronizing Sets: Sublinear-Time BWT Construction and Optimal LCE Data Structure

Burrows-Wheeler transform (BWT) is an invertible text transformation that, given a text $T$ of length $n$, permutes its symbols according to the lexicographic order of suffixes of $T$. BWT is one of the most heavily studied algorithms in data compression with numerous applications in indexing, sequence analysis, and bioinformatics. Its construction is a bottleneck in many scenarios, and settling the complexity of this task is one of the most important unsolved problems in sequence analysis that has remained open for 25 years. Given a binary string of length $n$, occupying $O(n/\log n)$ machine words, the BWT construction algorithm due to Hon et al. (SIAM J. Comput., 2009) runs in $O(n)$ time and $O(n/\log n)$ space. Recent advancements (Belazzougui, STOC 2014, and Munro et al., SODA 2017) focus on removing the alphabet-size dependency in the time complexity, but they still require $\Omega(n)$ time. In this paper, we propose the first algorithm that breaks the $O(n)$-time barrier for BWT construction. Given a binary string of length $n$, our procedure builds the Burrows-Wheeler transform in $O(n/\sqrt{\log n})$ time and $O(n/\log n)$ space. We complement this result with a conditional lower bound proving that any further progress in the time complexity of BWT construction would yield faster algorithms for the very well studied problem of counting inversions: it would improve the state-of-the-art $O(m\sqrt{\log m})$-time solution by Chan and P\v{a}tra\c{s}cu (SODA 2010). Our algorithm is based on a novel concept of string synchronizing sets, which is of independent interest. As one of the applications, we show that this technique lets us design a data structure of the optimal size $O(n/\log n)$ that answers Longest Common Extension queries (LCE queries) in $O(1)$ time and, furthermore, can be deterministically constructed in the optimal $O(n/\log n)$ time.Comment: Full version of a paper accepted to STOC 201

Quantum uniqueness

In the classical world one can construct two identical systems which have identical behavior and give identical measurement results. We show this to be impossible in the quantum domain. We prove that after the same quantum measurement two different quantum systems cannot yield always identical results, provided the possible measurement results belong to a non orthogonal set. This is interpreted as quantum uniqueness - a quantum feature which has no classical analog. Its tight relation with objective randomness of quantum measurements is discussed.Comment: Presented at 4th Feynman festival, June 22-26, 2009, in Olomouc, Czech Republic

Uniqueness of limit cycles for quadratic vector fields

Producción CientíficaThis article deals with the study of the number of limit cycles surrounding a critical point of a quadratic planar vector field, which, in normal form, can be written as x ′ = a1x − y − a3x 2 + (2a2 + a5)xy+a6y 2 , y ′ = x+a1y+a2x 2+(2a3+a4)xy−a2y 2 . In particular, we study the semi-varieties defined in terms of the parameters a1, a2, . . . , a6 where some classical criteria for the associated Abel equation apply. The proofs will combine classical ideas with tools from computational algebraic geometry.Agencia Estatal de Investigación - Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (grant MTM 2011-22751)Junta de Extremadura (grant GR15055)Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad - Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (grant MTM2015-65764-C3-1-P

Deference and Uniqueness

Deference principles are principles that describe when, and to what extent, it’s rational to defer to others. Recently, some authors have used such principles to argue for Evidential Uniqueness, the claim that for every batch of evidence, there’s a unique doxastic state that it’s permissible for subjects with that total evidence to have. This paper has two aims. The first aim is to assess these deference-based arguments for Evidential Uniqueness. I’ll show that these arguments only work given a particular kind of deference principle, and I’ll argue that there are reasons to reject these kinds of principles. The second aim of this paper is to spell out what a plausible generalized deference principle looks like. I’ll start by offering a principled rationale for taking deference to constrain rational belief. Then I’ll flesh out the kind of deference principle suggested by this rationale. Finally, I’ll show that this principle is both more plausible and more general than the principles used in the deference-based arguments for Evidential Uniqueness

Uniqueness of Simultaneity

We consider the problem of uniqueness of certain simultaneity structures in flat spacetime. Absolute simultaneity is specified to be a non-trivial equivalence relation which is invariant under the automorphism group Aut of spacetime. Aut is taken to be the identity-component of either the inhomogeneous Galilei group or the inhomogeneous Lorentz group. Uniqueness of standard simultaneity in the first, and absence of any absolute simultaneity in the second case are demonstrated and related to certain group theoretic properties. Relative simultaneity with respect to an additional structure X on spacetime is specified to be a non-trivial equivalence relation which is invariant under the subgroup in Aut that stabilises X. Uniqueness of standard Einstein simultaneity is proven in the Lorentzian case when X is an inertial frame. We end by discussing the relation to previous work of others.Comment: LeTeX-2e, 18 pages, no figure