Equivalence of transience and ballisticity in random environment
Let and let . A random walk in a uniformly elliptic i.i.d. random environment is transient in the direction if
-almost surely, and it is ballistic in the direction if
-almost surely. Transience-ballisticity conjecture. Transience in the direction implies ballisticity in the direction . Whether this implication holds in all dimensions remains open; in dimension one, transience need not imply ballisticity.
References
Primary source
Alexander Drewitz and Alejandro F. Ramírez, “Ballisticity conditions for random walk in random environment”, arXiv:0903.4465 (2009).
Progress summary
Nothing recorded yet. Refresh searches the literature and the public web for attempts on this problem, and writes the first summary here.
Solutions 1
RemarkAI-assistedClaimed by OpenAI. Claims to prove that almost-sure transience in a fixed direction implies a deterministic limiting velocity with positive projection in that direction for nearest-neighbor random walks in independent and identically distributed uniformly elliptic environments on Zd , d ≥ 2. This is the claimed implication on this page.See full solution
Claimed by OpenAI. Claims to prove that almost-sure transience in a fixed direction implies a deterministic limiting velocity with positive projection in that direction for nearest-neighbor random walks in independent and identically distributed uniformly elliptic environments on Zd , d ≥ 2. This is the claimed implication on this page.
GitHub repository: https://github.com/openai/math
- OpenAI-220-03-Directional-transience-implies-ballisticity.pdfOpen