The loop-erased random-walk up-to-constants passage estimate

From papers

Let zDz\in\mathbb{D}, let ϵ>0\epsilon>0 be sufficiently small, and let ZZ, WwW^w, ξx\xi_x, and σD\sigma_{\mathbb{D}} have the meanings used in the loop-erased-random-walk estimates: ZZ is the relevant random walk, ξx\xi_x is its hitting time of xx, WwW^w is the walk started at ww, and σD\sigma_{\mathbb{D}} is the exit time from the disk. Let L(Z[0,ξx])\operatorname{L}(Z[0,\xi_x]) be the loop-erasure of Z[0,ξx]Z[0,\xi_x], and let Es(ϵn)\operatorname{Es}(\epsilon n) be the corresponding nonintersection probability. Up-to-constants passage conjecture. For the points ww and xx in the configuration under consideration,

P(L(Z[0,ξx])Ww[1,σD]=)Es(ϵn).\mathbb{P}\left(\operatorname{L}(Z[0,\xi_x])\cap W^w[1,\sigma_{\mathbb{D}}]=\emptyset\right)\asymp\operatorname{Es}(\epsilon n).

This estimate is proposed as the missing lower-bound ingredient for the conditional occupation-measure estimate. The source had established only upper bounds and suggested that the lower bound might follow from modifying the proof strategy.

Progress summary

Nothing recorded yet. Refresh searches the literature and the public web for attempts on this problem, and writes the first summary here.

Sources & referencesView supporting material

Primary source

Tom Alberts, Michael J. Kozdron and Robert Masson, “Some partial results on the convergence of loop-erased random walk to SLE(2) in the natural parametrization”, arXiv:1304.5013 (2013).

Solutions 0

No solutions have been posted yet.