Monotonicity conjecture for norms of uniformly supported random walks
Monotonicity conjecture for norms of uniformly supported random walks
Let . Suppose has finite support . If is uniformly distributed on , and if every is on the boundary of , then the map is monotone for each . Monotonicity conjecture. Under these hypotheses, the norm is monotone as a function of for every . This conjecture is motivated by the observed interpolation between the and limits in the examples discussed above, but no proof is given.
Progress summary
The conjecture remains unproved: the available counterexample uses unequal probabilities and therefore does not apply.
Liu and Slade formulate the conjecture in 2026: for a uniformly supported random walk whose support lies on the boundary of its convex hull, the norm should vary monotonically with the parameter . They explicitly state that they have no proof.
May 2026 status
Liu and Slade report a nonmonotonicity example in dimension , but its step distribution is nonuniform, so it does not address the conjecture. No proof, uniform counterexample, or corroborated settlement is reported.
Current status (as of August 2026): The conjecture is open; nonmonotonicity is known for a nonuniform distribution, but the uniformly supported case remains unresolved.
Sources
Sources & referencesView supporting material
Primary source
Yucheng Liu and Gordon Slade, “Crossover from subcritical to critical decay: random walk, self-avoiding walk, percolation”, arXiv:2605.15545 (2026).
Solutions 1
Sign in to submit a solution.
A uniform twelve-point counterexample to norm monotonicity
Conjecture 3.6 of Liu and Slade, arXiv:2605.15545v1, is false. Take the step distribution uniform on
and take . We will prove that is neither nondecreasing nor nonincreasing on .
The source's Example 3.7 treats a nonuniform distribution; the equal-weight support below satisfies the uniformity assumption of the conjecture.
The idea is that the two endpoint limits of this norm are both , but its fourth-moment expansion forces it strictly below near .
1. The support satisfies the hypotheses
The set consists of the twelve points
with independent signs. Give each point probability . This distribution is invariant under coordinate sign changes and coordinate interchange, and it has finite support. Its support generates : indeed,
and interchanging coordinates gives .
Every support point is a strict vertex of its convex hull. For fixed , the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality gives for every , with equality only when . Thus the linear functional exposes uniquely. In particular, every support point lies on the required boundary.
2. The defining variational formula
Here , and without a subscript denotes the Euclidean norm.
Let have this distribution and write
For the random-walk norm in the conjecture, the mass and the norm are characterized by
The axis atoms make compact, and
Consequently is strictly increasing from to infinity on . We may therefore parameterize by
so that and as .
3. An analytic expansion of the actual maximizer
Set , so . Introduce the moments
Let denote the two-by-two identity matrix. Coordinate symmetry gives . Define
For , put
Since the support is finite and centrally symmetric, the power series of contains only even powers of . It follows that extends real-analytically to a neighborhood of , with
Here the remainder is analytic locally in both and . Consider the equations
At they hold with and . Their Jacobian with respect to at that point is
whose determinant is . The analytic implicit-function theorem therefore supplies analytic solutions and near , with and .
These solutions give the global maximizer, not merely a stationary point. For ,
is positive definite, since the support spans . If , convexity and give
For all sufficiently small positive , we have , and hence . The feasible set is precisely . Thus
Differentiating at yields
Since , the required fourth-moment difference is
It follows that
The analyticity established above now gives
The remainder divided by tends to zero. Therefore for every sufficiently small positive , and also
4. The other endpoint and the failure of monotonicity
Here the limit as can be proved directly. Put and
Because for every support point and has probability ,
Consequently
The atom at similarly gives . For the opposite bound, take . Since for all , every summand in is at most , so and . Hence . Combining these inequalities gives
Thus as well.
A monotone function on whose two endpoint limits both equal must be identically . Our expansion proves that this norm is strictly smaller than near . More explicitly, choose such a point ; the two endpoint limits supply with
This disproves the conjectured monotonicity while satisfying all its uniform-support and boundary hypotheses.