Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Square-lattice Potts critical inverse temperature

Statement

Let Q≥2 be an integer, J>0, and β>0. On Λn=[−n,n]2∩Z2, let Bn={x∈Λn:∥x∥∞=n} and let En be the nearest-neighbor edges with both endpoints in Λn. The Q-state Potts model has spins σ:Λn→{1,…,Q}, fixed plus boundary σ∣Bn=1, and finite-volume Gibbs probabilities proportional to e−βHn(σ), where Hn(σ)=−J∑{x,y}∈En1{σx=σy}. Define its plus-boundary order parameter by mQ+(β):=lim⁡n→∞Pβ,n+(σ0=1)−Q−1, when the limit exists, and define βc:=inf⁡{β>0:mQ+(β)>0}. Then the limit exists and βcJ=log⁡(1+Q). This is a numerical limit of finite-volume probabilities; no infinite-volume probability-law extension is required.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Integer Q≥2, coupling J>0, inverse temperature β>0, the finite plus-boundary Potts laws on (Λn,En), and the finite wired FK laws at p=1−e−βJ.

[F1]

On a finite simple graph, the Potts edge weight is ∏e(1+ve1{σx=σy}) and the FK edge-subset weight is Qk(A)∏e∈Ave (Finite Potts and Fortuin–Kasteleyn weights).

[F2]

For integer Q≥2, the finite Edwards–Sokal joint law has Potts and FK marginals and colors every FK component independently and uniformly when there is no pinned boundary (Finite Edwards–Sokal coupling and correlation identity). The pinned-boundary version used below is derived directly by the same finite summation with all vertices of Bn fixed to color 1.

[F3]

For real q≥1, finite FK weights with a boundary partition use qkξ(A) and p/(1−p) is the edge activity (Finite FK random-cluster weights for real q and boundary partitions).

[F4]

If an(p,Q) is the finite wired probability of 0↔Bn, its numerical limit L(p,Q) exists, is positive for p>Q/(1+Q), and is zero for p<Q/(1+Q) (Wired FK annuli and the numerical self-dual threshold).

Proof

1.1F1F2F3givenalgebra

Put v=eβJ−1 and p=v/(1+v)=1−e−βJ. On the finite spin-edge configurations with σ∣Bn=1, define the joint weight Wn+(σ,A)=v∣A∣∏{x,y}∈A1{σx=σy}. For fixed σ, summing over A⊆En gives ∏e∈En(1+v1{σx=σy})=e−βHn(σ). For fixed A, every component meeting Bn has color 1 and each remaining component has Q choices. After wiring all of Bn into one class, the number of unpinned components is kξn(A)−1. Thus the edge marginal has weight Qkξn(A)−1v∣A∣, proportional by the configuration-independent factor Q−1 to the wired FK weight in [F3]. Normalization therefore gives exactly the finite wired FK law. This supplies the pinned version of [F2] by an explicit finite sum.

2.1F4step 1.1algebra

Conditional on A, the origin has color 1 with probability one if it connects to Bn, and with probability 1/Q otherwise. Indeed every unpinned component has its independent uniform color by the finite count of step 1.1. Consequently Pβ,n+(σ0=1)=Q−1+(1−Q−1)an(p,Q). By [F4] the right side has a numerical limit. Hence mQ+(β)=(1−Q−1)L(1−e−βJ,Q).

3.1F4step 2.1algebra∎

The map β↦1−e−βJ is strictly increasing from 0 to 1. By [F4] and the positive prefactor in step 2.1, mQ+(β) is zero below the unique parameter solving 1−e−βJ=Q/(1+Q) and positive above it. Its defining positive-set infimum is therefore that parameter, regardless of its value at the critical point. Solving gives e−βcJ=1/(1+Q) and βcJ=log⁡(1+Q).

Remarks

The pinned-boundary component count is Qkξn(A)−1; its constant factor relative to the wired FK weight cancels on normalization. The order parameter is defined by finite-volume probabilities and its limit is established numerically, so this deduction does not use a choice-dependent infinite-volume measure extension. The coupling J is the Potts indicator-interaction coupling displayed in the statement.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources