Multicriticality and Scaling: Mellin Spectral Theory, and the Decoupling of Geometric and Spectral Exponents

Alejandro Frank; Laurence A. Jacobs

arxiv: 2606.07644 · v1 · pith:KC5AP2Y5new · submitted 2026-06-01 · 🧮 math.GM · math-ph· math.MP

Multicriticality and Scaling: Mellin Spectral Theory, and the Decoupling of Geometric and Spectral Exponents

Laurence A. Jacobs , Alejandro Frank This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 11:34 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.GM math-phmath.MP

keywords scale invarianceMellin transformmulticriticalityrenormalization groupspectral exponentsgeometric scalingeigenvalue decay

0 comments

The pith

Scale-invariant kernels on the multiplicative half-line decouple their geometric scaling exponent from the spectral decay exponent of their Mellin multipliers.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a spectral theory showing that any kernel satisfying the dilation property M(kx, ky) = k^{-a} M(x,y) must factorize as (xy)^{-a/2} F(x/y). The Mellin transform then diagonalizes the operator with eigenfunctions x^{-a/2 + iω} and eigenvalues given by the Mellin transform of F. This structure separates the geometric exponent a, which controls the overall scaling under dilation, from the spectral exponent b extracted from how the eigenvalues decay with ω. For a specific choice of F that yields a Lorentzian multiplier, b differs from a in general. This difference provides a precise way to identify multicriticality in renormalization group flows, where a equals b only for simple fixed points.

Core claim

For kernels with the scaling property under simultaneous dilation of arguments, the prefactor (xy)^{-a/2} carries the geometric exponent a while the shape function F determines a distinct spectral exponent b through its Mellin transform; equality a = b marks a simple RG fixed point whereas inequality indicates multiple independent scaling dimensions.

What carries the argument

Factorization of the kernel into (xy)^{-a/2} F(x/y) followed by Mellin diagonalization yielding eigenvalues ilde{F}(ω) whose decay defines the spectral exponent b.

If this is right

The equality a = b corresponds to a simple critical fixed point of the Renormalization Group.
a ≠ b signals the presence of multiple independent scaling dimensions.
Discrete self-similarity forces eigenvector collapse on the lattice, motivating the continuum formulation.
Finite-size corrections from lattice sampling can be quantified numerically.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Such decoupling may allow direct extraction of multicritical properties from finite matrix approximations without assuming a single scaling dimension.
Similar spectral analyses could apply to other multiplicative groups or scale-invariant problems in physics and mathematics.
The Lorentzian form for specific F suggests connections to known distributions in statistical mechanics models.

Load-bearing premise

The effective spectral exponent b extracted from eigenvalue decay of finite truncations is independent of the geometric exponent a and does not require additional fitting assumptions.

What would settle it

Compute the decay rate of eigenvalues in a finite truncation of the kernel with F(t) = c ρ^{|ln t|} and check whether it matches the input geometric exponent a or yields a different value b.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.07644 by Alejandro Frank, Laurence A. Jacobs.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Relative error ∆ (k) N (i, j) for k = 2, N = 250, r = 150 retained modes. Deviations from perfect scaling concentrate at large indices. 8.3 Convergence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Mean relative error ⟨∆ (k) N ⟩ versus fraction of retained eigenmodes r/N, for N = 250, k = 2. Several directions remain open. The generalization to mode-dependent scaling factors γk(n)— where distinct eigenmodes carry independent geometric scaling dimensions—would accommodate systems with multiple coexisting fixed points. The relationship between the width parameter σ of the Lorentzian multiplier and the … view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We develop a spectral theory of scale-invariant operators on the multiplicative half-line $(\mathbb{R}_+, dx/x)$. A symmetric kernel $M(x, y)$ satisfying $M(kx, ky) = k^{-a}M(x, y)$ necessarily factorizes as $(xy)^{-a/2}F(x/y)$, where the shape function $F$ depends only on the ratio of its arguments. The Mellin transform diagonalizes such operators: the generalized eigenfunctions are $\psi_\omega(x) = x^{-a/2+i\omega}$, and the eigenvalues are the Mellin multiplier $\tilde{F}(\omega)$. This structure reveals a fundamental decoupling of two exponents. The geometric exponent $a$, carried by the power-law envelope $(xy)^{-a/2}$, governs the matrix scaling under dilation. The spectral exponent $b$, measured from the eigenvalue decay of the finite-dimensional truncation, is an effective quantity determined by the shape of $\tilde{F}(\omega)$. For the explicit kernel $F(t) = c \rho^{|\ln t|}$, the Mellin multiplier is a Lorentzian of width $\sigma = -\ln \rho$, not a power law -- so $b$ is generically distinct from $a$. This decoupling provides a precise mathematical characterization of multicriticality: the equality $a = b$ corresponds to a simple critical fixed point of the Renormalization Group, while $a \neq b$ signals the presence of multiple independent scaling dimensions. We prove that the discrete self-similarity condition forces eigenvector collapse on the lattice, motivating the continuum formulation. Finite-size corrections from lattice sampling are quantified numerically.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper cleanly factors scale-invariant kernels and uses Mellin to separate a geometric exponent a from a spectral decay exponent b, then links a=b to ordinary criticality and a≠b to multicriticality, but the finite-matrix numerics are the part that still needs verification.

read the letter

The main thing here is the explicit decoupling: any kernel obeying M(kx,ky)=k^{-a}M(x,y) must be (xy)^{-a/2}F(x/y), the Mellin transform then gives eigenvalues ilde F( ilde u) that carry no a dependence, and for their Lorentzian example the eigenvalue fall-off defines a distinct b. That separation plus the claim that a=b marks a simple RG fixed point while a≠b signals multiple scaling dimensions is the new framing they put forward.

The factorization itself is immediate from the scaling assumption and the eigenfunctions x^{-a/2+iω} are the usual Mellin ones, so the algebra checks out. They also note that discrete self-similarity on a lattice forces eigenvector collapse, which is a reasonable motivation for staying in the continuum, and they say they have quantified finite-size corrections numerically.

The soft spot is exactly the one the stress test flags. Once you discretize the kernel on a finite grid the (xy)^{-a/2} factor is inside the matrix entries, so the ordered eigenvalues can pick up a-dependence in their decay with index k. Extracting an effective power b from that decay almost always requires choosing a functional form and fitting, which undercuts the “no additional assumptions” part. If the numerics they report really show b staying independent across a range of a and truncation sizes, the decoupling survives; if the independence only appears after the fit or only in the continuum limit, the RG interpretation is weaker than stated.

This is for people who work on scaling and fixed-point structure in mathematical physics. A reader who already thinks about Mellin transforms or RG eigenvalues will see a useful distinction even if they end up disagreeing with the multicriticality reading. The formal part is solid enough and the claim is specific enough that it deserves a serious referee rather than a desk reject.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a Mellin spectral theory for scale-invariant kernels on (R_+, dx/x). Any kernel satisfying M(kx,ky)=k^{-a}M(x,y) factorizes as (xy)^{-a/2}F(x/y). The Mellin transform diagonalizes the operator with generalized eigenfunctions ψ_ω(x)=x^{-a/2+iω} and eigenvalues given by the Mellin multiplier ilde{F}(ω). The work claims a decoupling between the geometric exponent a (from the power-law envelope) and the spectral exponent b (from eigenvalue decay in finite truncations). For the explicit choice F(t)=c ρ^{|ln t|}, ilde{F}(ω) is Lorentzian with width σ=-ln ρ, so b is generically distinct from a. This is interpreted as distinguishing simple RG fixed points (a=b) from multicritical points (a≠b). The manuscript proves that discrete self-similarity forces eigenvector collapse on the lattice and quantifies finite-size corrections numerically.

Significance. If the numerical evidence confirms that b remains independent of a, the result supplies a precise, mathematically grounded characterization of multicriticality via decoupled exponents, with the Mellin diagonalization and the explicit Lorentzian example as clear strengths. The lattice-to-continuum motivation is also a positive feature. The RG interpretation, however, remains suggestive until a direct link to standard beta-function flows is supplied.

major comments (2)

[Numerical truncation analysis] Numerical truncation analysis: the decoupling of b from a is the load-bearing claim for the multicriticality interpretation, yet the manuscript provides no explicit description of how the N×N matrix is assembled from the kernel (i.e., whether the factor (xy)^{-a/2} is retained in the discrete entries) nor the precise procedure used to read b from the ordered eigenvalues λ_k. Because any position-space discretization necessarily folds a into the matrix, it is unclear whether the reported numerical results demonstrate a-independence after finite-size corrections or whether the extraction of b implicitly assumes a decay law such as |λ_k|∼k^{-b}.
[Definition of spectral exponent b] Definition of spectral exponent b: the text states that b is 'measured from the eigenvalue decay of the finite-dimensional truncation' and is 'determined by the shape of ilde{F}(ω)', but does not specify whether b is obtained directly from the Lorentzian width σ without reference to the discrete spectrum or whether a fit is performed. This detail is required to substantiate the claim that no additional fitting assumptions are needed and that the continuum Mellin property survives truncation.

minor comments (2)

The Mellin transform convention (normalization, integration measure) should be stated explicitly upon first use in the main text rather than only in an appendix.
Numerical figure captions should report the range of a values examined, the truncation sizes N, and the precise criterion used to extract b so that readers can judge the robustness of the claimed independence.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the requested clarifications in the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Numerical truncation analysis] Numerical truncation analysis: the decoupling of b from a is the load-bearing claim for the multicriticality interpretation, yet the manuscript provides no explicit description of how the N×N matrix is assembled from the kernel (i.e., whether the factor (xy)^{-a/2} is retained in the discrete entries) nor the precise procedure used to read b from the ordered eigenvalues λ_k. Because any position-space discretization necessarily folds a into the matrix, it is unclear whether the reported numerical results demonstrate a-independence after finite-size corrections or whether the extraction of b implicitly assumes a decay law such as |λ_k|∼k^{-b}.

Authors: We agree that an explicit description of the discretization procedure is required. In the revision we will add a dedicated subsection that specifies the assembly of the N×N matrix (retaining the geometric prefactor (xy)^{-a/2} in each entry), the precise extraction of b from the ordered eigenvalues λ_k (via direct power-law fitting to the observed decay after subtracting finite-size corrections), and verification that no a-dependent decay law is presupposed. This will demonstrate that the reported a-independence survives the truncation. revision: yes
Referee: [Definition of spectral exponent b] Definition of spectral exponent b: the text states that b is 'measured from the eigenvalue decay of the finite-dimensional truncation' and is 'determined by the shape of tilde{F}(ω)', but does not specify whether b is obtained directly from the Lorentzian width σ without reference to the discrete spectrum or whether a fit is performed. This detail is required to substantiate the claim that no additional fitting assumptions are needed and that the continuum Mellin property survives truncation.

Authors: We will clarify the extraction procedure in the revision. The revised text will state that b is obtained by fitting the decay of the discrete eigenvalues λ_k and that the resulting value is shown to equal the Lorentzian width σ of tilde{F}(ω) without further assumptions. Explicit formulas relating the fit to σ, together with numerical checks confirming survival of the continuum Mellin property under truncation, will be added. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; decoupling follows directly from Mellin transform properties on factorized kernels

full rationale

The paper's derivation begins with the scale-invariance condition on M(x,y), which mathematically forces the factorization M(x,y)=(xy)^{-a/2}F(x/y) with F depending only on the ratio. The Mellin transform then supplies eigenfunctions x^{-a/2 + iω} and eigenvalues ilde{F}(ω) that are independent of a by the standard properties of the transform; this is a direct algebraic consequence, not a redefinition or fit. The spectral exponent b is defined from the decay of ilde{F}(ω) (explicitly a Lorentzian for the chosen F(t)=c ρ^{|ln t|}), and the claim a≠b for multicriticality is an interpretation of this independence rather than a quantity extracted by fitting the same data used to define a. No self-citations are load-bearing, no ansatz is smuggled, and finite truncations are presented only as numerical illustration of the continuum result. The derivation chain is self-contained against external mathematical benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on the standard properties of the Mellin transform on the multiplicative group and the factorization forced by scale invariance; the only explicit free parameter is the decay constant ho in the illustrative kernel.

free parameters (1)

ho
Controls the width ho of the exponential shape function F(t) = c ho^{|ln t|}; sets the Lorentzian width ilde{F}(\omega) and thereby the spectral exponent b.

axioms (2)

standard math Mellin transform diagonalizes convolution operators on the multiplicative half-line
Invoked when the paper states that the generalized eigenfunctions are x^{-a/2 + i\omega} with eigenvalues given by the Mellin multiplier.
standard math Scale invariance M(kx, ky) = k^{-a} M(x, y) forces the factorization (xy)^{-a/2} F(x/y)
Stated as a necessary property of any kernel satisfying the given scaling relation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5836 in / 1608 out tokens · 25357 ms · 2026-06-28T11:34:15.140916+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages

[1]

Eugene Stanley.Introduction to Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena

H. Eugene Stanley.Introduction to Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena. Oxford University Press, New York, 1971

1971
[2]

Michael E. Fisher. Renormalization group theory: Its basis and formulation in statistical physics.Rev. Mod. Phys., 70:653–681, 1998. doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.70.653

work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.70.653 1998
[3]

Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1992

Nigel Goldenfeld.Lectures on Phase Transitions and the Renormalization Group, volume 85 ofFrontiers in Physics. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1992

1992
[4]

Kenneth G. Wilson. Renormalization group and critical phenomena. I. Renormaliza- tion group and the Kadanoff scaling picture.Phys. Rev. B, 4:3174–3183, 1971. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.4.3174

work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.4.3174 1971
[5]

Kadanoff

Leo P. Kadanoff. Scaling laws for Ising models nearT c.Physics Physique Fizika, 2:263–272,
[6]

doi: 10.1103/PhysicsPhysiqueFizika.2.263. 12

work page doi:10.1103/physicsphysiquefizika.2.263
[7]

Wilson and John Kogut

Kenneth G. Wilson and John Kogut. The renormalization group and theεexpansion.Phys. Rep., 12:75–199, 1974. doi: 10.1016/0370-1573(74)90023-4

work page doi:10.1016/0370-1573(74)90023-4 1974
[8]

Franz J. Wegner. Corrections to scaling laws.Phys. Rev. B, 5:4529–4536, 1972. doi: 10. 1103/PhysRevB.5.4529

1972
[9]

Weaire, S

Jean Zinn-Justin.Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phenomena, volume 113 ofInterna- tional Series of Monographs on Physics. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 4th edition, 2002. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198509233.001.0001

work page doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198509233.001.0001 2002
[10]

Nunes Amaral, and H

Vasiliki Plerou, Parameswaran Gopikrishnan, Bernd Rosenow, Lu ´ıs A. Nunes Amaral, and H. Eugene Stanley. Universal and nonuniversal properties of cross correlations in financial time series.Phys. Rev. Lett., 83:1471–1474, 1999. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.1471

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.83.1471 1999
[11]

Noise dress- ing of financial correlation matrices.Phys

Laurent Laloux, Pierre Cizeau, Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, and Marc Potters. Noise dress- ing of financial correlation matrices.Phys. Rev. Lett., 83:1467–1470, 1999. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.83.1467

1999
[12]

Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, 3rd edition, 2004

Madan Lal Mehta.Random Matrices. Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, 3rd edition, 2004

2004
[13]

Mar ˇcenko and Leonid A

Vladimir A. Mar ˇcenko and Leonid A. Pastur. Distribution of eigenvalues for some sets of random matrices.Math. USSR Sb., 1:457–483, 1967. doi: 10.1070/ SM1967v001n04ABEH001994

1967
[14]

Are biological systems poised at criticality?J

Thierry Mora and William Bialek. Are biological systems poised at criticality?J. Stat. Phys., 144:268–302, 2011. doi: 10.1007/s10955-011-0229-4

work page doi:10.1007/s10955-011-0229-4 2011
[15]

Scale-free correlations in starling flocks.Proc

Andrea Cavagna, Alessio Cimarelli, Irene Giardina, Giorgio Parisi, Raffaele Santagati, Fabio Stefanini, and Massimiliano Viale. Scale-free correlations in starling flocks.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107:11865–11870, 2010. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1005766107

work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1005766107 2010
[16]

Matrix scale invariance: Criticality detection in multi-variable systems

Alejandro Frank, Sa ´ul Huitzil, Juan Claudio Toledo-Roy, and Laurence Jacobs. Matrix scale invariance: Criticality detection in multi-variable systems. 2026. Submitted

2026
[17]

IV: Analysis of Operators

Michael Reed and Barry Simon.Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics. IV: Analysis of Operators. Academic Press, New York, 1978

1978
[18]

Folland.A Course in Abstract Harmonic Analysis

Gerald B. Folland.A Course in Abstract Harmonic Analysis. Studies in Advanced Mathe- matics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1995

1995
[19]

Princeton Series in Applied Mathematics

Paul Embrechts and Makoto Maejima.Selfsimilar Processes. Princeton Series in Applied Mathematics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2002

2002
[20]

Titchmarsh.Introduction to the Theory of Fourier Integrals

Edward C. Titchmarsh.Introduction to the Theory of Fourier Integrals. Chelsea, New York, 3rd edition, 1986

1986
[21]

G. H. Hardy, J. E. Littlewood, and G. P ´olya.Inequalities. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2nd edition, 1952. 13

1952
[22]

American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2nd edition, 2005

Barry Simon.Trace Ideals and Their Applications, volume 120 ofMathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2nd edition, 2005

2005
[23]

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996

John Cardy.Scaling and Renormalization in Statistical Physics, volume 5 ofCambridge Lecture Notes in Physics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996

1996
[24]

Dover, Mineola, NY , 2006

Claude Itzykson and Jean-Bernard Zuber.Quantum Field Theory. Dover, Mineola, NY , 2006. Originally published by McGraw-Hill, 1980

2006
[25]

Springer, Berlin, 2nd edition,

Didier Sornette.Critical Phenomena in Natural Sciences. Springer, Berlin, 2nd edition,
[26]

doi: 10.1007/3-540-33182-4

work page doi:10.1007/3-540-33182-4
[27]

Palmer, Michael J

Ga ˇsper Tkaˇcik, Thierry Mora, Olivier Marre, Dario Amodei, Stephanie E. Palmer, Michael J. Berry, and William Bialek. Thermodynamics and signatures of criticality in a network of neu- rons.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 112:11508–11513, 2015. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1514188112

work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1514188112 2015
[28]

Springer, Berlin, 1984

Yoshiki Kuramoto.Chemical Oscillations, Waves, and Turbulence, volume 19 ofSpringer Series in Synergetics. Springer, Berlin, 1984. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-69689-3

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-69689-3 1984
[29]

Strogatz

Steven H. Strogatz. From Kuramoto to Crawford: exploring the onset of synchroniza- tion in populations of coupled oscillators.Physica D, 143:1–20, 2000. doi: 10.1016/ S0167-2789(00)00094-4

2000
[30]

Antonsen

Edward Ott and Thomas M. Antonsen. Low dimensional behavior of large systems of glob- ally coupled oscillators.Chaos, 18:037113, 2008. doi: 10.1063/1.2930766. 14

work page doi:10.1063/1.2930766 2008

[1] [1]

Eugene Stanley.Introduction to Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena

H. Eugene Stanley.Introduction to Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena. Oxford University Press, New York, 1971

1971

[2] [2]

Michael E. Fisher. Renormalization group theory: Its basis and formulation in statistical physics.Rev. Mod. Phys., 70:653–681, 1998. doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.70.653

work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.70.653 1998

[3] [3]

Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1992

Nigel Goldenfeld.Lectures on Phase Transitions and the Renormalization Group, volume 85 ofFrontiers in Physics. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1992

1992

[4] [4]

Kenneth G. Wilson. Renormalization group and critical phenomena. I. Renormaliza- tion group and the Kadanoff scaling picture.Phys. Rev. B, 4:3174–3183, 1971. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.4.3174

work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.4.3174 1971

[5] [5]

Kadanoff

Leo P. Kadanoff. Scaling laws for Ising models nearT c.Physics Physique Fizika, 2:263–272,

[6] [6]

doi: 10.1103/PhysicsPhysiqueFizika.2.263. 12

work page doi:10.1103/physicsphysiquefizika.2.263

[7] [7]

Wilson and John Kogut

Kenneth G. Wilson and John Kogut. The renormalization group and theεexpansion.Phys. Rep., 12:75–199, 1974. doi: 10.1016/0370-1573(74)90023-4

work page doi:10.1016/0370-1573(74)90023-4 1974

[8] [8]

Franz J. Wegner. Corrections to scaling laws.Phys. Rev. B, 5:4529–4536, 1972. doi: 10. 1103/PhysRevB.5.4529

1972

[9] [9]

Weaire, S

Jean Zinn-Justin.Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phenomena, volume 113 ofInterna- tional Series of Monographs on Physics. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 4th edition, 2002. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198509233.001.0001

work page doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198509233.001.0001 2002

[10] [10]

Nunes Amaral, and H

Vasiliki Plerou, Parameswaran Gopikrishnan, Bernd Rosenow, Lu ´ıs A. Nunes Amaral, and H. Eugene Stanley. Universal and nonuniversal properties of cross correlations in financial time series.Phys. Rev. Lett., 83:1471–1474, 1999. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.1471

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.83.1471 1999

[11] [11]

Noise dress- ing of financial correlation matrices.Phys

Laurent Laloux, Pierre Cizeau, Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, and Marc Potters. Noise dress- ing of financial correlation matrices.Phys. Rev. Lett., 83:1467–1470, 1999. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.83.1467

1999

[12] [12]

Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, 3rd edition, 2004

Madan Lal Mehta.Random Matrices. Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam, 3rd edition, 2004

2004

[13] [13]

Mar ˇcenko and Leonid A

Vladimir A. Mar ˇcenko and Leonid A. Pastur. Distribution of eigenvalues for some sets of random matrices.Math. USSR Sb., 1:457–483, 1967. doi: 10.1070/ SM1967v001n04ABEH001994

1967

[14] [14]

Are biological systems poised at criticality?J

Thierry Mora and William Bialek. Are biological systems poised at criticality?J. Stat. Phys., 144:268–302, 2011. doi: 10.1007/s10955-011-0229-4

work page doi:10.1007/s10955-011-0229-4 2011

[15] [15]

Scale-free correlations in starling flocks.Proc

Andrea Cavagna, Alessio Cimarelli, Irene Giardina, Giorgio Parisi, Raffaele Santagati, Fabio Stefanini, and Massimiliano Viale. Scale-free correlations in starling flocks.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107:11865–11870, 2010. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1005766107

work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1005766107 2010

[16] [16]

Matrix scale invariance: Criticality detection in multi-variable systems

Alejandro Frank, Sa ´ul Huitzil, Juan Claudio Toledo-Roy, and Laurence Jacobs. Matrix scale invariance: Criticality detection in multi-variable systems. 2026. Submitted

2026

[17] [17]

IV: Analysis of Operators

Michael Reed and Barry Simon.Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics. IV: Analysis of Operators. Academic Press, New York, 1978

1978

[18] [18]

Folland.A Course in Abstract Harmonic Analysis

Gerald B. Folland.A Course in Abstract Harmonic Analysis. Studies in Advanced Mathe- matics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1995

1995

[19] [19]

Princeton Series in Applied Mathematics

Paul Embrechts and Makoto Maejima.Selfsimilar Processes. Princeton Series in Applied Mathematics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2002

2002

[20] [20]

Titchmarsh.Introduction to the Theory of Fourier Integrals

Edward C. Titchmarsh.Introduction to the Theory of Fourier Integrals. Chelsea, New York, 3rd edition, 1986

1986

[21] [21]

G. H. Hardy, J. E. Littlewood, and G. P ´olya.Inequalities. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2nd edition, 1952. 13

1952

[22] [22]

American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2nd edition, 2005

Barry Simon.Trace Ideals and Their Applications, volume 120 ofMathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2nd edition, 2005

2005

[23] [23]

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996

John Cardy.Scaling and Renormalization in Statistical Physics, volume 5 ofCambridge Lecture Notes in Physics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996

1996

[24] [24]

Dover, Mineola, NY , 2006

Claude Itzykson and Jean-Bernard Zuber.Quantum Field Theory. Dover, Mineola, NY , 2006. Originally published by McGraw-Hill, 1980

2006

[25] [25]

Springer, Berlin, 2nd edition,

Didier Sornette.Critical Phenomena in Natural Sciences. Springer, Berlin, 2nd edition,

[26] [26]

doi: 10.1007/3-540-33182-4

work page doi:10.1007/3-540-33182-4

[27] [27]

Palmer, Michael J

Ga ˇsper Tkaˇcik, Thierry Mora, Olivier Marre, Dario Amodei, Stephanie E. Palmer, Michael J. Berry, and William Bialek. Thermodynamics and signatures of criticality in a network of neu- rons.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 112:11508–11513, 2015. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1514188112

work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1514188112 2015

[28] [28]

Springer, Berlin, 1984

Yoshiki Kuramoto.Chemical Oscillations, Waves, and Turbulence, volume 19 ofSpringer Series in Synergetics. Springer, Berlin, 1984. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-69689-3

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-69689-3 1984

[29] [29]

Strogatz

Steven H. Strogatz. From Kuramoto to Crawford: exploring the onset of synchroniza- tion in populations of coupled oscillators.Physica D, 143:1–20, 2000. doi: 10.1016/ S0167-2789(00)00094-4

2000

[30] [30]

Antonsen

Edward Ott and Thomas M. Antonsen. Low dimensional behavior of large systems of glob- ally coupled oscillators.Chaos, 18:037113, 2008. doi: 10.1063/1.2930766. 14

work page doi:10.1063/1.2930766 2008