Paper detail

A Lower Bound for the Mixing Time of the Random-to-Random Insertions Shuffle

The best known lower and upper bounds on the mixing time for the random-to-random insertions shuffle are $(1/2-o(1))n\log n$ and $(2+o(1))n\log n$. A long standing open problem is to prove that the mixing time exhibits a cutoff. In particular, Diaconis conjectured that the cutoff occurs at $3/4n\log n$. Our main result is a lower bound of $t_n = (3/4-o(1))n\log n$, corresponding to this conjecture. Our method is based on analysis of the positions of cards yet-to-be-removed. We show that for large $n$ and $t_n$ as above, there exists $f(n)=Θ(\sqrt{n\log n})$ such that, with high probability, under both the measure induced by the shuffle and the stationary measure, the number of cards within a certain distance from their initial position is $f(n)$ plus a lower order term. However, under the induced measure, this lower order term is strongly influenced by the number of cards yet-to-be-removed, and is of higher order than for the stationary measure.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.