Paper detail

A proof of Sznitman's conjecture about ballistic RWRE

We consider a random walk in a uniformly elliptic i.i.d. random environment in $\mathbb Z^d$ for $d\ge 2$. It is believed that whenever the random walk is transient in a given direction it is necessarily ballistic. In order to quantify the gap which would be needed to prove this equivalence, several ballisticity conditions have been introduced. In particular, in 2001 and 2002, Sznitman defined the so called conditions $(T)$ and $(T')$. The first one is the requirement that certain unlikely exit probabilities from a set of slabs decay exponentially fast with their width $L$. The second one is the requirement that for all $γ\in (0,1)$ condition $(T)_γ$ is satisfied, which in turn is defined as the requirement that the decay is like $e^{-CL^γ}$ for some $C>0$. In this article we prove a conjecture of Sznitman of 2002, stating that $(T)$ and $(T')$ are equivalent. Hence, this closes the circle proving the equivalence of conditions $(T)$, $(T')$ and $(T)_γ$ for some $γ\in (0,1)$ as conjectured by Sznitman, and also of each of these ballisticity conditions with the polynomial condition $(P)_M$ for $M\ge 15d+5$ introduced by Berger, Drewitz and Ramirez in 2014.

preprint2018arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 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.