Just back from a great workshop at Seoul National University, I am just going to use this piece to outline in a relaxed manner my key goals for my work on random walks on quantum groups for the near future.
In the very short term I want to try and get a much sharper lower bound for my random walk on the Sekine family of quantum groups. I believe the projection onto the ‘middle’ of the might provide something of use. On mature reflection, recognising that the application of the upper bound lemma is dominated by one set of terms in particular, it should be possible to use cruder but more elegant estimates to get the same upper bound except with lighter calculations (and also a smaller
— see Section 5.7).
I also want to understand how sharp (or otherwise) the order convergence for the random walk on the dual of
is —
sounds awfully high. Furthermore it should be possible to get a better lower bound that what I have.
It should also be possible to redefine the quantum total variation distance as a supremum over projections subsets via
. If I can show that for a positive linear functional
that
then using these ideas I can. More on this soon hopefully. No, this approach won’t work. (I have since completed this objective with some help: see here).
The next thing I might like to do is look at a random walk on the Sekine quantum groups with an -dependent driving probability and see if I can detect the cut-off phenomenon (Chapter 4). This will need good lower bounds for
, some cut-off time.
Going back to the start, the classical problem began around 1904 with the question of Markov:
Which card shuffles mix up a deck of cards and cause it to ‘go random’?
For example, the perfect riffle shuffle does not mix up the cards at all while a riffle shuffle done by an amateur will.
In the context of random walks on classical groups this question is answered by the Ergodic Theorem 1.3.2: when the driving probability is not concentrated on a subgroup (irreducibility) nor the coset of a normal subgroup (aperiodicity).
Necessary and sufficient conditions on the driving probability for the random walk on a quantum group to converge to random are required. It is expected that the conditions may be more difficult than the classical case. However, it may be possible to use Diaconis-Van Daele theory to get some results in this direction. It should be possible to completely analyse some examples (such as the Kac-Paljutkin quantum group of order 8).
This will involve a study of subgroups of quantum groups as well as normal quantum subgroups.
It should be straightforward to extend the Upper Bound Lemma (Lemma 5.3.8) to the case of compact Kac algebras. Once that is done I will want to look at quantum generalisations of ‘natural’ random walks and shuffles.
I intend also to put the PhD thesis on the Arxiv. After this I have a number of options as regard to publishing what I have or maybe waiting a little while until I solve the above problems — this will all depend on how my further study progresses.
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 13, 2018 at 1:50 pm
The Cut-Off Phenomenon in Random Walks on Compact Quantum Groups | J.P. McCarthy: Math Page
[…] Cut-off phenomenon for random walks on free orthogonal quantum groups, that answers so many of these questions, some of which appeared as natural further problems in my PhD […]
February 16, 2018 at 5:40 pm
Random Walks: Questions for The Future | J.P. McCarthy: Math Page
[…] May 2017 I wrote down some problems that I hoped to look at in my study of random walks on quantum groups. Following work of Amaury […]
May 1, 2020 at 2:05 pm
Research: What Next? | J.P. McCarthy: Math Page
[…] 2017, shortly after completing my PhD and giving a talk on it at a conference in Seoul, I wrote a post describing the outlook for my […]