The Four-Dimensional Anderson Model: Formalization Blueprint

2 Layer L0: combinatorics

Pairings of finite index sets, interval structure, primitivity, and the elementary counting lemmas of the paper’s §5.4.2. Everything here is mathlib-level combinatorics with no analytic content.

Definition 1 Partial pairing; paper Def. 2.2
✓
#

A partial pairing \(\kappa \) of a finite index set \(A\) is a partition of a subset \(P \subseteq A\) into disjoint two-element subsets (pairs); \(S = A \setminus P\) is the set of single indices. If \(S = \varnothing \), \(\kappa \) is a full pairing.

Definition 2 Intervals, fully paired subintervals, primitivity; paper Def. 2.3
✓

For a linearly ordered finite index set: subintervals \([a,b]\); a subinterval \(B\) is fully paired under \(\kappa \) if \(\kappa \) induces a full pairing on \(B\); \(\kappa \) is primitive if no proper subinterval is fully paired. The L0 API also provides: the induced pairing after removing a fully paired subinterval (paper Def. 3.1(2a)), the smallest-leftmost fully paired subinterval selector with its uniqueness lemma, and enumeration finsets for fixed index sets (needs of 44 and §4.1).

Lemma 3 Tree counting; paper Lemma 5.2
✓

The number of plane rooted trees with \(r\) leaves in which every internal node has at least two children is at most \(C^r\) for an explicit absolute constant \(C\). Such trees have at most \(2r-1\) vertices; the balanced-parentheses serialization injects them into Dyck-type words of bounded length, giving an explicit \(C\).

Proof ▶

Prefix-code cancellation for the serialization key; injection into bounded binary words.

Definition 4 Lacunary families; paper Def. 5.11
✓
#

A family of positive integers is lacunary if every dyadic window \([X, 2X]\) contains \(O(1)\) of its members.

Lemma 5 Binomial and multinomial bounds; paper Lemma 5.12
✓

For every \(\alpha {\gt} 1\) there is \(\beta = \beta (\alpha )\) with \(\binom {m+n}{m} \le \alpha ^m \beta ^n\); the multinomial analogue (paper (5.50)); and the lacunary version (paper (5.51)) with a uniform \(C^{n_1+\dots +n_r}\) bound.

Proof ▶

Binomial theorem term bound; exact-telescoping multinomial recursion; dyadic pigeonhole and sorted rearrangement for the lacunary case.

Lemma 6 Sequence counting; paper Lemma 5.13
✓

For \(\theta {\gt} 0\) and \(m \le n\): \(\sum _{1\le z_1,\dots ,z_m\le n}\prod _{j=1}^{m-1} \min \big(1, 2^{-\theta (z_j - z_{j+1})}\big) \le C(\theta )^n\); the dyadic version (paper (5.56)); and the variants skipping at most 100 factors.

Proof ▶

Truncated drops with a strictly monotone reindexing into binomial counts; rank replacement for the dyadic version; block splitting for the skip variant.