arxiv: v3 [math-ph] 4 Jun 2017

Transcription

1 arxiv: v3 [math-ph] 4 Jun 207 Tilings of non-convex Polygons, skew-young Tableaux and determinantal Processes Contents Mark Adler Kurt Johansson Pierre van Moerbeke Introduction and main results 2 2 Interlacing and measures on skew-young Tableaux 2 3 An alternative integral representation for h y yj ( n and some determinantal identities 20 4 From Karlin-McGregor to the K q -kernel 26 5 Transforming M into M and computing its inverse 36 6 The integral representation of the K q -kernel 40 7 The K red -kernel as a limit of the K q -kernel, for q 48 8 The K red -kernel as a r + 3-fold integral, with r L d Mathematics Subject Classification Primary: 60G60, 60G65, 35Q53; secondary: 60G0, 35Q58 Key words and Phrases:Lozenge tilings, non-convex polygons, kernels Department of Mathematics, Brandeis University, Waltham, Mass 02453, USA adler@brandeisedu The support of a Simons Foundation Grant # is gratefully acknowledged MA thanks the Simons Center for Geometry and Physics for its hospitality Department of Mathematics, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden E- mail: kurtj@kthse The support of the Swedish Research Council (VR and grant KAW of the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation are gratefully acknowledged Department of Mathematics, Université de Louvain, 348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium and Brandeis University, Waltham, Mass 02453, USA pierrevanmoerbeke@uclouvainbe The support of a Simons Foundation Grant # is gratefully acknowledged PvM thanks the Simons Center for Geometry and Physics, Stony Brook, and the Kavli Institute of Physics, Santa Barbara, for their hospitality

2 Abstract This paper studies random lozenge tilings of general non-convex polygonal regions We show that the pairwise interaction of the non-convexities leads asymptotically to new kernels and thus to new statistics for the tiling fluctuations The precise geometrical figure here consists of a hexagon with cuts along opposite edges For this model we take limits when the size of the hexagon and the cuts tend to infinity, while keeping certain geometric data fixed in order to guarantee interaction beyond the limit We show in this paper that the kernel for the finite tiling model can be expressed as a multiple integral, where the number of integrations is related to the fixed geometric data above The limiting kernel is believed to be a universal master kernel Introduction and main results The purpose of this paper is to study random lozenge tilings of non-convex polygonal regions Non-convex figures are particularly interesting due to the appearance of new statistics for the tiling fluctuations, caused by the non-convexities themselves or by the interaction of these non-convexities The final goal will be to study the asymptotics of the tiling statistical fluctuations in the neighborhood of these non-convexities, when the polygons tend to an appropriate scaling limit The tiling problems of hexagons by lozenges goes back to the celebrated 9- formula on the enumeration of lozenge tilings of hexagons of sides a, b, c, a, b, c by the Scottish mathematician MacMahon [32] This result has been extended in the combinatorics community to many different shapes, including non-convex domains, in particular to shapes with cuts and holes; see eg, Ciucu, Fischer and Krattenthaler [, 30] Tiling problems have been linked to Gelfand-Zetlin cones by Cohn, Larsen, Propp [2], and to non-intersecting paths, determinantal processes, kernels and random matrices by Johansson [7, 8, 9] In [20], Johansson showed that the statistics of the lozenge tilings of hexagons was governed by a kernel consisting of discrete Hahn polynomials; see also Gorin[24] In [2] and [23], it was shown that, in appropriate limits, the tiles near the boundary between the frozen and stochastic region (arctic circle fluctuate according to the Airy process and near the points of tangency of the arctic circle with the edge as the GUE-minor process Tiling of non-convex domains were investigated by Okounkov-Reshetikhin [36] and Kenyon-Okounkov [28] from a macroscopic point of view Further important phenomena for nonconvex domains appear in the work of Borodin, Gorin and Rains [8], Defosseux [3], Metcalfe [33], Petrov [37, 38], Gorin [25], Novak [34], Bufetov and Knizel [6], Duse and Metcalfe [5, 6], and Duse, Johansson and Metcalfe [4]; see also the recent paper by Betea, Bouttier, Nejjar and Vuletic [5] The present study consisting of two papers leads to the so-called Discrete Tacnode Kernel (3, which we believe to be a master kernel, from which many other kernels can be deduced (see Fig; namely, ( the GUE-tacnode kernel for overlapping Aztec diamonds [2,, 4] (also a nonconvex geometry, when the size of the overlap remains small compared to the 2

3 size of the diamonds See also coupled GUE-matrices [4] (2 the Tacnode kernel in the context of colliding Brownian motions and double Aztec diamonds (3 The cusp-airy kernel ([4] should also be a scaling limit of the Discrete Tacnode Kernel (3, etc discrete-tacnode kernel L dtac for non-convex hexagons GUE-tacnode for double Aztec-diamonds Cusp-Airy kernel tacnode kernel Pearcey kernel Fig Is the statistics associated with the discrete-tacnode kernel for nonconvex hexagons universal? Does it imply in some appropriate limit all these known statistics? Is it a master-kernel? This led us to investigate determinantal processes for lozenge tilings of fairly general non-convex polygons, with non-convexities facing each other This is going much beyond Petrov s work [38] on the subject, and yet inspired by some of his techniques Consider a hexagon with several cuts as in Fig2, and a tiling with lozenges of the shape as in Fig3, colored blue, red and green; introducing a cut amounts to covering a region with red tiles Note there is an affine transformation from our tiles to the usual ones in the literature; see eg the simulation of Fig5 The right-leaning blue tiles turn into our blue ones, the up-right red ones into our red ones and the left-leaning green tiles (30 o to our green tiles (45 o, all as in Fig2 Two different determinantal pocesses, a K-process and an L-process, will be considered, depending on the angle at which one looks at the polygons; south to north for the K-process or south-west to north-east for the L-process In this series of two papers, the first one will focus on the K-process and its kernel, and the second one [3] on the L-process, its kernel and its asymptotic limit in between the non-convexities Nevertheless both processes will be introduced in this paper 3

4 x d+n n n u b 0 b b 2 b u b u x n N y d dly y d+n d N y d+ d }{{} d 0 d m m l+ Fig 2: A non-convex polygon P (hexagon with u + l cuts, and the hexagon P P {u + l + red triangles} (multicut model n 0 A good part of the work will consist of reducing the number of integrations in the K-kernel to r + 3, where r, an integer defined in (5, relates to the geometry of the polygon and of the L-process In the second paper, the L-kernel will require many more transformations in order to be in the right shape to perform asymptotics As a preview of the second paper [3] we merely state here the form of the L-kernel and the asymptotics without proof Incidentally, the K-kernel should also lead to interesting open questions related to the Gaussian Free Field (Petrov [37] and also to open questions related to Petrov s [37] and Gorin s [25] work; see comments after Theorem To be precise, and as shown in Figure 2, we consider a general non-convex polygonal region P (multicut model consisting of taking a hexagon where two opposite edges have cuts, u cuts b, b 2,, b u cut out of the upper-part and l cuts d, d 2,, d l cut out of the lower-part ; let d : l d i Let b 0 and b u be the cuts corresponding to the two triangles added to the left and the right of P and let d 0 be the size of the lower-oblique side Then N : b 0 + d 0 is the distance between the lower and upper edges The intervals separating the upper-cuts (resp lower-cuts are denoted by n i (resp m i and we require them to satisfy l+ m i u n i, which is equivalent to u 0 b i d + N Define P to be the quadrilateral (with two parallel sides obtained by adding the red triangles to P, as in Fig Introduce the coordinates (n, x Z 2, where n 0 and n N refer to the lower and upper sides of the polygon, with x being the running variable along the lines n The vertices of P and P all belong to the vertical lines x {half-integers} of the grid (in Fig2 The d l d i integer points in { P\P} {n 0} are labeled by y > > y d ; they are the integers in the cuts We complete that set with the integer points to the left of P along {n 0}; they are labeled by y d+ > > y d+n and we set y d+ d and y d+n d N This fixes the origin of the x-coordinate Similarly, the integer points { P\P} {n N} The b i and d i s also denote the size of the cuts 4

5 are labeled by x > > x d+n d N We assume that x i y i for all i d + N, and that y d / {x-coordinates of an upper-cut} Besides the (n, x-coordinates, another set of coordinates (η, ξ will also be convenient (see Fig 3: η n + x + 2, ξ n x 2 n 2 (η + ξ, x 2 (η ξ ( Assuming y y d N, we define polynomials 2 : P (z : (z y d + N (y y d + and Q(z : d+n (z x i (2 The roots x i of Q(z, compared to the roots y N + < < y d of P (z, can be subdivided into three sets, the L(eft, the R(ight, the C(enter, and a set G(ap not containing any x i : L : {x i, such that x i < y N + } R : {x i, such that x i y d } C : {x,, x d+n }\(L R G : {y N +,, y d }\C, (3 ensuing the decompositions in polynomials P (z Q C (zp G (z, and Q(z Q L (zq C (zq R (z (4 The number r, assumed positive, will play an important role: r : L d (5 Referring to contour integration in this paper, the notation Γ(set of points will denote a contour encompassing the points in question and no other poles of the integrands; eg, contours like Γ(R, Γ(L, Γ(x + N, (6 The K and L-processes Given a covering of this polygonal shape with tiles of three shapes, colored in red, blue and green tiles, as in Fig2, put a red and blue dot in the middle of the red and blue tiles The red dots belong to the intersections of the vertical lines x integers and the horizontal lines n 0,, N; they define a point process (n, x, which we call the K red -process The initial condition at the bottom n 0 is given by the d fixed red dots at integer locations in the lower-cuts, whereas the final condition at the top n N is given by the d + N fixed red dots in the upper-cuts, including the red dots to 2 For any integers k Z and N 0 we have k 0 and k N k(k + (k + N 5

6 the left and to the right of the figure, all at integer locations Notice that the process of red dots on P form an interlacing set of integers starting from d fixed dots (contiguous for the two-cut and non-contiguous for the multi-cut model and growing linearly to end up with a set of d + N (non-contiguous fixed dots This can be viewed as a truncated Gel fand-zetlin cone! The blue dots belong to the intersection P of the parallel oblique lines n + x k 2 with the horizontal lines n l 2 for k, l Z ; in terms of the coordinates (, the blue dots are parametrized by (η, ξ (k, 2l k Z 2, with (k, l as above It follows that the (η, ξ-coordinates of the blue dots satisfy η + ξ, 3,, 2N This point process defines the L blue -process The blue dots on the oblique lines also interlace, going from left to right, but their numbers go up, down, up and down again The number of blue dots per oblique line n + x k 2 is given by the difference between the heights computed at the points n 0 and n N along that line ; see Fig7 A special feature appears in the two-cut model One could also consider an L green -process, by putting a green dot on the green tiles It would lead to a a determinantal process of green particles on the vertical lines x half integers, where the number r in (5 would be replaced by s R d ; see Fig4 In the end, this kernel would be similar to the L blue -kernel As it turns out, the two kernels K red and L blue are highly related, as will be shown in [3], where also the asymptotics for the L-kernel will be carried out Indeed, both point processes can be described by dimers on the points of the associated bipartite graph dual to P; the two kernels are related by the inverse Kasteleyn matrix of the bipartite graph The aim of this first paper is to find a kernel for the K red -process, which involves no more than r + 3 integrations which is a conditio sine qua non for taking asymptotics for L blue while keeping r fixed As mentioned, the L blue -kernel will require many more contour changes to do so in [3] This kernel could also be used for showing the Gaussian Free Field result in the bulk, again keeping r fixed The following rational function, h(u : Q R (u P G (uq L (u, (7 appears crucially in the following k-fold contour integral 3 for k 0, (see (6 Ω ± k (v, z : ( k α Γ(L { du α h(u α (z u α ± cut Ẽ(y 2 k 2πi (v u α (u g (u,, u k Ẽ g (ycut (z; u,, u k (8 3 Set Ω + 0 (v, z A shorthand notation for the Vandermonde is k(u : k (u,, u k i<j k (ui uj 6

7 where Ẽ(ycut g is a symmetric function of the variables u,, u k, which depend on the integer points y d < < y in the lower-cuts, with g y y d d + the number of gaps in that sequence The precise symmetric function will be given later in (42 and (44 When that sequence is contiguous, we have g 0 and the symmetric function equals ; eg, this is so when P has one lower-cut Theorem For (m, x and (n, y P, the determinantal process of red dots is given by the kernel, involving at most r + 2-fold integrals, with r as in (5 K red (m, x; n, y (y x + n m (N n! dv (v x+ N m n>m y x + (n m! (N m! Γ(x+N 2πiQ R (vq C (v ( dz Q R (zq C (z Ω + r (v, z Γ 2πi(z v(z y N n+ Ω + r (0, 0 + dz P (zq L (z Ω r+ (v, z r+ Γ τ 2πi(z y N n+ Ω +, r (0, 0 (9 where Γ(x + N : contour containing the set x + N {x, x +, } Γ : very large contour containing all the poles of the z-integrand Γ τ : Γ(y + n N,, min(y N, y τ<0, with τ : (y + n (y + (0 It is an interesting open problem to investigate the correlation function det(k red (m i, x i ; n j, y j i,j k in the bulk (liquid region and its limit when the size of the figure tends uniformly to For a configuration with cuts on one side only, Petrov [37] has shown that the limit of the correlation function is given by the correlation of the incomplete beta-kernel for a slope satisfying the Burger s equation (translation invariant Gibbs measure; these were introduced in [35] Gorin [25] goes beyond by showing that the result remains valid if one allows the location of the cuts on one side to be random, yielding a measure in the limit For a figure with two-sided cuts (above and below, what is the analogue of the incomplete beta-kernel and the slope? The present project actually deals with a very different limit, as will be explained below The L blue -kernel will be given in Theorem 2 below, but the proof will appear in another paper [3] It is not clear how to obtain the L blue -kernel from scratch, due to the intricacy of the interlacing pattern, mentioned earlier Therefore we must first compute the K red -kernel and then hope to compute the L blue -kernel by an alternative method Indeed, we check that the inverse Kasteleyn matrix of the dimers on the associated bipartite graph dual to P coincides with the K-kernel This leads us to the following statement to appear in [3]: 7

8 Theorem 2 The L blue -process of blue dots and the K red -process of red dots have kernels related as follows: L blue (η, ξ; η, ξ K red ( m 2, x; m + 2, x, ( where (m, x and (m, x are the same geometric points as (η, ξ and (η, ξ, expressed in the new coordinates (; see Fig 6 We state the asymptotic result (without proof, suggested by the simulation of Fig5, for the two-cut model (one cut below and one above and for even N We do not expect the multi-cut case to lead to a fundamentally new universality class in the limit, as the upper- and lower-cuts will only interact pairwise locally For the two-cut model, we concentrate on the polygonal shape P, as in Figs2&4, with l, u 2 and with equal opposite parallel sides, ie, b u d 0 and N b u b 0 ; it has two cuts of same size d : d b, one on top and one at the bottom For that model, the oblique strip {ρ} extending the oblique segments of the upper- and lower-cuts within P will play an important role (see Fig4: that is the region containing the parallel lines x + n 2 + k (or, what is the same, the lines η k for m k n + b d Thus the strip {ρ} has the following width: ρ : n m + b d m 2 n 2 + b d, setting b : b 0, (2 and we assume ρ 0 It will be shown that the ρ + parallel oblique lines η k, k Z within the strip {ρ} each carry the same number r of blue dots, with r defined in (5 In the simulation of Fig5, {ρ} is the finite oblique strip separating the two large hexagons; see also Fig4 The discrete-tacnode kernel L dtac (τ, θ ; τ 2, θ 2 in the variables (τ i, θ i Z R is defined by the following expression, where the integrations are taken along upwards oriented vertical lines L 0+ to the right of a (counterclock contour Γ 0 about the origin and with integer r 0 : L dtac (τ, θ ; τ 2, θ 2 : H τ τ 2 (θ 2 θ dv dz V ρ τ e V 2 θ V Θ r (V, Z + (2πi 2 Z V Z ρ τ 2 e Z2 θ 2 Z Θ r (0, 0 + Γ 0 Γ 0 + r r+ dv (2πi 2 L 0+ Γ 0 L 0+ L 0+ dv (2πi 2 dv (2πi 2 dz Z V dz V τ L 0+ Z ρ τ 2 dz V ρ τ Γ 0 Z τ 2 V τ 2 e V 2 +(θ 2 βv Θ r (V, Z Z τ e Z2 +(θ βz Θ r (0, 0 e V 2 (θ βv e Z2 θ 2 Z Θ + r (V, Z Θ r (0, 0 e V 2 θ V Θ r+ (V, Z : e Z2 (θ 2 βz Θ r (0, L dtac i, (3 8

9 h h+ h h+ h h h h h h+ h+ h blue red green Fig 3 Three types of tiles, with the height function and with corresponding level line The red tiles (blue tiles have a red dot (blue dot in the middle m m 2 d n d n 2 c b y d+n d N y d+ d y d m d y m m x d+n d N x c+d+ c d x c+d n c d x c+ n c x c m + m 2 c x m + m 2 ρ σ η m + m 2 + b η m + ρ τ ρ /2 η m τ /2 η d x n η ξ x 2 n0 nn Fig 4 : Tiling of a hexagon with two opposite cuts of equal size (Twocut model, with red, blue and green tiles Here d 2, n n 2 5, m 4, m 2 6, b 3, c 7, and thus r, ρ 2, σ 4 The (x, n-coordinates have their origin at the black dot and the (ξ, η-coordinates at the circle given by (x, n ( 2, 0 Red tiles carry red dots on horizontal lines n k for 0 k N (K-process and blue tiles blue dots on oblique lines η k for d + k m + m 2 + b (L-process The left and right boundaries of the strip {ρ} are given by the dotted oblique lines η m and η m + ρ Finally, the tilings define m + m 2 non-intersecting paths 9

10 ρ Fig 5 Computer simulation for n 05, n2 95, m m2 00, b 25, c 30, d 20 and n 50, n2 30, m 20, m2 60, b 30, c 60, d 20 Courtesy of Antoine Doeraene (m0 +,x0 2 (m0, x0 ' (η 0, ξ 0 (m, x ' (η, ξ (m,x 2 Fig 6 The Lblue -kernel of blue dots expressed in terms of the Kred -kernel of neighbouring red dots, using the (η, ξ-variables in ( where z m z 0 m, (Heaviside function (m! " r I # 2 Y e2wα +βwα Z Wα dwα Θr (V, Z : 2r (W,, Wr ρ V W 2πi W α α L0+ (4 "r I # 2 +βw 2W Y α e α dwα Θ± ((Z Wα (V Wα ± ρ r (V, Z : 2πi Wα L0+ Hm (z : 2r (W,, Wr We now state the main Theorem of this project, which will appear in [3]: 0

11 Theorem 3 Given the polygon P with cuts of equal size d, above and below, keeping ρ, r 0 fixed, as defined in (2,(5, let the polygon P and the size d of the two cuts go to, according to the following scaling of the geometric variables b, c, m i, n i > 0, in terms of d and new parameters < γ < 3, a : 2 γ β < 0, β 2, γ, γ 2 R, γ, b d + r c γd n i m i ( i (ρ r m i γ+ γ (d + a 2 β i d + γi for i, 2 (5 The variables (η, ξ Z 2 with ξ η 2Z + get rescaled into new variables (τ, θ Z R, having their origin at the halfway point (η 0, ξ 0 along the left boundary of the strip {ρ}, shifted by ( 2, 2 (see little circle along the line η m in Fig4: γ+ (η i, ξ i (η 0, ξ 0 + (τ i, a (θ i + β 2 d with (η 0, ξ 0 (m, N m (6 With this scaling and after a conjugation, the kernel ( of the L-process tends to the new kernel L dtac, as in (3, depending only on the width ρ of the strip {ρ}, the number r b d of blue dots on the oblique lines in the strip {ρ} and the parameter β : β β 2, to be precise, lim ( 2 (η +ξ η 2 ξ 2 d ( d γ+ η2 η L blue (η, ξ ; η 2, ξ 2 2a 2 ξ 2 L dtac (τ, θ ; τ 2, θ 2 dθ 2 (7 The kernel satisfies the following involution: L dtac (τ, θ ; τ 2, θ 2 L dtac (ρ τ 2, β θ 2 ; ρ τ, β θ This involution exchanges L dtac L dtac 2, with L dtac k being self-involutive for k 3, 4 Also L dtac has support on {τ > ρ}, L dtac 2 has support on {τ 2 < 0} and L dtac 4 on {τ > ρ} {τ 2 < 0} These formulas of Theorems and 2 can be specialized to known situations: to hexagons with no cuts (Johansson[20], to non-convex polygons P with cuts at the top only (Petrov [38], and to the case where the strip ρ reduces to a line (ie, ρ 0, in which the polygon P (as in Fig3 can be viewed as two hexagons glued together along one side (Duse-Metcalfe [5] Outline Many steps are necessary to prove Theorem Section 2: Instead of putting the uniform distribution on the red dot-configuration on P, it will be more convenient to first consider a non-uniform distribution depending on a parameter 0 < q ; this distribution will tend to the uniform

12 one when q The red dot-configuration will be shown to be equivalent to the set of semi-standard skew-young Tableaux of a given shape; the latter can be read off the geometry of P The q-probability on this set will have a Karlin- McGregor type of formula, which is not surprising due an equivalent formulation in terms of non-intersecting paths The use of q-deformations have been initiated by Okounkov-Reshetikhin [36] and Kenyon-Okounkov [28] Also it has been used effectively in the work of Petrov [38] for lozenge tilings of hexagons with cuts on the upper-side only Section 2 also contains a brief description of the two-cut model Section 3 deals with some determinantal identities, but also with a useful, but unusual, integral representation of the elementary symmetric function h y yj ( n Section 4: Adapting Eynard-Mehta techniques, further refined in [9] and [7], will lead to the construction a kernel K q, involving the inverse of a matrix M Section 5: The matrix M can be transformed so that the inverse is readily computable Section 6: The transformed kernel K q has a multiple integral representation, using integral representations of the different ingredients Section 7: Taking the limit when q yields a kernel K red, involving contour integrals about R, with at the worst d + 2-fold integrations, where d is the size of the cuts Section 8: The kernel K red will then further be reduced to a sum of contour integrations, mostly about L, with at the worst r + 3-fold integrals 2 Interlacing and measures on skew-young Tableaux The two-cut model, already mentioned before, deserves some further discussion Remember for the two-cut model we have b : b 0 L and c : b u ; see Fig 2&4 In other terms, this is now a hexagon with edges of size m + m 2 + d, b, c 2, n + n 2 + d, b, c 2 with two cuts, one below and one above, both of same size d, satisfying m + m 2 n + n 2 and with N b + c (see Fig4 The quadrilateral P associated with P is depicted in Fig7 Note that the most-right point y m in the lower-cut plays an important role! In the two-cut model, two strips within P will play a special role: (Fig4 (i the oblique strip {ρ}, already introduced in (2 (ii a vertical strip {σ} extending the vertical segments of the upper- and lowercuts; that is the region between the lines x n c 2 and x m d 2 The strip {σ} has width (again same notation for the name and the width of the strip! σ : m n + c d n 2 m 2 + c d 0 (8 2

13 n n n n + u ni u ni l+ mi n n n 0 l+ mi m 0 2 m m m m m m + l+ mi Fig 7 The polygon P, with u upper-cuts and l lower-cuts and the parallelogram P P {4 red triangles} The heights along the boundary of P are given by the numbers next to the figure That ρ, σ 0 amounts to the inequalities: d b n m m 2 n 2 c d It is natural to assume that the strips {ρ} (respectively {σ} have no point in common with the vertical parts (respectively oblique parts of the boundary P This condition for {ρ} implies {x + n 2 + m } {n N} > c d 2 and {x + n 2 + n + b d} {n 0} < m + m 2 2, implying d b > max( m, n 2 The condition for the strip {σ} implies n c 2 > d 2 and m d 2 < m + m 2 c 2, implying c d < min(n, m 2 These inequalities combined with condition ρ, σ 0 above imply max( n 2, m < d b m 2 n 2 n m c d < min(m 2, n (9 The four regions line{n N} mentioned in (3 can now be written as L {x d+c+b,, x d+c+ }, R {x c,, x }, C {x c+d,, x c+ } G {ρ} {σ}, and so the polynomials P and Q, as in (4, spelled out, are given by: P (z : P ρ (zq C (zp σ (z (z x d+c + ρ (z x c+ d (z y d + σ Q(z : Q L (zq C (zq R (z (z x d+c+ b (z x c+ d (z x c, (20 (2 where P ρ, P σ, Q L, Q C, Q R are monic polynomials whose roots are given by the sets { ρ}, { σ}, L, C and R, respectively, where { ρ} : {ρ} {n N} and { σ} : {σ} {n N} The inequalities (9 imply that each of the sets C { σ} and { ρ} C form a contiguous set of integers, such that each of the three sets are completely separated: C < { σ} < R and L < { ρ} < C 3

14 Nonintersecting paths, level lines and the K red - and L blue -processes The height function on the tiles, given in Fig3, imply that the heights along the boundary of the polygon P are independent of the tiling; for the heights along P, see Fig 7 The level lines of heights 2, 3 2,, m 2, m + 2,, l+ m i 2 pass obliquely through green tiles, vertically through blue tiles, and avoid the red tiles; the level lines are the nonintersecting paths going from top to bottom in Fig4 It follows that the intersection (within P of the level lines with the oblique lines {η integer} determine the blue dots and with the lines {n integer} the red dot at the integers x / level lines In other terms drawing a horizontal line from left to right through the middle of the blue and green tiles (say, in Fig 4 increases the height by and remains flat along the red tiles Thus the tilings of the hexagon P are equivalent to l+ m i u n i non-intersecting level-lines It follows that #{red dots of the K-process on the horizontal line n k within P} #{flat segments of the heigth function along the line n k} [ ] [ increment in height between the length of the (line n k P two points (line n k P l+ ( l+ m i + d + k ( m i d + k ] When an oblique line η k traverses a tile, as in Fig2, the height increases by for a blue tile and stays flat for a red and green tile Therefore, we have #{blue dots of the L-process on the oblique line η k within P} [ increment in height along (line η k P ], 4

15 leading to the following pattern for the blue dots for the two-cut model: k #{blue dots on η k} n + n 2 + b 0 n + n 2 b n + b b m + ρ b d r m b d r m d b b d b d 0 This implies that the number of blue dots are r (local minimum along each of the oblique lines η k within the strip {ρ}, including its boundary Outside, that number starts growing linearly in steps of up to b, stays fixed for a while and then goes down to 0 linearly in steps of The red dot-configurations and skew-young tableaux The red dots on the horizontal lines {n k} P for 0 k N are parametrized by x (k Z d+k x (k N < < x(k, subjected to the interlacing pattern below, in short x (k x (k, x (k i+ < x(k i x (k i (22 This interlacing follows from an argument similar to [38, ] So, we have a truncated Gelfand-Tsetlin cone with prescribed top and bottom and for completion, set x (0 k y k and x (N k x k : x d+n < < x d+c < < x +c < < x x (N d+n < < x(n y d < < y 2 < < y 5

16 The interlacing pattern above, with x (k x (k, is equivalent to a red dot configuration of a polygon P As an example, for the two-cut model, the top consists of the three regions L, C and R of contiguous integers; and the bottom of one contiguous region, given by the lower-cut Moreover, setting for 0 k N, 4 leads to a sequence of partitions ν (k i x (k i + i, with prescribed initial and final condition, ν (0 ν ( ν (N, (23 µ : ν (0 and λ : ν (N and such that each skew diagram ν (i \ν (i is a horizontal strip 5 Note the condition x i y i for all i d + N on the cuts, mentioned just before (2, guarantees that µ λ In fact the consecutive diagrams ν (i \ν (i are horizontal strips, if and only if the precise inequalities x (m i+ < x(m i x (m i hold Putting the integer i s in each skew-diagram ν (i \ν (i, for i N, is equivalent to a skew-young tableau filled with N numbers,, N and exactly N This leads to the following semi-standard skew-young tableau in the two-cut case, as in Fig8 An argument, using the height function, which is similar to the one in [], shows that all configurations are equally likely So we have uniform distribution on the set of configurations To conclude, we have: {All configuration of red dots} {skew-young Tableaux of shape λ\µ filled with numbers to N } { } µ ν (0 ν ( ν (N λ, with µ λ fixed, with ν (m \ν (m horizontal strip, 4 Define x (k : d+k i x(k i for 0 k N; in particular for k 0 and k N, we have y d yi and x d+n x i That means, the sum is always taken within the parallelogram P Also define ν (k : i ν(k 5 i An horizontal strip is a Young diagram where each row has at most one box in each column 6

17 ν (N λ with equal probability for each configuration m m {}}{{}} 2 { / / / / / / d c / / / i / / / N i }{{} n 2 d i N N } {{ } n / / / / / / / / Fig 8: Example for the two-cut model Semi-standard skew-young Tableau λ\µ filled with numbers,, N in one-to one correspondence with the red dotprocess On the right is the precise semi-standard skew-young Tableau associated with Fig 4 Uniform and q-probability on the set of red dot-configurations The last statement above implies that #{configuration of red dots} s λ\µ (,,, 0, 0, }{{} N (24 and thus we have uniform probability measure P on the space of all N + - uples of partitions {ν (0,, ν (N } P(given configuration of red dots P(ν (0, ν (2, ν (N, such that µ ν (0 ν ( ν (N λ s λ\µ (,,, 0, 0 ν (0 ν ( ν (N ν (0 µ ν (N λ (25 }{{} N As will be seen, we define a q-dependent probability measure P q, for 0 < q, on the same space of all N + -uples of partitions, as follows P q (ν (0, ν (2, ν (N, such that µ ν (0 ν ( ν (N λ (q N i ν(i (N ν (0 s λ\µ (q N, q 2 N,, q, q 0 ν (0 ν ( ν (N ν (0 µ ν (N λ, (26 which for q leads to the uniform probability (25 explained below 7 This formula will be

18 MacDonald [3] is an excellent reference for the following discussion Recall skew-schur polynomials are defined as: for any µ λ, s λ\µ (x : det(h λi i µ j +j(x i,j n det(h xi y j (x i,j n, where h r (x is defined for r 0 as i ( x i z r 0 for n l(λ, (27 h r (xz r, (28 and h r (x 0 for r < 0 Skew Schur polyomials also satisfy the properties s λ\µ (x, y ν s λ\ν (xs ν\µ (y, (29 and for x (x,, x N, s λ\µ (x,, x N In particular, for 0 < q, from (30 s λ\µ (q N, q 2 N,, q, q 0 N µν (0 ν (N λ i0 µν (0 ν ( ν (N λ µν (0 ν ( ν (N λ x ν(i+ ν (i i+ (30 (q N i (N i( ν(i ν (i (q N i ν(i (N ν (0 (3 The expression N i (N i( ν(i ν (i in formula (3 is the volume of the three-dimensional figure obtained by putting N i cubes of size on top of the squares containing i in the skew-young diagram, for i N This shows why (26 defines a probability measure Some useful formulas: Notice that h r (α γ,, α γ N+ α r(γ N+ h r (α 0,, α N (32 and thus for α q and γ d, we have h r (q 0, q,, q N q r( N d h r (q d,, q d+n (33 Defining for y, z R (in terms of the q-pochhammer symbol (a; q k k j0 ( aq j for k > 0 and for k 0, P n (z : n i zq i q i : (zq; q n (q; q n : n e i z i and P y n(z : q dy P n (zq y, (34 i0 8

19 one checks, using the generating series (28 and the definition of P n, that for n 0, h r (q 0,, q n du n 2πi Γ 0 u r+ uq l l0 P n (q r for r 0 This is valid for general r Z and n, d 0, upon inserting an indicator function: h r (q d,, q d+n q rd h r (q 0,, q n 2πi Γ 0 d+n du u r+ ld uq l q rd P n (q r ( r n or r 0 (35 Indeed the left hand side equals 0 for r < 0, whereas P n (q r 0 for n r < 0, but 0 for r < n The integral equals 0 for r < 0 So, the identity is valid for each of the two indicator functions; both of them will be used Also by (28, s λ\µ (q 0, q,, q N det(h xi y j (q 0, q,, q N i i,j N+d q (d+n ( d+n y i d+n x i det(h xi y j (q d,, q d+n i,j N+d q N(d+N (d+(n+/2 q (d+n ( y x det(h, where H is a square matrix of size d + N : H (H ij i,j N+d : (h xi y j (q d, q d+,, q d+n i,j N+d (q (x i y j d h xi y j (q 0,, q N i,j N+d, (36 (37 where formula (33 is used in the second line q-calculus The polynomial Q(z has a natural q-extension, namely (we often write q i : q x i d+n d+n Q q (z : (z q x i (z q i, (38 and from (34 we have P N m (vq x N m i zq i N m zvq q i x i vq i x q i (vq x+ ; q N m (q; q N m 9

20 Following Petrov [38], we define the q-hypergeometric function 2 φ by means of z n z k q (k y k N rn+ ( q r k : (q N ; q N n 2 φ (q, q n ; q N q, qy z k stands for the Vandermonde determinant of size k : Φ q ( qy z (39 Lemma 2 For any a Z, remembering the definitions (38 and (34 of Q(z and P β n(z, the following limits hold n lim P n(q x k + x (x + n, lim Py q k n! n (q x (x y + n, q n! lim q k Q q(q x i (q d+n Q (x i, lim q d (q x,, q xd (q d(d /2 d (x,, x d, (40 and (due to Petrov[38] lim q (q N Γ N dz 2πiz Φ q(z (z q ρr y (N n +! Γ dz 2πi(z y N n+2 N (z ρ r Proof: The limits are straightforward, except for Petrov s limit formula (4 3 An alternative integral representation for h y yj ( n and some determinantal identities Proposition 3 Given d and integers y {y d < < y } satisfying N + y d y 0, and given the sum of the gaps g : y y d d + between these integers, the following holds, with the constant 6 C N,d C N,d C N,d and with C N,d d j (N j! and C N,d d(y,,y d d : j (d j! ( (xα y β + N det (N! α,β d (42 d C N,d d (x,, x d E g (y (x,, x d (x α y d + N (y y d + α 6 The explicit form of the constant will never be used 20

21 where E g (y is a symmetric function of x,, x d with coefficients depending on the y i s, E g (y (x,, x d (x x d g + lower order terms, (43 where the lower order terms refer to terms of total degree < gd, with degree in any x i g For contiguous (y,, y d (d,,, we have g 0, and so the symmetric function and C N,d Given an arbitrary choice of k + l points (x,, x k, x,, x l in the set L (having k + l points, and the associated power sum symmetric polynomials 7 t α (L : k i xα i + l i x α i, we have that any symmetric function S(x,, x k (resp S(z; x,, x k with some additional variable z can be expressed in terms of a symmetric function in the complementary variables x,, x l (resp z, x,, x l To be precise, ( α α S(z, x,, x k F z + x i,, z α + F ( z + t (L : S(z, x,, x l, x α i l x i,, z α + t α (L the latter being a new symmetric function, with coefficients depending polynomially on the variables t α (L Formula (44 is also valid in the absence of the z-variable As an example, with one gap (g, upon defining σ i (x by d (u + x i d i0 σ iu d i, for y (2 < 4 < 5 < 6: E y (x σ 4 σ 3 σ 2 + σ 49 l x α i (44 y (2 < 3 < 5 < 6 < 7: E y (x σ (σ 4 + σ 3 + 4(σ 2 + σ Proof: We give the proof for (y d,, y (,, d The determinant above has the general form det((x α + β N α,β d Each column of the matrix in the determinant det((x α + β N α,β d has the common factor (x α + d N d, which, taken out, leaves us a determinant of the type below; by Lemma 3 in Krattenthaler [29], this determinant equals: det ((x i + A n (x i + A n (x i + A j+ (x i + B j (x i + B j (x i + B 2 i,j n n (x (B i A j 2 i,j n 7 Given variables u,, u k, any symmetric polynomial E(u in these variables can be written as a polynomial in power sum symmetric polynomials t α(u,, u k k i uα i for integer α 0 with rational coefficients in the coefficients of the symmetric polynomial 2

22 In this expression A j j, B j N + j 2 for 2 j d, from which it follows that 2 i,j n (B i A j ((N! d d k ((N k!, proving identity (42 Defining B(y : max(y + n, y + N, we now define the contours γ y : Γ(y, y,, B(y, if B(y y, if B(y > y, (45 and the contour Γ τ, defined such that γ y Γ(y, y,, y + n N\Γ τ, (46 given that a contour integral will be taken over a rational function with denominator equal to (z y N n+ Then it is easily seen that Γ τ : { Γ(min(y N, y,, y + n N, if τ < 0, if τ 0, (47 with Γ τ containing exactly τ > 0 points, if y N y and N n + points, if y N y, and none, when τ 0 This confirms definition (0 We now state the following general Lemma, which will play a crucial role in the expression of the K-kernel Proposition 32 Given 0 n N and integer points (y > > y j > satisfying 0 y y j N,the following holds, with the contours γ y and Γ τ as in (45 and (47 h y yj ( n du 2πiu y yj+ ( u n Γ 0 (N n! (N! (N n! (N! dz(z y j + N γ y 2πi(z y N n+ ( Γ(y,y,,y N+n Γ τ dz(z y j + N 2πi(z y N n+ (48 Proof: At first, notice that by Cauchy s theorem, the integral below, for n 0, equals minus the sum of the residues at z and, with the residue at vanishing when n + k 0, Γ 0 n dz 2πiz +k ( z n l k + l l Res z (k + n (n! 22 Res z n+k 0 (49

23 Consider the contour γ y as in (45 If B(y > y, then we have max(y + n, y + > y + N, implying that y N > y, since 0 n N, and thus N y y j + > y y j + N, and so y y j + 0, implying that both sides of (48 vanish In that case, since γ y, we have that, in view of (46, Γ τ Γ(y, y,, y + n N So, we now consider B(y y We have thus {y, y,, B(y} {y, y,, y N + n} Then, since y B(y N n max(y + y n, 0, we have for the right hand side of (48, upon evaluating by residues and upon using the change of variables l y k and i y j in, (N n! (N! y lb(y (l y j + (l y j + N y (l i y B(y (N n! (N! k0 iy N+n i l (y y j k + (y y j k + N (j k N n j0 j k y B(y (N n! ( k (y y j k + N (N! k!(n n k! k0 N n max(0,y + y n k0 N n max(0,y + y n k0 ( k ( N n k ( k ( N n k (y yj k + N Γ 0 (N! dz z y y j k+ ( z N, (50 provided y y j k+n 0 ( holds for all 0 k N n max(0, y + y n in the expression on the right hand side of It suffices to check this for the largest value k N n max(0, y + y n Indeed, this is so: (i If y + n y +, then k N n and y y j k + N y + n y j y y j 0 (ii If y + n < y +, then k N +y y and so y y j k+n y y j 0; this checks the inequality ( above For this same case, namely y + n < y +, and for N n (y + y n + k N n, we also have that the integrand in the last expression (50 has no residue at z 0, because the z-exponent in its 23

24 denominator equals y y j k + y y j (N n (y + y n + + y y j N + 0, using the inequality in the statement Therefore, in the last expression in (50 the sum can be extended to 0 k N n and so the final expression reads N n ( N n ( k k k0 Γ 0 z k dz 2πiz y yj+ ( z Γ0 N dz ( z N n 2πiz y yj+ ( z N dz 2πiz y yj+ ( z n The last formula of (48 follows from formula (46, thus ending the proof of Proposition 32 Both Propositions will be applied to certain determinants, which will come up later, and which depend on the geometry of P In the corollary below, the u,, u d are arbitrary complex variables Referring to the model P, remember y cut {y > > y d } are the integer points in the {lower-cuts} {n 0} and P (z is as in (2 We define three expressions, which will play an important role in Section 7: (ycut d (u,, u d : det (ycut d ( (uα y β + N (N! Γ 0 α,β d w y w y d (w; u 2,, u d : det ( (uα yβ + N (N! 2 α d β d dw (ycut d,n (y; u 2,, u d : (ycut Γ 0 2πiw y+ ( w n d (w; u 2,, u d h y y ( n h y yd ( n det ( (uα yβ + N (N! 2 α d β d (5 We now apply formula (42 (or the first formula (5 to the (integer points y > > y d in the lower cuts, thus leading to the symmetric function E (ycut g (u,, u d, as in (42 24

25 Corollary 33 The following identities hold for the determinantal expressions in (5, with C N,d as in (42, P (u as in (2, and the contour Γ τ as in (47: and (ycut d (ycut d,n (y; u 2,, u d C N,d (u,, u d C N,d E (ycut (u d (u ( E (ycut g Γ(y,y,,y N+n g Γ τ d P (u α, (52 α (N n!dz 2πi(z y N n+ (z, u 2,, u d d (z, u 2,, u d P (z d P (u α α2 (53 Proof: The first identity (52 follows at once from Proposition 3 The second identity (53 follows from moving the w-integral to the first row of (ycut d (w,, u d, using Proposition 32 : (ycut d,n (y; u 2,, u d ( (N n!dz (uα y β + N det γ y 2πi(z y N n+ (N! (N n!dz (ycut 2πi(z y d (z, u 2,, u d N n+ γ y α,β d u z Finally using the first identity (52, applied to (ycut d (z, u 2,, u d ends the proof of Corollary 33 The next lemma deals with identities involving Vandermonde s with certain rows removed For x R m and y R n, define the Vandermonde x m x 0 m (x det (x i x j x m m x 0 i<j m m x m x k+ x k x 0 ˆk m (x det x m m x k+ m xm k x 0 m m (xe m k (x, where ˆk refers to removing the column containing the kth power Also e k (y y i y ik i <i 2 < <i k We will need the following Lemma: 25

26 Lemma 34 Then we have (here Q(z : m (z x i n (z y i n k n (y n+m (x, y m (x ( m(m /2 m Q (x l e k(y, and so in particular, setting k 0, n (y n+m (x, y m (x ( m(m /2 m Q (x l (54 The following symmetric function, with variables removed, has the integral representation: (with Q q defined in (38 ( r e r (q,, ˆq k, ˆq i,, ˆq id,, q d+n dz Q q (z Γ 2πiz N r+ (z q k d l (z q i l, (55 Proof: The first relation is shown by multiplication by z n k ( k and summing from k 0 to n, which leads to an obvious identity The second is straightforward and the third is just the residue Theorem 4 From Karlin-McGregor to the K q -kernel Since the K-process of red dots has a nonintersecting paths description, one expects to have a Karlin-McGregor formula for the q-dependent probability measure P q, as in (26 above This will be shown in Proposition 4 Then in Proposition 42, we will obtain a kernel by adapting the arguments in Borodin-Ferrari- Prähofer [7] and in Borodin-Rains [9] to these new circumstances We first need some notation Remember from (22 the interlacing pattern x (m x (m for m N To the left of each sequence x(m, we add an extra point, a so-called virtual point x (m d+m virt; it can be thought of as a point at Then we define for x {virt} Z, z, k Z and k 0, the following functions, where the matrix H was defined in (56: χ i (z : zyi, for i d ϕ k (x, z : q (k (z x x Z x z + q (k z xvirt ( du 2πi uq k u z x+ + q (k z xvirt Γ 0 h z x (q k + q (k z xvirt N+d ψ i (z : (H ij zxj, for i d + N j (56 26

27 So, in particular we have ϕ k (virt, z q (k z Proposition 4 The probability (26 can be written as a product of N + 2 determinants with P q (ν (0, ν (, ν (N, such that µ ν (0 ν ( ν (N λ C N,d,q det(χ i (x (0 j i,j d N m det(ϕ d+m (x (m i, x (m j i,j d+m det(ψ i (x (N j i,j N+d, C N,d,q q dn(d+n+ 3 N(N 2 (57 Define the following -operation between two real or complex functions f(k and g(k defined for k Z: f g : k Z f(kg(k; (58 eg, for functions ϕ k as above, the operation means a convolution (ϕ k ϕ k+ (x, y ϕ k (x, ϕ k+ (, y z Z ϕ k(x, zϕ k+ (z, y Subsequently, define ϕ n,m+ (x, y : (ϕ n ϕ m (x, yδ n m (59 The functions ψ j, as in (56, have a natural extension in terms of the geometry of P: namely, for 0 m N and k d + N, define: ψ (m+ k (x : ϕ d+m+ (x, ϕ d+n (, ψ k ( ϕ d+m+,d+n+ (x, ψ k ( (60 and for m N we have ψ (N+ j ψ j Proposition 42 The K q -point-process is determinantal with kernel, for 0 m, n N, given by 8 : K q (m, x; n, y ϕ d+m+ ϕ d+n (x, y + ψ (m+ k (x(m kl (χ l ϕ d+,d++n (y k d+n l d + k d+n d+ l d+n ψ (m+ k (x(m kl (ϕ l (virt, ϕ l+,d++n (, y, (6 8 The l-summation in the third term of (6 goes up to l d + n; that term contains ϕ d+n+,d+n+, which we declare 27

28 where for i, j N + d: M kl : χ k ( ψ ( l (, k d ϕ k (virt, ψ (k+ d l (, d + k d + N (62 Before giving the proof of Propositions 4 and 42, the following Lemma will be needed: Lemma 43 The following determinantal identities hold: for m N, det(χ i (x (0 j i,j d det(ϕ k (x (m i d (0 x j y j, x (m j i,j d+m q (k ( x(m x (m x (m x (m det(ψ i (x (N j i,j N+d det(h xi y j (q d,, q d+n i,j N+d d+n j x (N j x j (63 Remembering the -operation (58, we have the following convolution properties for x, y Z, with the last identity valid for k d + N, m N: ϕ n+,m+ (x, y (ϕ n+ ϕ m (x, y h y x (q n,, q m n<m m dz 2πi Γ 0 z y x+ uq l n<m ln χ l (ϕ n+ ϕ m (y h y yl (q n,, q m n<m q (n y ϕ n (virt, (ϕ n+ ϕ m (, y n<m ( q ( q m n ϕ n (virt, (ϕ n+ ϕ m (, ψ j ( N+d ( q ( q m n (H jl q (n x l, l d+n ϕ n+,m+ (x, ψ j ( (H jl h xl x(q n,, q m l d+n χ i ( ϕ n+,m+ (, ψ j ( (H jl h xl y i (q n,, q m l (64 ψ (m d+n k (x (H kl h xl x(q d+m,, q d+n (65 l 28

29 Proof: The proof of the first three determinantal identities is straightforward; for instance, det(ϕ k (x (m i q (k ( d+m, x (m j i,j d+m i x(m i d+m i x (m i q (k ( x(m x (m x (m x (m, det( x (m i x (m j i,j d+m taking into account the fact that the last row of the matrix above is given by (q (k x(m,, q (k x(m d+m The convolution properties (64 follow from the identity (29, applied to the partition λ (r, 0, 0, and µ (s, 0, 0, with r > s, ie, µ λ Indeed one has: s λ (x h r (x, s λ\µ (x h r s (x, and so, setting ν (α, 0, 0,, one has h r α (x, y α Z h r α (xh α s (y (66 29

30 Another example of proof is: ϕ n (virt, (ϕ n+ ϕ m (, ψ j ( z Z ending the proof of Lemma 43 q (n z N+d ( q ( q m n (H jl zxl l N+d ( q ( q m n (H jl q (n x l, Proof of Proposition 4: The denominator of the probability (26 can be expressed as a determinant, using formula (36 Also from the second formula (63, it follows that N m det(ϕ d+m (x (m i, x (m j i,j d+m l q (N x(n +d( x (N x (0 q N x (i x (0 x ( x (N q (d+n x d y q N x (i x (0 x ( x (N and then using the two remaining formulas of (63, one checks 9 : P(ν (0, ν (2, ν (N, such that µ ν (0 ν ( ν (N λ (q N i2 ν(i (N ν (0 s λ\µ (q N, q 2 N,, q, q 0 ν (0 ν ( ν (N ν (0 µ ν (N λ q N(d+N (d+(n+/2 q N (d+i (d+i/2+d(d+/2 q (N d(d+/2 q (d+n ( x y (q N i x(i (N y det(h xi y j (q d,, q d+n i,j N+d ν (0 ν ( ν (N ν (0 µ ν (N λ C N,d,q q (d+n x d y (q N i x(i det(h xi y j (q d,, q d+n i,j N+d ν (0 ν ( ν (N ν (0 µ ν (N λ C N,d,q det(χ i (x (0 j i,j d N m det(ϕ d+m (x (m i, x (m j i,j d+m det(ψ i (x (N j i,j N+d, establishing the Karlin-MacGregor formula of Proposition 4 Proof of Proposition 42: The technology explained in [7, 9] will now be adapted to these new circumstances Given a set X, let L be a positive-definite X X matrix with rows and columns parametrized by the points x X, with L X a X X-submatrix with rows and columns parametrized by x X A random point process (L-ensemble on X will be defined by the probability P(X det(l X det(+l 9 One uses N (d + i (d + i/2 2 (dn(d + N + 3 N(N 2 30

31 for X X It is determinantal with kernel K L( + L ; that means that the correlation ρ(y P(X X Y X det K Y Given a decomposition X Y Y c, with Y and with corresponding block matrix Y, the conditional L-ensemble process on Y is defined by P(Y det L Y Y c det( Y +L and is determinantal with correlation kernel K Y ( Y + L Y Y This is now applied to X Y Y c : (X (0 X (N {, 2,, d, x (0 }, where X(k Z are all the point configurations d+,, x(n d+n at level 0 k N and the x (k d+k+ virt are virtual variables, playing the role of point at for each set X (k for 0 k N ; We now apply this set-up to the specific situation of the paper, although this is completely general Indeed, we now define (infinite matrices in terms of the functions appearing in the Karlin-McGregor formula (6, where Φ (d contains the initial condition (points not in P at level y 0, in particular the lower-cut for the red dots, where the T k,k are the transition functions from one level to another and where Ψ (d+n contains the final condition for the red dots (points not in P at level y N, in particular the upper-cuts: Φ (d {,, d} X (0 -matrix, with (Φ (d (i, x (0 χ i (x (0 T k,k (X (k {x (k d+k } X(k -matrix, for k N with T k,k (x (k, x (k ϕ d+k (x (k, x (k Ψ (d+n (X (N {,, d + N}-matrix, with Ψ (d+n (x (N, j : ψ j (x N (67 The conditional L-ensemble on X with Y as above is given by the block matrix, where each block has infinite size The only nonzero determinants of the form det L Y Y c appearing in P(Y above are suitable finite minors of this matrix L below These lead exactly to the Karlin-McGregor formula (57, as is easily seen by picking appropriate rows and columns according to the coordinates on top and to the left of the matrix L below :,,d+n x (0,,x(0 x ( d,,x( d+ x (N,,x (N d+n L d x (0 x (0 d+ x (N x (N d+n x (N x (N d+n 0 Φ (d T 0, T, T N,N Ψ d+n

32 We now move rows and columns of L in order to write the matrix as a block (Y c Y-matrix L Y c Y Indeed, move the rows corresponding to the virtual variables x (0 d+, x( d+2,, x(k d+k,, x(n d+n respectively to the d +, d + 2,, d + k,, d + N th row, yielding the matrix below, where the X (k X (k -matrices W k,k are the matrices T k,k with the last row removed, ( A B L Y c Y : C D 0 d+n E 0 E E k E N 0 W W k,k W N,N Ψ d+n d + N d + N and Y ( 0 0 0, with A 0, B : (E 0,, E N, C : (0,, 0, Ψ d+n T D 0 : 0 W W W N,N In the matrix B, the E k is a (d + N X (k -matrix for 0 k N, defined by, for k > 0, 0 for i d + k E k (i, x (k T k,k (x (k d+k, x(k ϕ d+k (x (k d+k, x(k for i d + k 0 d + k + i d + N, 32

33 and, for k 0, E 0 Φ d 0 0 d N Defining D : Y +D 0, the point measure on Y is determinantal with correlation kernel, given by K : Y ( Y + L Y c Y ( A B Y Y, Y C D ( Y D D CM BD Y Y Y D + D CM BD, (68 with M BD C A; it will be shown that this is precisely the matrix M in (62 To do so, we need to compute the different matrices appearing in the expression (68 It is easily seen that D W [0, W [0,N 0 W[N,N with W [n,m : W n,n+ W m,m m>n Coordinatewise, the X (n X (m -matrices W [n,m are given by W [n,m (x (n, x (m ϕ d++n (x (n, x (n+ ϕ d+m (x (m, x (m ϕ d++n,d++m (x (n, x (m Moreover, X (0 BD E 0, X ( E 0W [0, + E,, X m k0 E (m kw [k,m + Em,, X N k0 E (N kw [k,n + EN d + N, 33

34 where E k W [k,m O ϕ d+k (x (k d+k, x(k O d + k ( ϕ d++k,d++m (x (k, x (m j δ m>k ( O (ϕ d+k ϕ d++k,d++m (x (k d+k, x (m δ m>k O d + k Hence BD consists of N + column-blocks, the mth block being given below, for 0 m N, with O N m a (N m X (m matrix of zeros, m k0 E kw [k,m + E m (χ ϕ d+,d++m (x (m (χ d ϕ d+,d++m (x m (ϕ d+ ϕ d+2,d++m (x (0 d+, x(m (ϕ d+k ϕ d++k,d++m (x (k d+k, x(m (ϕ d+m ϕ d+m,d++m (x (m 2 d+m, x(m ϕ d+m (x (m d+m, x(m O N m d + d + k d + m d + m Notice that in the matrix above, we have that the arguments x (k d+k virt Moreover W [0,N Ψ d+n ψ ( j (x (0 D W [k,n Ψ d+n ψ (k+ j (x (k C W [N,N Ψ d+n, with ψ (N+ j ψ j, ψ (N j (x (N Ψ d+n ψ (N+ j (x (N j d+n (69 (70 34