{
  "schema_version": 1,
  "problem_number": "AMR-096-0036",
  "title": "The Subnetwork S(1) of a Scale-Invariant Random Spatial Network Is Not a Tree",
  "author": {
    "name": "Alper Ferudun",
    "affiliation": "Mercury Software GmbH",
    "url": "https://github.com/AlperTheKing"
  },
  "abstract": "D. Aldous asked for a proof that in a scale-invariant random spatial network (SIRSN) the subnetwork S(1), the union of the routes between the points of a Poisson process of rate one, cannot be a tree, even with Steiner points (Electron. J. Probab. 19 (2014), Open Problem 10; Open Problem 36 of the arXiv version). We prove this for every SIRSN and every weak SIRSN: the outcomes in which S(1) contains no simple closed curve form a set of outer probability zero, so that S(1) contains a circuit almost surely and, in particular, is not almost surely a tree. The same holds when \"tree\" means that the graph whose vertices are the Poisson points and the junctions of S(1) has no finite cycle. More generally, for any process of compatible routes with the invariance properties of a SIRSN, if that set has outer probability p > 0, then P(D_1 ≥ t) ≥ cp/t for all large t, where D_1 is the route length between two points at distance one and c > 7.7·10⁻¹¹ is explicit; the SIRSN axiom E D_1 < ∞ excludes this. The core of the proof is Aldous's argument for route lengths in invariant tree networks (Electron. Commun. Probab. 26 (2021)), whose percolation lemma is used as published. What the note adds is the transfer of this argument to the routes of a SIRSN, which need not consist of finitely many segments (a centroid bipartition and a route-length bound for finite unions of compatible routes), and the replacement of Palm probabilities by Campbell's formula and scale invariance. This is an unrefereed note.",
  "result_type": "COMPLETE_PROOF",
  "categories": [
    "math.PR",
    "math.MG"
  ],
  "keywords": [
    "scale-invariant random spatial networks",
    "SIRSN",
    "spatial tree networks",
    "Steiner points",
    "route lengths",
    "Poisson process",
    "Campbell formula",
    "centroid of a tree",
    "site percolation",
    "Aldous open problems",
    "UnsolvedMath",
    "AMR-096-0036",
    "math.PR",
    "math.MG",
    "open mathematics"
  ],
  "manuscript_version_date": "2026-10-17",
  "publication_date": "2026-10-17",
  "publication_date_kind": "first public online release",
  "version": "1.0",
  "date_modified": "2026-10-17",
  "presentation_revision_only": false,
  "doi_archived_file_version": "1.0",
  "status": "unrefereed preprint",
  "canonical_url": "https://eulersolve.org/papers/amr-096-0036/",
  "pdf_url": "https://eulersolve.org/papers/amr-096-0036/paper.pdf?v=6ee0c7f58126",
  "doi": "10.5281/zenodo.23427973",
  "zenodo_record_url": "https://zenodo.org/records/23427973",
  "license": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/",
  "scope_caveat": "Proves Aldous's question for every SIRSN and weak SIRSN: the outcomes in which S(1) has no circuit have outer probability zero; the core argument is Aldous's 2021 proof, with its Lemma 2.2 used as published.",
  "files": {
    "paper.pdf": {
      "sha256": "6ee0c7f581265d51d05e1f860edfb3b9867641743085417236c895c484640ba5"
    },
    "source.zip": {
      "sha256": "aa6b81fc5debd30cbf1e233bcacf681abd5bf8bd2dc17cd1d56100eb4e39bbaa"
    },
    "verification_report.md": {
      "sha256": "90f24eea6152bd97190813c0abb55af6eb770c0536cc34154f92bcee5c369d3e"
    }
  },
  "ai_use_disclosure": "AI-assisted tools supported research, computation, proof development, and manuscript preparation. The author remains responsible for all claims and the final text."
}