The size distribution of land plots is a result of land allocation processes in the past. In the absence of regulation this is a Markov process leading an equilibrium described by a probabilistic equation used commonly in the insurance and financial mathematics. We support this claim by analyzing the distribution of two plot types, garden and build-up areas, in the Czech Land Registry pointing out the coincidence with the distribution of prime number factors described by Dickman function in the first case.

The HFEv- signature scheme is one of the most studied multivariate schemes and one of the major candidates for the upcoming standardization of post-quantum digital signature schemes. In this paper, we propose three new attack strategies against HFEv-, each of them using the idea of projection. Especially our third attack is very effective and is, for some parameter sets, the most efficient known attack against HFEv-. Furthermore, our attack requires much less memory than direct and rank attacks. By our work, we therefore give new insights in the security of the HFEv- signature scheme and restrictions for the parameter choice of a possible future standardized HFEv- instance.

No abstract uploaded!

The product formula for perturbations of propagators by Faris is generalized: we show that one can use arbitrary partitions of a given interval and perform the limit uniformly with respect to the partition norm. The results are applied to express solutions of the Schrdinger equation, in particular for some complex and time-dependent potentials, by means of Nelson-type path integrals.

The problem of maximizing the L p norms of chords connecting points on a closed curve separated by arc length u arises in electrostatic and quantum-mechanical problems. It is known that among all closed curves of fixed length, the unique maximizing shape is the circle for 1 p 2, but this is not the case for sufficiently large values of p. Here we determine the critical value p c (u) of p above which the circle is not a local maximizer finding, in particular, that p c (1 2 L)= 5 2. This corrects a claim made in [P. Exner, EM Harrell, M. Loss, Lett. Math. Phys. 75 (2006) 225].