Phase transitions in nonequilibrium d-dimensional models with q absorbing states

Physical Review E - Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics

Volumn 65, Issue 5, 2002, Pages

  Lipowski, Adam ^a,b   Droz, Michel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

^b ADAM MICKIEWICZ UNIVERSITY   (Poland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA REDUCTION; GROUND STATE; MARKOV PROCESSES; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; NUMERICAL ANALYSIS; PROBLEM SOLVING;

ABSORBING STATES; ANNIHILATION; NONEQUILIBRIUM SYSTEMS; POTTS MODEL;

PHASE TRANSITIONS;

EID: 37649026652     PISSN: 15393755     EISSN: 15502376     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.65.056114     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. J. L. Cardy, Scaling and Renormalization in Statistical Physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996).
2. F. Y. Wu, Rev. Mod. Phys. 54, 235 (1982).
3. H. Hinrichsen, Adv. Phys. 49, 815 (2000); J. Marro and R. Dickman, Nonequilibrium Phase Transitions in Lattice Models (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999).
4. H. Hinrichsen, Adv. Phys. 49, 815 (2000); J. Marro and R. Dickman, Nonequilibrium Phase Transitions in Lattice Models (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999).
5. P. Grassberger, Z. Phys. B: Condens. Matter 47, 365 (1982); H. K. Janssen, ibid. 42, 151 (1981).
6. P. Grassberger, Z. Phys. B: Condens. Matter 47, 365 (1982); H. K. Janssen, ibid. 42, 151 (1981).
7. P. Grassberger, F. Krause, and T. von der Twer, J. Phys. A 17, L105 (1984); I. Jensen, Phys. Rev. E 50, 3623 (1994).
8. P. Grassberger, F. Krause, and T. von der Twer, J. Phys. A 17, L105 (1984); I. Jensen, Phys. Rev. E 50, 3623 (1994).
9. H. Takayasu and A. Yu. Tretyakov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 3060 (1992).
10. A. Lipowski, J. Phys. A 29, L355 (1996).
11. H. Hinrichsen, Phys. Rev. E 55, 219 (1997).
12. J. L. Cardy and U. C. Täuber, J. Stat. Phys. 90, 1 (1998).
13. An alternative technique, which is based on the Langevin equation is also being developed. See e.g., A. Vespignani, R. Dickman, M. A. Munoz, and S. Zapperi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5676 (1998).
14. C. A. Voigt and R. M. Ziff, Phys. Rev. E 56, R6241 (1997); I. Jensen, Phys. Rev. A 45, R563 (1992).
15. C. A. Voigt and R. M. Ziff, Phys. Rev. E 56, R6241 (1997); I. Jensen, Phys. Rev. A 45, R563 (1992).
16. In the surface-catalysis models active sites very often constitute boundaries of inactive domains, i.e., they are located on (d- 1)-dimensional manifolds. To consider such sites as particles we would have to use a number of constraints, which would make a resulting BARW model extremely complicated. However, in the d = 1 models domain boundaries are pointlike and relations to BARW models hold.
17. R. Dickman and T. Tomé, Phys. Rev. A 44, 4833 (1991).
18. In the present paper we do not consider models with infinitely many absorbing states. In some cases typical universality classes are reported, such as DP or PC, but it is also possible that some models of this kind might exhibit novel critical behavior. Classification of such models into universality classes is certainly more difficult than of models with finitely many absorbing states, which are of primary concern in the present paper.
19. G. Szabó and M. A. Santos, Phys. Rev. E 59, R2509 (1999).
20. A. Lipowski and M. Droz, e-print cond-mat/0110404.
21. R. J. Baxter, Exactly Solved Models in Statistical Mechanics (Academic, New York, 1982).
22. One of the objections against associating a universality class with q is that this number did not enter the field-theory formalism. On the other hand, certain symmetries (such as parity conservation) do enter such a formalism. (We thank U. Täuber for drawing our attention to this fact.) However, one can argue that systems with a certain number of absorbing states might generate such symmetries at the coarse-grained level, even though the microscopic dynamics do not have such symmetries (see [8] for a more detailed example). But the symmetries that emerge after coarse graining might also depend on certain details of the dynamics (see [16]), which implies that q is not an absolutely decisive factor to determine criticality.
23. G. Grinstein, C. Jayaprakash, and Y. He, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 2527 (1985).
24. P. Grassberger and A. de la Torre, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 122, 373 (1979).
25. A. J. Bray, Adv. Phys. 43, 357 (1994).
26. G. S. Grest, M. P. Anderson, and D. J. Srolovitzw, Phys. Rev. B 38, 4752 (1988).
27. J. Hooyberghs, E. Carlon, and C. Vanderzande, Phys. Rev. E 64, 036124 (2001).
28. B. Derrida, J. L. Lebowitz, and E. R. Speer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 150601 (2001).