MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994382151 · doi:10.1142/s0217979201004526

DIRECTED PERCOLATION AND OTHER SYSTEMS WITH ABSORBING STATES: IMPACT OF BOUNDARIES

2001· article· en· W1994382151 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modern Physics B · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDirected percolationPercolation critical exponentsScalingCritical exponentUniversality (dynamical systems)Critical dimensionCritical phenomenaPhase transitionPercolation (cognitive psychology)Renormalization group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We review the critical behavior of nonequilibrium systems, such as directed percolation (DP) and branching-annihilating random walks (BARW), which possess phase transitions into absorbing states. After reviewing the bulk scaling behavior of these models, we devote the main part of this review to analyzing the impact of walls on their critical behavior. We discuss the possible boundary universality classes for the DP and BARW models, which can be described by a general scaling theory which allows for two independent surface exponents in addition to the bulk critical exponents. Above the upper critical dimension d c , we review the use of mean field theories, whereas in the regime d c , where fluctuations are important, we examine the application of field theoretic methods. Of particular interest is the situation in d=1, which has been extensively investigated using numerical simulations and series expansions. Although DP and BARW fit into the same scaling theory, they can still show very different surface behavior: for DP some exponents are degenerate, a property not shared with the BARW model. Moreover, a "hidden" duality symmetry of BARW in d=1 is broken by the boundary and this relates exponents and boundary conditions in an intricate way.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Modern Physics BSame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207