MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003155512 · doi:10.1103/physreve.84.041129

Tuning coupling: Discrete changes in runaway avalanche sizes in disordered media

2011· article· en· W2003155512 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Braden A. W. Brinkman, Karin A. Dahmen

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsScalingCoupling (piping)SigmaSpinsIsing modelCondensed matter physicsStatistical physicsMathematical physicsQuantum mechanicsMathematicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hysteretic systems may exhibit a runaway avalanche in which a large fraction of the constituents of the system collectively change state. It would be very valuable to understand the role that interaction strength between constituents plays in the size of such catastrophic runaway avalanches. We use a simple model, the random field Ising model, to study how the size of the runaway avalanche changes as the coupling between spins, $J$, is tuned. In particular, we calculate $P(S)$, the distribution of size changes $S$ in the runaway avalanche size as $J$ comes close to a critical value ${J}_{c}$, and find that the distribution scales as $P(S)\ensuremath{\sim}{S}^{\ensuremath{-}\ensuremath{\tau}}\mathcal{D}({S}^{\ensuremath{\sigma}}(J/{J}_{c}\ensuremath{-}1))$, with $\ensuremath{\tau}$ and $\ensuremath{\sigma}$ critical exponents and $\mathcal{D}(x)$ a universal scaling function. In mean field theory we find $\ensuremath{\tau}=3/2$, $\ensuremath{\sigma}=1/2$, and $\mathcal{D}(x)=\mathrm{exp}[\ensuremath{-}{(3x)}^{1/\ensuremath{\sigma}}/2]$. On the basis of these results and previous studies, we also predict that for three dimensions $\ensuremath{\tau}=1.6$ and $\ensuremath{\sigma}=0.24$.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.279
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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207