Spatial correlation of the dynamic propensity of a glass-forming liquid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present computer simulation results on the dynamic propensity (as defined by Widmer-Cooper et al 2004 Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 135701) in a Kob-Andersen binary Lennard-Jones liquid system consisting of 8788 particles. We compute the spatial correlation function for the dynamic propensity as a function of both the reduced temperature T, and the time scale on which the particle displacements are measured. For T ≤ 0.6, we find that non-zero correlations occur at the largest length scale accessible in our system. We also show that a cluster-size analysis of particles with extremal values of the dynamic propensity, as well as 3D visualizations, reveal spatially correlated regions that approach the size of our system as T decreases, consistently with the behavior of the spatial correlation function. Next, we define and examine the 'coordination propensity', the isoconfigurational average of the coordination number of the minority B particles around the majority A particles. We show that a significant correlation exists between the spatial fluctuations of the dynamic and coordination propensities. In addition, we find non-zero correlations of the coordination propensity occurring at the largest length scale accessible in our system for all T in the range 0.466 < T < 1.0. We discuss the implications of these results for understanding the length scales of dynamical heterogeneity in glass-forming liquids.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".