2006
DOI: 10.1007/s10955-005-8081-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Numerical Approach to Copolymers at Selective Interfaces

Abstract: Abstract. We consider a model of a random copolymer at a selective interface which undergoes a localization/delocalization transition. In spite of the several rigorous results available for this model, the theoretical characterization of the phase transition has remained elusive and there is still no agreement about several important issues, for example the behavior of the polymer near the phase transition line. From a rigorous viewpoint non coinciding upper and lower bounds on the critical line are known.In t… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
32
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
3
32
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The case (λ, h) ∈ L 1 is harder to investigate and we must recall that the strict inequality h(λ) < h 0 c (β) is not rigorously proven for the moment. However, some numerical evidences in [7] shows that L 1 is not an empty set and contrary to what we just said about D and L 2 , the influence of a depinning term in the region L 1 is not understood at all. This leads to the following open problem: for (λ, h) ∈ L 1 , namely when h(λ) ≤ h < h 0 c (λ), can we find a large enough depinning term β < 0 that leads to a delocalization, i.e., h ≥ h β c (λ)?…”
Section: Two Particular Casescontrasting
confidence: 69%
“…The case (λ, h) ∈ L 1 is harder to investigate and we must recall that the strict inequality h(λ) < h 0 c (β) is not rigorously proven for the moment. However, some numerical evidences in [7] shows that L 1 is not an empty set and contrary to what we just said about D and L 2 , the influence of a depinning term in the region L 1 is not understood at all. This leads to the following open problem: for (λ, h) ∈ L 1 , namely when h(λ) ≤ h < h 0 c (λ), can we find a large enough depinning term β < 0 that leads to a delocalization, i.e., h ≥ h β c (λ)?…”
Section: Two Particular Casescontrasting
confidence: 69%
“…It is also known (see [3] and [17], Chapter 5.2) that h c (β) < h c (0) for every β > 0. 9 The annealed bound (2.6) applied to this case shows that…”
mentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Here physicists generally take "altered" to mean that the specific heat exponent is different, but a disorder-induced change in the critical point is also of interest ( [4], [5], [14], [17]). This produces the question, "change relative to what, u a c or u q x ?"…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%