Nonequilibrium phase transitions into absorbing states

2009

Self Cite

The pair contact process with diffusion (PCPD) with modulo 2 conservation (PCPD2) [ 2A-->4A , 2A-->0 ] is studied in one dimension, focused on the crossover to other well established universality classes: the directed Ising (DI) and the directed percolation (DP). First, we show that the PCPD2 shares the critical behaviors with the PCPD, both with and without directional bias. Second, the crossover from the PCPD2 to the DI is studied by including a parity-conserving single-particle process (A-->3A) . We find the crossover exponent 1/varphi_{1}=0.57(3) , which is argued to be identical to that of the PCPD-to-DP crossover by adding A-->2A . This suggests that the PCPD universality class has a well-defined fixed point distinct from the DP. Third, we study the crossover from a hybrid-type reaction-diffusion process belonging to the DP [ 3A-->5A , 2A-->0 ] to the DI by adding A-->3A . We find 1/varphi_{2}=0.73(4) for the DP-to-DI crossover. The inequality of varphi_{1} and varphi_{2} further supports the non-DP nature of the PCPD scaling. Finally, we introduce a symmetry-breaking field in the dual spin language to study the crossover from the PCPD2 to the DP. We find 1/varphi_{3}=1.23(10) , which is associated with a new independent route from the PCPD to the DP.

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The pair contact process with diffusion (PCPD) is an interacting particle system with diffusion, pair annihilation (2A → 0), and creation of offspring by pairs (2A → 3A) [1,2,3]. It is well known that the PCPD scaling is definitely distinct from the directed percolation (DP) scaling in two dimensions and higher.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crossover from the parity-conserving pair contact process with diffusion to other universality classes

2009

Self Cite

“…In this regard, we will call this kind of a phase transition a microscopic absorbing phase transition (miAPT), first coined in Ref. [19]. For comparison, a phase transition in the previous sections, which occurs with nonzero activity density in the infinite-size limit, will be called a macroscopic APT (maAPT).…”

Section: Microscopic Absorbing Phase Transitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Absorbing phase transitions in deterministic fixed-energy sandpile models

2018

Self Cite

We investigate the origin of the difference, which was noticed by Fey et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 145703 (2010)PRLTAO0031-900710.1103/PhysRevLett.104.145703], between the steady state density of an Abelian sandpile model (ASM) and the transition point of its corresponding deterministic fixed-energy sandpile model (DFES). Being deterministic, the configuration space of a DFES can be divided into two disjoint classes such that every configuration in one class should evolve into one of absorbing states, whereas no configurations in the other class can reach an absorbing state. Since the two classes are separated in terms of toppling dynamics, the system can be made to exhibit an absorbing phase transition (APT) at various points that depend on the initial probability distribution of the configurations. Furthermore, we show that in general the transition point also depends on whether an infinite-size limit is taken before or after the infinite-time limit. To demonstrate, we numerically study the two-dimensional DFES with Bak-Tang-Wiesenfeld toppling rule (BTW-FES). We confirm that there are indeed many thresholds. Nonetheless, the critical phenomena at various transition points are found to be universal. We furthermore discuss a microscopic absorbing phase transition, or a so-called spreading dynamics, of the BTW-FES, to find that the phase transition in this setting is related to the dynamical isotropic percolation process rather than self-organized criticality. In particular, we argue that choosing recurrent configurations of the corresponding ASM as an initial configuration does not allow for a nontrivial APT in the DFES.

“…Although this argument is not unquestionable (see Ref. [23] for a critique), it is quite persuasive once the dynamic exponent of the PCPD is accepted to be smaller than 2 as numerical studies suggest. We will discuss this argument at the end of Sec.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical decay exponent of the pair contact process with diffusion

2014

Self Cite

We investigate the one-dimensional pair contact process with diffusion (PCPD) by extensive Monte Carlo simulations, mainly focusing on the critical density decay exponent δ. To obtain an accurate estimate of δ, we first find the strength of corrections to scaling using the recently introduced method [S.-C. Park. J. Korean Phys. Soc. 62, 469 (2013)KPSJAS0374-488410.3938/jkps.62.469]. For small diffusion rate (d≤0.5), the leading corrections-to-scaling term is found to be ∼t^{-0.15}, whereas for large diffusion rate (d=0.95) it is found to be ∼t^{-0.5}. After finding the strength of corrections to scaling, effective exponents are systematically analyzed to conclude that the value of critical decay exponent δ is 0.173(3) irrespective of d. This value should be compared with the critical decay exponent of the directed percolation, 0.1595. In addition, we study two types of crossover. At d=0, the phase boundary is discontinuous and the crossover from the pair contact process to the PCPD is found to be described by the crossover exponent ϕ=2.6(1). We claim that the discontinuity of the phase boundary cannot be consistent with the theoretical argument supporting the hypothesis that the PCPD should belong to the DP. At d=1, the crossover from the mean field PCPD to the PCPD is described by ϕ=2 which is argued to be exact.