LBan-IV: Difference between revisions

From Disordered Systems Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 11: Line 11:
Two important transitions associated with pinning are:
Two important transitions associated with pinning are:


* '''Depinning transition.'''
* '''Depinning transition.'''
Interfaces pinned by impurities appear in many contexts: magnetic domain walls, crack fronts, dislocations, vortices.
Interfaces pinned by impurities appear in many contexts: magnetic domain walls, crack fronts, dislocations, vortices.
Above a critical force <math>f_c</math>, steady motion sets in. Close to threshold, motion is intermittent and proceeds via avalanches (e.g. Barkhausen noise).
Above a critical force <math>f_c</math>, steady motion sets in. Close to threshold, motion is intermittent and proceeds via avalanches (e.g. Barkhausen noise).


* '''Yielding transition.'''
* '''Yielding transition.'''
Amorphous materials (foams, emulsions, pastes) deform elastically at small stress and flow at large stress.
Amorphous materials (foams, emulsions, pastes) deform elastically at small stress and flow at large stress.
The analogue of the depinning threshold is the '''yield stress''' <math>\sigma_y</math>, separating solid-like from flowing behavior.
The analogue of the depinning threshold is the '''yield stress''' <math>\sigma_y</math>, separating solid-like from flowing behavior.


 
Both the critical force per unit length <math>f_c</math> and the yield stress <math>\sigma_y</math> are '''self-averaging quantities''', analogous to the free-energy density in equilibrium disordered systems. Sample-to-sample fluctuations are universal but subleading in system size. The two transitions share many phenomenological features (threshold, intermittency, avalanches) but differ in an important respect:
Both the critical force per unit length <math>f_c</math> and the yield stress <math>\sigma_y</math> are '''self-averaging quantity''', analogous to the free-energy density in equilibrium disordered systems. Sample-to-sample fluctuations are universal but subleading in system size. The two transitions share many phenomenological features (threshold, intermittency, avalanches) but differ in an important respect:


* Depinning obeys monotonic dynamics (no-passing rule).
* Depinning obeys monotonic dynamics (no-passing rule).
Line 28: Line 27:


At zero temperature, in the overdamped regime, the interface evolves as
At zero temperature, in the overdamped regime, the interface evolves as
 
<math display="block">
<center>
<math>
\partial_t h(x,t)
\partial_t h(x,t)
= \nabla^2 h(x,t) + f + F(x,h(x,t)),
= \nabla^2 h(x,t) + f + F(x,h(x,t)),
Line 36: Line 33:
F(x,h) = - \frac{\delta V(x,h)}{\delta h}.
F(x,h) = - \frac{\delta V(x,h)}{\delta h}.
</math>
</math>
</center>


Here:
Here:
Line 46: Line 42:


Consider two interfaces evolving under the same disorder:
Consider two interfaces evolving under the same disorder:
 
<math display="block">
<center>
<math>
\partial_t h = \nabla^2 h + f + F(x,h).
\partial_t h = \nabla^2 h + f + F(x,h).
</math>
</math>
</center>


Let
Let
 
<math display="block">
<center>
<math>
h_\alpha(x,0) < h_\beta(x,0) \quad \forall x.
h_\alpha(x,0) < h_\beta(x,0) \quad \forall x.
</math>
</math>
</center>


Define their difference:
Define their difference:
 
<math display="block">
<center>
\delta h(x,t) = h_\beta(x,t) - h_\alpha(x,t).
<math>
\Delta(x,t) = h_\beta(x,t) - h_\alpha(x,t).
</math>
</math>
</center>


Assume that at some first contact point <math>(x^*,t^*)</math>,
Assume that at some first contact point <math>(x^*,t^*)</math>,
 
<math display="block">
<center>
\delta h(x^*,t^*) = 0.
<math>
\Delta(x^*,t^*) = 0.
</math>
</math>
</center>


Subtracting the equations of motion gives
Subtracting the equations of motion gives
 
<math display="block">
<center>
\partial_t \delta h
<math>
= \nabla^2 \delta h
\partial_t \Delta
= \nabla^2 \Delta
+ F(x,h_\beta) - F(x,h_\alpha).
+ F(x,h_\beta) - F(x,h_\alpha).
</math>
</math>
</center>


At the first contact:
At the first contact:


* <math>\Delta = 0</math>,
* <math>\delta h = 0</math>,
* <math>\nabla^2 \Delta \ge 0</math> (minimum),
* <math>\nabla^2 \delta h \ge 0</math> (minimum),
* the disorder force is identical because it is quenched.
* the disorder force is identical because it is quenched.


One finds that the velocity of the lower interface is strictly smaller than that of the upper one:
One finds that the velocity of the lower interface is strictly smaller than that of the upper one:
 
<math display="block">
<center>
<math>
v_\alpha(x^*,t^*) < v_\beta(x^*,t^*).
v_\alpha(x^*,t^*) < v_\beta(x^*,t^*).
</math>
</math>
</center>


Thus crossing is impossible and ordering is preserved.
Thus crossing is impossible and ordering is preserved.
Line 115: Line 93:
The depinning transition is simpler and better understood. In the following we focus on depinning and introduce minimal cellular automata capturing its physics. We will later return to yielding and discuss how similar automata can describe plastic flow.
The depinning transition is simpler and better understood. In the following we focus on depinning and introduce minimal cellular automata capturing its physics. We will later return to yielding and discuss how similar automata can describe plastic flow.


= Cellular Automata =
= Cellular Automaton for Depinning =


We now introduce a discrete version of the interface equation of motion.
We now introduce a discrete model in the depinning universality class.
These cellular automata belong to the same universality class as the original model,
Time is discrete and the interface evolves through jumps between narrow pinning wells.
and they are straightforward to implement numerically. 
The model captures threshold dynamics and avalanche propagation while remaining analytically tractable.
For clarity, we first discuss the case of one spatial dimension, <math>d = 1</math>.
We then extend its definition.


==The 1D model==
== Degrees of freedom ==
=== Step 1: Discretization along the ''x''-direction ===


The interface is represented as a collection of blocks <math>i = 1, \ldots, L</math>  
The interface is represented by blocks of height <math>h_1,\ldots,h_N</math>.
connected by springs with spring constant set to unity.
The velocity of the <math>i</math>-th block is given by:


<center><math>
== Elastic interactions in finite dimension ==
v_i(t) = \partial_t h_i(t) =  
\frac{1}{2}\bigl[h_{i+1}(t) + h_{i-1}(t) - 2 h_i(t)\bigr]
+ f + F_i\!\bigl(h_i(t)\bigr) .
</math></center>


Here, <math>h_i(t)</math> is the position of block <math>i</math> at time <math>t</math>,
In spatial dimension <math>d</math>, each block interacts with its nearest neighbours:
<math>f</math> is the external driving force, and <math>F_i</math> is the quenched random pinning force.
<math display="block">
F_i^{\rm elast}
= \frac{1}{z}\sum_{j\in nn(i)} (h_j-h_i),
</math>
where <math>z</math> is the coordination number.


=== Step 2: Discretization along the ''h''-direction ===
When a block jumps forward by <math>\Delta</math>, each neighbour receives an additional stress <math>\Delta/z</math>.


The key simplification is the '''narrow-well approximation''' for the disorder potential. 
== Narrow-well disorder ==
In this approximation, impurities act as pinning centers, each trapping a block of the interface at discrete positions up to a local threshold force  <math>\sigma_i^{th}</math> is overcomed. The distance between two consecutive pinning centers is a positive random variable
<math>\Delta</math>, drawn from a distribution <math>g(\Delta)</math>. 


The total force acting on block <math>i</math> is:
Each block is trapped in a sequence of narrow pinning wells along the <math>h</math>-axis.
Different blocks have independent trap sequences (translationally invariant disorder).


<center><math>
Each well has a local depinning threshold.
\sigma_i = \frac{1}{2} \bigl(h_{i+1} + h_{i-1} - 2 h_i \bigr) + f .
Disorder may affect both the threshold values and the distances between wells. Here, for simplicity, we set all thresholds equal:
</math></center>
<math display="block">
f_Y = 1.
</math>
The distances <math>\Delta>0</math> between consecutive wells are random variables drawn from a distribution <math>g(\Delta)</math>. A common choice is exponential wells:
<math display="block">
g(\Delta)=e^{-\Delta}.
</math>


As <math>f</math> is slowly increased, each block experiences a gradually increasing pulling force.
[[File:WellsFigure.png|center|200px]]
An instability occurs when:
''Open circles: trap positions.
<center><math>
Filled circles: instantaneous interface configuration in <math>d=1</math>.''
\sigma_i \geq \sigma_i^{th} ,
</math></center>


== Driving protocols ==


When this condition is met, block <math>i</math> jumps to the next available well,
Two drivings will be used in the course.
and the forces are updated as:


<center><math>
* '''Constant force'''
\begin{cases}
<math display="block">
\sigma_i \;\to\; \sigma_i - \Delta,\\[6pt]
F_i^{\rm drive}=F.
\sigma_{i \pm 1} \;\to\; \sigma_{i \pm 1} + \dfrac{\Delta}{2},
</math>
\end{cases}
</math></center>


After such an instability, one of the neighboring blocks may also become unstable,
* '''Displacement control'''
initiating a chain reaction.
<math display="block">
F_i^{\rm drive}=k_0(w-h_i).
</math>


In this page we focus on constant force.
Displacement control will be introduced later to study avalanches.


In the narrow wells approximation, the randomness of the disordered potential reduces to two random quantities: the distance between wells <math>\Delta</math> and the threshold <math>\sigma_i^{\rm th}</math> that must be overcome for the interface to escape the trapping well.
== Distance to instability ==


The universal properties of the depinning transition remain unchanged if one of these two quantities is taken as constant. Here, we choose:
Define
'''Uniform thresholds:'''
<math display="block">
All local thresholds are taken equal to one. The only remaining random variable is <math>\Delta</math>.
x_i = f_Y - F_i^{\rm elast} - F.
</math>


==Extensions of the 1D model ==
Interpretation:


The system’s dimensionality is encoded in the elastic force acting on each block. In spatial dimension <math>d</math>, the local force on block <math>i</math> is written as a sum over its nearest neighbours:
* <math>x_i>0</math>: block stable.
* <math>x_i\le0</math>: block unstable.


<center><math> \sigma_i = \frac{1}{z} \sum_{j \in \mathrm{nn}(i)} \bigl(h_j - h_i\bigr) + f , </math></center>
The dynamics can be written entirely in terms of the variables <math>x_i</math>.


where <math>z</math> is the coordination number, i.e. the number of nearest neighbours of each block. The value of <math>z</math> increases with the spatial dimension (e.g. <math>z=4</math> for a square lattice in <math>d=2</math>, <math>z=6</math> in <math>d=3</math>, and so on).
== Update rule ==


This form of the elastic force ensures that when a block becomes unstable and advances by an amount <math>\Delta</math>, its <math>z</math> neighbours each receive an extra stress <math>\Delta/z</math>.
If a block <math>i</math> becomes unstable, it jumps to the next well:
<math display="block">
h_i \to h_i + \Delta.
</math>


To describe the model in the limit of high dimension, it is convenient to replace the discrete Laplacian by a fully connected elasticity, corresponding to <math>z = L</math>. In this case, the force becomes:
In finite dimension, this induces an elastic redistribution of stress to its neighbours.
Each neighbour receives an additional stress <math>\Delta/z</math>.


<center><math> \sigma_i = h_{\mathrm{CM}} - h_i + f , </math></center>
== Fully connected limit ==


where <math>h_{\mathrm{CM}} = \frac{1}{L}\sum_{j=1}^{L} h_j</math> is the center-of-mass height.
In high spatial dimension, elasticity becomes mean-field:
<math display="block">
F_i^{\rm elast}=h_{\rm CM}-h_i,
\qquad
h_{\rm CM}=\frac{1}{N}\sum_i h_i.
</math>


In the last part of the lecture we will solve the fully connected model explicitly. However, other elastic kernels are widely studied.
When block <math>i</math> jumps by <math>\Delta</math>:
<math display="block">
x_i \to x_i+\Delta\Bigl(1-\frac{1}{N}\Bigr),
\qquad
x_{j\ne i}\to x_j-\frac{\Delta}{N}.
</math>


The jumping site tends to stabilize, while all other sites are shifted uniformly toward instability.
This homogeneous redistribution of stress is the origin of avalanche propagation.


== Thermodynamic limit ==


1. '''Long-range depinning kernels:'''
In the fully connected model, there is no spatial structure.
All blocks are statistically equivalent.


<center><math> \sigma_i = \sum_{j \ne i} \frac{h_j - h_i}{|j-i|^{d+\alpha}} + f , </math></center>
In the thermodynamic limit <math>N\to\infty</math>, the state of the system at time <math>t</math> is completely characterized by the distribution
<math display="block">
P_t(x),
</math>
the probability density of distances to instability.


Here the sum extends over all sites, but the contribution decays with distance. The parameter <math>\alpha</math> controls the interaction range and typically lies between <math>2/d</math> and <math>2</math>. For these values, the critical exponents depend continuously on <math>\alpha</math>. For <math>\alpha \ge 2</math>, one recovers the short-range results, while for <math>\alpha \le 2/d</math> one recovers the fully connected (mean-field) behavior. Many physical systems exhibit a long-range depinning transition; for instance, a 1D crack front corresponds to <math>\alpha = 1</math>. Importantly, the transition remains a depinning transition, and in particular the no-passing rule continues to hold.
Define the interface velocity
<math display="block">
v^t = h_{\rm CM}(t)-h_{\rm CM}(t-1).
</math>


2. '''Kernels that violate the no-passing rule:'''
The evolution of <math>x</math> for a single block is:


In some systems, such as the yielding transition of amorphous solids, the elastic interactions are described by Eshelby kernels. These interactions are long-ranged, anisotropic, and have a quadrupolar symmetry with zero spatial sum (the stress released in one region is redistributed so that the net force on the system remains unchanged). Such kernels break the no-passing rule and lead to qualitatively different critical behavior, which we will discuss in the conclusions of the next lecture.
If <math>x(t)>0</math>:
<math display="block">
x(t+1)=x(t)-v^{t+1}.
</math>


== Velocity-Force Caracteristics==
If <math>x(t)<0</math>:
We define the interface velocity at time <math>t</math>:
<math display="block">
x(t+1)=x(t)-v^{t+1}+\Delta.
</math>


<center><math> v^{t} = h_{\mathrm{CM}}(t) - h_{\mathrm{CM}}(t-1) . </math></center>
Using the update rule for stable and unstable sites separately, one obtains:
<math display="block">
P_{t+1}(x)
=
P_t(x+v^{t+1})\,H(x+v^{t+1})
+
\int_0^\infty d\Delta\,
P_t(x+v^{t+1}-\Delta)\,g(\Delta)\,
H(-x-v^{t+1}+\Delta).
</math>


In the fully connected model, the blocks have no spatial structure, and therefore there are no privileged interactions (such as nearest- or next-nearest-neighbor couplings).
This equation fully describes the dynamics of the force-controlled model.
For this reason, the state of the system at time <math>t</math> is entirely characterized by  the distance to instability of a single block:
<center><math> x(t) = 1 - F - h_{\mathrm{CM}}(t) + h(t) . </math></center>
Our goal is to determine their distribution, <math>P_t(x)</math>.


To derive the evolution equation of <math>P_t(x)</math>, we write the dynamics for a single block:
== Stationary solutions ==


<center><math> x(t+1) = 1 - F - h_{\mathrm{CM}}(t+1) + h(t+1) . </math></center>
In the stationary state the velocity becomes constant <math>v</math>, and <math>P_t(x)\to P(x)</math>.


We must distinguish two cases:
Solving this equation in the thermodynamic limit (see exercise) yields:


If <math>x(t) > 0</math>:
=== Deterministic critical force ===


<center><math> x(t+1) = 1 - F - h_{\mathrm{CM}}(t) - v^{t+1} + h(t) = x(t) - v^{t+1} . </math></center>
<math display="block">
F_c
=
1-\frac{\overline{\Delta^2}}{2\overline{\Delta}}.
</math>


If <math>x(t) < 0</math>:
The critical force is self-averaging.


<center><math> x(t+1) = 1 - F - h_{\mathrm{CM}}(t) - v^{t+1} + h(t) + \Delta = x(t) - v^{t+1} + \Delta . </math></center>
=== Velocity–force relation ===
 
Using the Heaviside function <math>H(x)</math>, the evolution equation for <math>P_{t+1}(x)</math> can be written as the sum of these two contributions:
 
<center><math> P_{t+1}(x) = P_t(x + v^{t+1})\, H(x + v^{t+1}) \;+\; \int_0^\infty d\Delta \; P_t(x + v^{t+1} - \Delta)\, g(\Delta)\, H(-x - v^{t+1} + \Delta) . </math></center>
 
This equation fully describes the dynamics of the system, given an initial condition <math>P_0(x)</math> and a distribution of threshold distances <math>g(\Delta)</math>.
 
We are now interested in stationary solutions, which become independent of the initial condition and are characterized by a constant stationary velocity <math>v</math>.
In the stationary state, the equation reads:
 
<center><math> P(x) = P(x + v)\, H(x + v) \;+\; \int_0^\infty d\Delta \; P(x + v - \Delta)\, g(\Delta)\, H(-x - v + \Delta) . </math></center>
 
From this self-consistent equation, we want to derive a relation that expresses the stationary velocity <math>v</math> as a function of the external force <math>F</math>.
To do this, we consider the first and second moments of the left- and right-hand sides.
 
It is useful to verify the following identity for a generic test function <math>\phi(x)</math>:
 
<center><math> \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dx \, \phi(x) P(x) = \int_{0}^{\infty} dx \, \phi(x-v) P(x) + \int_{-\infty}^{0} dx \, P(x) \int_{0}^{\infty} d\Delta \; \phi(x-v+\Delta)\, g(\Delta) . </math></center>
=== First moment ===
Using <math>\phi(x) = x</math> we obtain the equation for the first moment:
 
<center><math> \overline{x} = \overline{x} - v + \overline{\Delta} \int_{-\infty}^{0} P(x)\, dx , </math></center>
 
from which we derive the relation connecting the stationary velocity to the fraction of unstable sites:
 
<center><math> v = \overline{\Delta} \int_{-\infty}^{0} P(x)\, dx . </math></center>
 
This result shows that the mean velocity is proportional to the probability of finding an unstable site, with the proportionality factor given by the average jump size <math>\overline{\Delta}</math>.
 
=== Second moment ===
Using <math>\phi(x) = x^2</math> and <math>\overline{x} = 1-F</math>  we obtain the equation for the second moment:
 
<center><math> v^2 + 2 v (1-F -\frac{\overline{\Delta^2}}{2 \overline{\Delta}}) -2 \overline{\Delta} \int_{-\infty}^0 dx \, x P(x) =0  </math></center>
 
One can show that
<center><math>  \int_0^{\infty} dx \, x P(x) = \frac{\overline{\Delta^2}}{2 \overline{\Delta}} (1-\frac{v}{\overline{\Delta}})</math></center>
and observe <math> \overline{\Delta} \int_{-\infty}^0 dx \, x P(x) = \overline{\Delta} \overline{x} - \overline{\Delta} \int_0^{\infty} dx \, x P(x) </math> to get the final equation:
 
 
<center><math> v^2 + 2 v (1-F -\frac{\overline{\Delta^2}}{ \overline{\Delta}}) -2 \overline{\Delta}  (1-F-\frac{\overline{\Delta^2}}{2 \overline{\Delta}})  =0  </math></center>
Let's define
 
 
<center><math> F_c= 1 -\frac{\overline{\Delta^2}}{ 2\overline{\Delta}}  </math></center>
 
we can write


The stationary velocity satisfies the implicit quadratic relation
<math display="block">
v^2
+2v(2F_c-F-1)
-2\overline{\Delta}(F_c-F)
=0.
</math>


<center><math> v^2 + 2 v (2F_c -F -1) -2 \overline{\Delta}  (F_c-F)  =0  </math></center>
This equation determines the full <math>v\!-\!F</math> characteristic curve.

Latest revision as of 22:06, 1 March 2026

Pinning and Depinning of a Disordered Material

In earlier lectures, we discussed how disordered systems can become trapped in deep energy states, forming a glass. Today we examine how such systems can also be pinned and resist external deformation.

Disorder creates a complex energy landscape with many minima, maxima, and saddle points. When an external force is applied, the landscape is tilted. Local minima remain stable until a finite threshold is reached.

This gives rise to dynamical phase transitions.

Depinning vs Yielding

Two important transitions associated with pinning are:

  • Depinning transition.

Interfaces pinned by impurities appear in many contexts: magnetic domain walls, crack fronts, dislocations, vortices. Above a critical force fc, steady motion sets in. Close to threshold, motion is intermittent and proceeds via avalanches (e.g. Barkhausen noise).

  • Yielding transition.

Amorphous materials (foams, emulsions, pastes) deform elastically at small stress and flow at large stress. The analogue of the depinning threshold is the yield stress σy, separating solid-like from flowing behavior.

Both the critical force per unit length fc and the yield stress σy are self-averaging quantities, analogous to the free-energy density in equilibrium disordered systems. Sample-to-sample fluctuations are universal but subleading in system size. The two transitions share many phenomenological features (threshold, intermittency, avalanches) but differ in an important respect:

  • Depinning obeys monotonic dynamics (no-passing rule).
  • Yielding generally does not, due to stress redistributions of mixed sign.

Equation of Motion for Depinning

At zero temperature, in the overdamped regime, the interface evolves as th(x,t)=2h(x,t)+f+F(x,h(x,t)),F(x,h)=δV(x,h)δh.

Here:

  • f is the external driving force,
  • F(x,h) is the quenched disorder force.

The No-Passing Rule

Consider two interfaces evolving under the same disorder: th=2h+f+F(x,h).

Let hα(x,0)<hβ(x,0)x.

Define their difference: δh(x,t)=hβ(x,t)hα(x,t).

Assume that at some first contact point (x*,t*), δh(x*,t*)=0.

Subtracting the equations of motion gives tδh=2δh+F(x,hβ)F(x,hα).

At the first contact:

  • δh=0,
  • 2δh0 (minimum),
  • the disorder force is identical because it is quenched.

One finds that the velocity of the lower interface is strictly smaller than that of the upper one: vα(x*,t*)<vβ(x*,t*).

Thus crossing is impossible and ordering is preserved.

Consequences

  • Metastable states are totally ordered.
  • The critical force fc is independent of initial conditions.
  • For f>fc, no metastable states survive.

This monotonic structure is specific to depinning and does not hold for yielding systems.

Outlook

The depinning transition is simpler and better understood. In the following we focus on depinning and introduce minimal cellular automata capturing its physics. We will later return to yielding and discuss how similar automata can describe plastic flow.

Cellular Automaton for Depinning

We now introduce a discrete model in the depinning universality class. Time is discrete and the interface evolves through jumps between narrow pinning wells. The model captures threshold dynamics and avalanche propagation while remaining analytically tractable.

Degrees of freedom

The interface is represented by blocks of height h1,,hN.

Elastic interactions in finite dimension

In spatial dimension d, each block interacts with its nearest neighbours: Fielast=1zjnn(i)(hjhi), where z is the coordination number.

When a block jumps forward by Δ, each neighbour receives an additional stress Δ/z.

Narrow-well disorder

Each block is trapped in a sequence of narrow pinning wells along the h-axis. Different blocks have independent trap sequences (translationally invariant disorder).

Each well has a local depinning threshold. Disorder may affect both the threshold values and the distances between wells. Here, for simplicity, we set all thresholds equal: fY=1. The distances Δ>0 between consecutive wells are random variables drawn from a distribution g(Δ). A common choice is exponential wells: g(Δ)=eΔ.

Open circles: trap positions. Filled circles: instantaneous interface configuration in d=1.

Driving protocols

Two drivings will be used in the course.

  • Constant force

Fidrive=F.

  • Displacement control

Fidrive=k0(whi).

In this page we focus on constant force. Displacement control will be introduced later to study avalanches.

Distance to instability

Define xi=fYFielastF.

Interpretation:

  • xi>0: block stable.
  • xi0: block unstable.

The dynamics can be written entirely in terms of the variables xi.

Update rule

If a block i becomes unstable, it jumps to the next well: hihi+Δ.

In finite dimension, this induces an elastic redistribution of stress to its neighbours. Each neighbour receives an additional stress Δ/z.

Fully connected limit

In high spatial dimension, elasticity becomes mean-field: Fielast=hCMhi,hCM=1Nihi.

When block i jumps by Δ: xixi+Δ(11N),xjixjΔN.

The jumping site tends to stabilize, while all other sites are shifted uniformly toward instability. This homogeneous redistribution of stress is the origin of avalanche propagation.

Thermodynamic limit

In the fully connected model, there is no spatial structure. All blocks are statistically equivalent.

In the thermodynamic limit N, the state of the system at time t is completely characterized by the distribution Pt(x), the probability density of distances to instability.

Define the interface velocity vt=hCM(t)hCM(t1).

The evolution of x for a single block is:

If x(t)>0: x(t+1)=x(t)vt+1.

If x(t)<0: x(t+1)=x(t)vt+1+Δ.

Using the update rule for stable and unstable sites separately, one obtains: Pt+1(x)=Pt(x+vt+1)H(x+vt+1)+0dΔPt(x+vt+1Δ)g(Δ)H(xvt+1+Δ).

This equation fully describes the dynamics of the force-controlled model.

Stationary solutions

In the stationary state the velocity becomes constant v, and Pt(x)P(x).

Solving this equation in the thermodynamic limit (see exercise) yields:

Deterministic critical force

Fc=1Δ22Δ.

The critical force is self-averaging.

Velocity–force relation

The stationary velocity satisfies the implicit quadratic relation v2+2v(2FcF1)2Δ(FcF)=0.

This equation determines the full vF characteristic curve.