L-6: Difference between revisions

From Disordered Systems Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 40: Line 40:
x_i \to = x_i +\frac{1}{L} \frac{\Delta}{1+m^2}  
x_i \to = x_i +\frac{1}{L} \frac{\Delta}{1+m^2}  
  </math></center>
  </math></center>
The total stress drop is  <math> m^2 d w P_w(0) \int d x x g(x) = m^2 d w P_w(0)  \overline{x} </math> hence  
The total stress drop is  <math> m^2 d w P_w(0) \int d x x g(x) = m^2 d w P_w(0)  \overline{x} </math> hence all points move to the origin of   
all points move to the origin of   
<center> <math> m^2 dw P_w(0) \frac{\overline{x}}{1+m^2} </math> </center>
<center> <math> m^2 dw P_w(0) \frac{\overline{x}}{1+m^2} </math> </center>
part of them shifts, part of them become unstable... we can write
part of them shifts, part of them become unstable... we can write
Line 49: Line 48:




==== Stationary solution====
== Stationary solution==
Increasing the drive the distribution converge to the fixed point:
Increasing the drive the distribution converge to the fixed point:
<center> <math>0 =  \partial_x P_{\text{stat}}(x) + P_{\text{stat}}(0) g(x)  </math> </center>
<center> <math>0 =  \partial_x P_{\text{stat}}(x) + P_{\text{stat}}(0) g(x)  </math> </center>

Revision as of 18:08, 29 February 2024

Avalanches and Bienaymé-Galton-Watson process

Goal: We solve the mean field version of the cellular automaton, derive its avalanche statistics and make a connection with the Bienaymé-Galton-Watson process used to describe an epidemic outbreak.

Fully connected (mean field) model for the cellular automaton

Let's study the mean field version of the cellular automata introduced in the previous lecture. We introduce two approximations:

  • Replace the Laplacian, which is short range, with a mean field fully connected interction
σi=hCMhi+m2(whi),

.


  • The local threshold are all equal. In particular we set
σith=1,i

.


As a consequence, in the limit L, the statistical properties of the system are described by the distribution of the local stresses σi. For simplicity, instead of the stresses, we study the distance from threshold

xi=1σi

Our goal is thus to determine their distribution Pw(x), given their intial distribution, P0(x), and a value of w.

Dynamics

Let's rewrite the dynamics with the new variables

  • Drive: Increasing ww+dw each point decreases its distance to threshold
xixim2dw

.

As a consequence

Pw+dw(x)=Pw(x+dw)Pw(x)+m2dwxPw(x)


  • Instability 1: Stress drop The instability occurs when a point is at xi=0. Then, the point is stabilized (stress drop):
xi=0xi=Δ

Increasing ww+dw, a fraction m2dwPw(0) of the blocks is unstable. Due to the stress drop, their distance to threshold becomes m2dwPw(0)g(x). Hence, one writes

wPw(x)m2[xPw(x)+Pw(0)g(x)]


  • Instability 2: Stress redistribution The stress drop of a single block induces a stress redistribution where all blocks approach threshold.
xi=xi+1LΔ1+m2

The total stress drop is m2dwPw(0)dxxg(x)=m2dwPw(0)x hence all points move to the origin of

m2dwPw(0)x1+m2

part of them shifts, part of them become unstable... we can write

wPw(x)=m2[xPw(x)+Pw(0)g(x)][1+Pw(0)x1+m2+(Pw(0)x1+m2)2+]

and finally:

wPw(x)=m21Pw(0)x1+m2[xPw(x)+Pw(0)g(x)]


Stationary solution

Increasing the drive the distribution converge to the fixed point:

0=xPstat(x)+Pstat(0)g(x)
  • Determne Pstat(0)=1x using
1=0dxPstat(x)=0dxxxPstat(x)
  • Show
Pstat(x)=1xxg(z)dz