LBan-IV: Difference between revisions

From Disordered Systems Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
Line 115: Line 115:
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
connected by springs with spring constant set to unity.
<math>h_1,\ldots,h_N</math>.
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.


=== Step 2: Discretization along the ''h''-direction ===
<center>
<math>
F_i^{\rm elast}
= \frac{1}{z}\sum_{j\in nn(i)} (h_j-h_i),
</math>
</center>


The key simplification is the '''narrow-well approximation''' for the disorder potential. 
where <math>z</math> is the coordination number.
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:
When a block jumps forward by <math>\Delta</math>, each neighbour receives an additional stress <math>\Delta/z</math>.


<center><math>
== Narrow-well disorder ==
\sigma_i = \frac{1}{2} \bigl(h_{i+1} + h_{i-1} - 2 h_i \bigr) + f .
</math></center>


As <math>f</math> is slowly increased, each block experiences a gradually increasing pulling force.
Each block is trapped in a sequence of narrow pinning wells along the <math>h</math>-axis.
An instability occurs when:
Different blocks have independent trap sequences (translationally invariant disorder).
<center><math>
\sigma_i \geq \sigma_i^{th} ,
</math></center>


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:


When this condition is met, block <math>i</math> jumps to the next available well,
<center>
and the forces are updated as:
<math>
f_Y = 1.
</math>
</center>


<center><math>
The distances <math>\Delta>0</math> between consecutive wells are random variables drawn from a distribution <math>g(\Delta)</math>.
\begin{cases}
\sigma_i \;\to\; \sigma_i - \Delta,\\[6pt]
\sigma_{i \pm 1} \;\to\; \sigma_{i \pm 1} + \dfrac{\Delta}{2},
\end{cases}
</math></center>


After such an instability, one of the neighboring blocks may also become unstable,
A common choice is exponential wells:
initiating a chain reaction.


<center>
<math>
g(\Delta)=e^{-\Delta}.
</math>
</center>


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.
[[File:WellsFigure.png|center|600px]]


The universal properties of the depinning transition remain unchanged if one of these two quantities is taken as constant. Here, we choose:
''Open circles: trap positions. 
'''Uniform thresholds:'''
Filled circles: instantaneous interface configuration in <math>d=1</math>.''
All local thresholds are taken equal to one. The only remaining random variable is <math>\Delta</math>.


==Extensions of the 1D model ==
== Driving protocols ==


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:
Two drivings will be used in the course.


<center><math> \sigma_i = \frac{1}{z} \sum_{j \in \mathrm{nn}(i)} \bigl(h_j - h_i\bigr) + f , </math></center>
* '''Constant force'''
<center>
<math>
F_i^{\rm drive}=F.
</math>
</center>


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).
* '''Displacement control'''
<center>
<math>
F_i^{\rm drive}=k_0(w-h_i).
</math>
</center>


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


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:
== Distance to instability ==


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


where <math>h_{\mathrm{CM}} = \frac{1}{L}\sum_{j=1}^{L} h_j</math> is the center-of-mass height.
<center>
<math>
x_i = f_Y - F_i^{\rm elast} - F.
</math>
</center>


In the last part of the lecture we will solve the fully connected model explicitly. However, other elastic kernels are widely studied.
Interpretation:


* <math>x_i>0</math>: block stable.
* <math>x_i\le0</math>: block unstable.


The dynamics can be written entirely in terms of the variables <math>x_i</math>.


1. '''Long-range depinning kernels:'''
== Update rule ==


<center><math> \sigma_i = \sum_{j \ne i} \frac{h_j - h_i}{|j-i|^{d+\alpha}} + f , </math></center>
If a block <math>i</math> becomes unstable, it jumps to the next well:


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.
<center>
<math>
h_i \to h_i + \Delta.
</math>
</center>


2. '''Kernels that violate the no-passing rule:'''
In finite dimension, this induces an elastic redistribution of stress to its neighbours.
Each neighbour receives an additional stress <math>\Delta/z</math>.


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.
== Fully connected limit ==


== Velocity-Force Caracteristics==
In high spatial dimension, elasticity becomes mean-field:
We define the interface velocity at time <math>t</math>:


<center><math> v^{t} = h_{\mathrm{CM}}(t) - h_{\mathrm{CM}}(t-1) . </math></center>
<center>
<math>
F_i^{\rm elast}=h_{\rm CM}-h_i,
\qquad
h_{\rm CM}=\frac{1}{N}\sum_i h_i.
</math>
</center>


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).
When block <math>i</math> jumps by <math>\Delta</math>:
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:
<center>
<math>
x_i \to x_i+\Delta\Bigl(1-\frac{1}{N}\Bigr),
\qquad
x_{j\ne i}\to x_j-\frac{\Delta}{N}.
</math>
</center>


<center><math> x(t+1) = 1 - F - h_{\mathrm{CM}}(t+1) + h(t+1) . </math></center>
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.


We must distinguish two cases:
== Thermodynamic limit ==


If <math>x(t) > 0</math>:
In the fully connected model, there is no spatial structure.
All blocks are statistically equivalent.


<center><math> x(t+1) = 1 - F - h_{\mathrm{CM}}(t) - v^{t+1} + h(t) = x(t) - v^{t+1} . </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


If <math>x(t) < 0</math>:
<center>
<math>
P_t(x),
</math>
</center>


<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>
the probability density of distances to instability.


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:
Define the interface velocity


<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>
<center>
<math>
v^t = h_{\rm CM}(t)-h_{\rm CM}(t-1).
</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>.
The evolution of <math>x</math> for a single block is:


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>.
If <math>x(t)>0</math>:
In the stationary state, the equation reads:
<center>
<math>
x(t+1)=x(t)-v^{t+1}.
</math>
</center>


<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>
If <math>x(t)<0</math>:
<center>
<math>
x(t+1)=x(t)-v^{t+1}+\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>.
Using the update rule for stable and unstable sites separately, one obtains:
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>
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>


<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>
This equation fully describes the dynamics of the force-controlled model.
=== 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>
== Stationary solutions ==


from which we derive the relation connecting the stationary velocity to the fraction of unstable sites:
In the stationary state the velocity becomes constant <math>v</math>,
and <math>P_t(x)\to P(x)</math>.


<center><math> v = \overline{\Delta} \int_{-\infty}^{0} P(x)\, dx . </math></center>
Solving this equation in the thermodynamic limit (see exercise) yields:


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>.
=== Deterministic critical force ===


=== Second moment ===
<center>
Using <math>\phi(x) = x^2</math> and <math>\overline{x} = 1-F</math> we obtain the equation for the second moment:
<math>
F_c
=
1-\frac{\overline{\Delta^2}}{2\overline{\Delta}}.
</math>
</center>


<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>
The critical force is self-averaging.


One can show that
=== Velocity–force relation ===
<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:


The stationary velocity satisfies the implicit quadratic relation


<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>
<center>
Let's define
<math>
v^2
+2v(2F_c-F-1)
-2\overline{\Delta}(F_c-F)
=0.
</math>
</center>


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

Revision as of 17:00, 25 February 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 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).
  • 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:

Δ(x,t)=hβ(x,t)hα(x,t).

Assume that at some first contact point (x*,t*),

Δ(x*,t*)=0.

Subtracting the equations of motion gives

tΔ=2Δ+F(x,hβ)F(x,hα).

At the first contact:

  • Δ=0,
  • 2Δ0 (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.