LBan-V: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
For simplicity, we restrict to the fully connected model, where the distance of block <math>i</math> from its local instability threshold is | For simplicity, we restrict to the fully connected model, where the distance of block <math>i</math> from its local instability threshold is | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
x_i = 1 - (h_{CM} - h_i) - k_0 (w - h_i). | |||
<math> | |||
x_i = 1 - (h_{CM} - h_i) - k_0 | |||
</math> | </math> | ||
The first term represents the elastic pull exerted by the rest of the interface, while the second encodes the external driving through the spring. | The first term represents the elastic pull exerted by the rest of the interface, while the second encodes the external driving through the spring. | ||
Here <math>h_{CM}</math> is the center-of-mass position of the interface. Because the sum of all internal elastic forces vanishes, the total external force is balanced solely by the pinning forces. The effective external force can thus be written as a function of <math>w</math>: | Here <math>h_{CM}</math> is the center-of-mass position of the interface. Because the sum of all internal elastic forces vanishes, the total external force is balanced solely by the pinning forces. The effective external force can thus be written as a function of <math>w</math>: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
F(w) = k_0 (w - h_{CM}). | |||
<math> | |||
F(w) = k_0 | |||
</math> | </math> | ||
As <math>w</math> is increased quasistatically, the force <math>F(w)</math> would increase if <math>h_{CM}</math> were fixed. When an avalanche takes place, <math>h_{CM}</math> jumps forward and <math>F(w)</math> suddenly decreases. However, in the steady state and in the thermodynamic limit <math>L \to \infty</math>, the force recovers a well-defined value. In the limit <math>k_0 \to 0</math>, this force tends to the critical depinning force <math>F_c</math>; at finite <math>k_0</math> it lies slightly below <math>F_c</math>. | As <math>w</math> is increased quasistatically, the force <math>F(w)</math> would increase if <math>h_{CM}</math> were fixed. When an avalanche takes place, <math>h_{CM}</math> jumps forward and <math>F(w)</math> suddenly decreases. However, in the steady state and in the thermodynamic limit <math>L \to \infty</math>, the force recovers a well-defined value. In the limit <math>k_0 \to 0</math>, this force tends to the critical depinning force <math>F_c</math>; at finite <math>k_0</math> it lies slightly below <math>F_c</math>. | ||
| Line 28: | Line 22: | ||
To study avalanches, the position <math>w</math> is increased '''quasi-statically''': it is shifted by an infinitesimal amount <math>w \to w + \mathrm{d}w</math> so that the block closest to its instability threshold reaches it, | To study avalanches, the position <math>w</math> is increased '''quasi-statically''': it is shifted by an infinitesimal amount <math>w \to w + \mathrm{d}w</math> so that the block closest to its instability threshold reaches it, | ||
<math display="block">x_i = 0.</math> | |||
This block is the '''epicenter''' of the avalanche: it becomes unstable and jumps to the next well. | This block is the '''epicenter''' of the avalanche: it becomes unstable and jumps to the next well. | ||
When block <math>i</math> jumps by <math>\Delta</math>, both the elastic contribution and the driving spring relax. This gives | When block <math>i</math> jumps by <math>\Delta</math>, both the elastic contribution and the driving spring relax. This gives | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
\begin{cases} | \begin{cases} | ||
x_i = 0 \;\longrightarrow\; x_i = \Delta (1 + k_0), \\[6pt] | x_i = 0 \;\longrightarrow\; x_i = \Delta (1 + k_0), \\[6pt] | ||
| Line 42: | Line 33: | ||
\end{cases} | \end{cases} | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
The key feature of the quasi-static protocol is that <math>w</math> does not evolve during the avalanche: all subsequent destabilizations are triggered exclusively by previously unstable blocks. | The key feature of the quasi-static protocol is that <math>w</math> does not evolve during the avalanche: all subsequent destabilizations are triggered exclusively by previously unstable blocks. | ||
| Line 60: | Line 50: | ||
We shift the parabola by <math>w \to w + \mathrm{d}w</math>. Before the shift: | We shift the parabola by <math>w \to w + \mathrm{d}w</math>. Before the shift: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
x_i(w) = 1 - k_0(w - h_i(w)) + (h_{CM}(w) - h_i(w)). | x_i(w) = 1 - k_0(w - h_i(w)) + (h_{CM}(w) - h_i(w)). | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
We now follow the dynamics generation by generation. | We now follow the dynamics generation by generation. | ||
| Line 74: | Line 61: | ||
* Stable sites (<math>x_i > k_0dw</math>): | * Stable sites (<math>x_i > k_0dw</math>): | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
x_i^{t=1} = x_i - k_0dw. | x_i^{t=1} = x_i - k_0dw. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
* Sites with <math>0 < x_i < k_0dw</math> become unstable. | * Sites with <math>0 < x_i < k_0dw</math> become unstable. | ||
Since <math>dw</math> is infinitesimal, their fraction is | Since <math>dw</math> is infinitesimal, their fraction is | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
P_w(0)\,k_0dw. | P_w(0)\,k_0dw. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
They jump and stabilize at | They jump and stabilize at | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
x_i^{t=1} = \Delta(1+k_0). | x_i^{t=1} = \Delta(1+k_0). | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
=== Second generation === | === Second generation === | ||
The parabola is now fixed, but the center of mass has advanced: | The parabola is now fixed, but the center of mass has advanced: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
h_{CM} \to h_{CM} + \overline{\Delta}\,P_w(0)\,k_0dw. | h_{CM} \to h_{CM} + \overline{\Delta}\,P_w(0)\,k_0dw. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
Thus all sites shift again toward instability. | Thus all sites shift again toward instability. | ||
* Stable sites: | * Stable sites: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
x_i^{t=2} | x_i^{t=2} | ||
= | = | ||
| Line 121: | Line 94: | ||
\left(1+\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)\right)k_0dw. | \left(1+\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)\right)k_0dw. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
* | * Newly unstable fraction: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
P_w(0)k_0dw + \left(\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)\right)P_w(0)k_0dw . | P_w(0)k_0dw + \left(\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)\right)P_w(0)k_0dw . | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
=== Higher generations === | === Higher generations === | ||
Iterating produces a geometric amplification: | Iterating produces a geometric amplification: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
1+\overline{\Delta}P_w(0) | 1+\overline{\Delta}P_w(0) | ||
+(\overline{\Delta}P_w(0))^2+\dots | +(\overline{\Delta}P_w(0))^2+\dots | ||
| Line 142: | Line 109: | ||
\frac{1}{1-\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)}. | \frac{1}{1-\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)}. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
The quantity <math>\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)</math> plays the role of a '''branching ratio''': it measures the average number of sites destabilized by one instability. | The quantity <math>\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)</math> plays the role of a '''branching ratio''': it measures the average number of sites destabilized by one instability. | ||
We obtain | We obtain | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
x \to x - \frac{k_0}{1-\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)}\,dw. | x \to x - \frac{k_0}{1-\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)}\,dw. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
and a fraction | and a fraction | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
\frac{P_w(0)}{1-\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)}k_0dw | \frac{P_w(0)}{1-\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)}k_0dw | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
is reinjected at a random location <math>\Delta(1+k_0)</math>. | is reinjected at a random location <math>\Delta(1+k_0)</math>. | ||
This yields | This yields | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
\partial_w P_w(x) | \partial_w P_w(x) | ||
= | = | ||
| Line 178: | Line 134: | ||
\right]. | \right]. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
== Stationary solution == | == Stationary solution == | ||
At large <math>w</math>: | At large <math>w</math>: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
0= | 0= | ||
\partial_x P_{\text{stat}}(x) | \partial_x P_{\text{stat}}(x) | ||
| Line 192: | Line 145: | ||
g\!\left(\frac{x}{1+k_0}\right). | g\!\left(\frac{x}{1+k_0}\right). | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
Solving: | Solving: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
P_{\text{stat}}(x) | P_{\text{stat}}(x) | ||
= | = | ||
| Line 203: | Line 153: | ||
\int_{x/(1+k_0)}^\infty g(z)\,dz. | \int_{x/(1+k_0)}^\infty g(z)\,dz. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
=== Critical Force=== | === Critical Force === | ||
The | |||
The average distance from the threshold gives a simple relation for the force acting on the system, namely | |||
<math> | <math display="block"> | ||
F(k_0)= 1- \overline{x} = 1-(1+k_0) \frac{\overline{\Delta^2}}{2 \overline{\Delta}} | F(k_0)= 1- \overline{x} = 1-(1+k_0) \frac{\overline{\Delta^2}}{2 \overline{\Delta}}. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
In the limit | In the limit <math>k_0\to 0</math> we obtain: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
F_c = F(k_0\to 0)= 1 - \frac{1}{2}\frac{\overline{\Delta^2}}{\overline{\Delta}} | F_c = F(k_0\to 0)= 1 - \frac{1}{2}\frac{\overline{\Delta^2}}{\overline{\Delta}}. | ||
</math | </math> | ||
== Avalanches == | == Avalanches == | ||
| Line 223: | Line 171: | ||
Ordering sites by stability: | Ordering sites by stability: | ||
<math display="block">x_1<x_2<x_3<\dots</math> | |||
<math>x_1<x_2<x_3<\dots</math | |||
From order statistics: | From order statistics: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
\int_0^{x_1}P_w(t)dt=\frac1L. | \int_0^{x_1}P_w(t)dt=\frac1L. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
Thus | Thus | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
x_n \sim \frac{n}{LP_w(0)}. | x_n \sim \frac{n}{LP_w(0)}. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
Each instability gives kicks <math>\Delta/L</math>. | Each instability gives kicks <math>\Delta/L</math>. | ||
Compare mean kick and mean gap: | Compare mean kick and mean gap: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
\frac{\overline{\Delta}}{L} | \frac{\overline{\Delta}}{L} | ||
\quad \text{vs}\quad | \quad \text{vs}\quad | ||
\frac{1}{LP_w(0)}. | \frac{1}{LP_w(0)}. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
Criticality occurs when | Criticality occurs when | ||
<math display="block">\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)=1.</math> | |||
<math>\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)=1.</math | |||
Using the stationary solution: | Using the stationary solution: | ||
<math display="block">\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)=\frac{1}{1+k_0}.</math> | |||
<math>\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)=\frac{1}{1+k_0}.</math | |||
Hence: | Hence: | ||
| Line 276: | Line 206: | ||
Define the random increments | Define the random increments | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
\eta_1 = \frac{\Delta_1}{L}- x_1, | \eta_1 = \frac{\Delta_1}{L}- x_1, | ||
\quad | \quad | ||
| Line 286: | Line 214: | ||
\ldots | \ldots | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
and the associated random walk | and the associated random walk | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
X_n = \sum_{i=1}^n \eta_i. | X_n = \sum_{i=1}^n \eta_i. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
The mean increment is | The mean increment is | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
\overline{\eta} | \overline{\eta} | ||
= | = | ||
| Line 306: | Line 227: | ||
\frac{1}{L P_w(0)}. | \frac{1}{L P_w(0)}. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
An avalanche remains active as long as | An avalanche remains active as long as | ||
<math display="block">X_n > 0.</math> | |||
<math> | |||
X_n > 0. | |||
</math | |||
The avalanche size <math>S</math> is therefore the first-passage time of the walk to zero. | The avalanche size <math>S</math> is therefore the first-passage time of the walk to zero. | ||
| Line 321: | Line 236: | ||
At criticality, | At criticality, | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
\overline{\eta}=0, | \overline{\eta}=0, | ||
\qquad | \qquad | ||
\overline{\Delta}P_w(0)=1. | \overline{\Delta}P_w(0)=1. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
The jump distribution is symmetric and has zero drift. | The jump distribution is symmetric and has zero drift. We set <math>X_0=0</math>. | ||
We set <math>X_0=0</math>. | |||
Let | Let | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
Q(n)=\text{Prob}\left(X_1>0,\dots,X_n>0\right) | Q(n)=\text{Prob}\left(X_1>0,\dots,X_n>0\right) | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
be the survival probability of the walk. | be the survival probability of the walk. | ||
By the Sparre–Andersen theorem, for large <math>n</math>, | By the Sparre–Andersen theorem, for large <math>n</math>, | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
Q(n)\sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi n}}. | Q(n)\sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi n}}. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
The avalanche-size distribution is the first-passage probability: | The avalanche-size distribution is the first-passage probability: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
P(S)=Q(S)-Q(S+1). | P(S)=Q(S)-Q(S+1). | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
Using the asymptotic form, | Using the asymptotic form, | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
P(S) | P(S) | ||
\sim | \sim | ||
| Line 371: | Line 270: | ||
\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi}}\, S^{-3/2}. | \frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi}}\, S^{-3/2}. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
Thus, at criticality, | Thus, at criticality, | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
P(S)=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi}}\,S^{-3/2} | P(S)=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi}}\,S^{-3/2} | ||
\quad (S\gg1). | \quad (S\gg1). | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
The universal exponent is | The universal exponent is | ||
<math display="block">\tau=\frac{3}{2}.</math> | |||
<math>\tau=\frac{3}{2}.</math | |||
This power law is of Gutenberg–Richter type. | This power law is of Gutenberg–Richter type. | ||
| Line 393: | Line 285: | ||
Using the stationary solution, | Using the stationary solution, | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
\overline{\Delta}P_{\text{stat}}(0) | \overline{\Delta}P_{\text{stat}}(0) | ||
= | = | ||
\frac{1}{1+k_0}, | \frac{1}{1+k_0}, | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
the mean drift becomes | the mean drift becomes | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
\overline{\eta} | \overline{\eta} | ||
= | = | ||
| Line 411: | Line 297: | ||
k_0\,\frac{\overline{\Delta}}{L}. | k_0\,\frac{\overline{\Delta}}{L}. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
The random walk is weakly biased toward negative values. | The random walk is weakly biased toward negative values. For small <math>k_0</math>, the walk is only slightly tilted. | ||
For small <math>k_0</math>, the walk is only slightly tilted. | |||
In this case the distribution retains the critical form | In this case the distribution retains the critical form | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
P(S)\sim S^{-3/2} | P(S)\sim S^{-3/2} | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
up to a cutoff set by the inverse squared drift: | up to a cutoff set by the inverse squared drift: | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
<math> | |||
S_{\max}\sim k_0^{-2}. | S_{\max}\sim k_0^{-2}. | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
Revision as of 22:08, 1 March 2026
Avalanches at the Depinning Transition
In the previous lesson, we studied the dynamics of an interface in a disordered medium under a uniform external force . In a fully connected model, we derived the force–velocity characteristic and identified the critical depinning force .
In this lesson, we focus on the avalanches that occur precisely at the depinning transition. To do so, we introduce a new driving protocol: instead of controlling the external force , we control the position of the interface by coupling it to a parabolic potential. Each block is attracted toward a prescribed position through a spring of stiffness .
For simplicity, we restrict to the fully connected model, where the distance of block from its local instability threshold is
The first term represents the elastic pull exerted by the rest of the interface, while the second encodes the external driving through the spring.
Here is the center-of-mass position of the interface. Because the sum of all internal elastic forces vanishes, the total external force is balanced solely by the pinning forces. The effective external force can thus be written as a function of :
As is increased quasistatically, the force would increase if were fixed. When an avalanche takes place, jumps forward and suddenly decreases. However, in the steady state and in the thermodynamic limit , the force recovers a well-defined value. In the limit , this force tends to the critical depinning force ; at finite it lies slightly below .
Quasi-Static Protocol and Avalanche Definition
To study avalanches, the position is increased quasi-statically: it is shifted by an infinitesimal amount so that the block closest to its instability threshold reaches it,
This block is the epicenter of the avalanche: it becomes unstable and jumps to the next well.
When block jumps by , both the elastic contribution and the driving spring relax. This gives
The key feature of the quasi-static protocol is that does not evolve during the avalanche: all subsequent destabilizations are triggered exclusively by previously unstable blocks.
It is convenient to organize the avalanche into generations of unstable sites:
- First generation: the epicenter.
- Second generation: sites destabilized by it.
- Third generation: sites destabilized by generation two.
- And so on.
This hierarchical construction allows us to compute avalanche amplification step by step.
Derivation of the Evolution Equation
Our goal is to determine the distribution of distances to threshold at fixed .
We shift the parabola by . Before the shift:
We now follow the dynamics generation by generation.
First generation
During the shift, the center of mass has not yet moved.
- Stable sites ():
- Sites with become unstable.
Since is infinitesimal, their fraction is
They jump and stabilize at
Second generation
The parabola is now fixed, but the center of mass has advanced:
Thus all sites shift again toward instability.
- Stable sites:
- Newly unstable fraction:
Higher generations
Iterating produces a geometric amplification:
The quantity plays the role of a branching ratio: it measures the average number of sites destabilized by one instability.
We obtain and a fraction is reinjected at a random location .
This yields
Stationary solution
At large :
Solving:
Critical Force
The average distance from the threshold gives a simple relation for the force acting on the system, namely
In the limit we obtain:
Avalanches
We consider an avalanche starting from a single unstable site .
Ordering sites by stability:
From order statistics:
Thus
Each instability gives kicks .
Compare mean kick and mean gap:
Criticality occurs when
Using the stationary solution:
Hence:
- → subcritical.
- → critical.
Mapping to a Random Walk
Define the random increments and the associated random walk
The mean increment is
An avalanche remains active as long as
The avalanche size is therefore the first-passage time of the walk to zero.
Critical case (k₀ = 0)
At criticality,
The jump distribution is symmetric and has zero drift. We set .
Let be the survival probability of the walk.
By the Sparre–Andersen theorem, for large ,
The avalanche-size distribution is the first-passage probability:
Using the asymptotic form,
Thus, at criticality,
The universal exponent is
This power law is of Gutenberg–Richter type.
Finite k₀ > 0 (Subcritical case)
Using the stationary solution, the mean drift becomes
The random walk is weakly biased toward negative values. For small , the walk is only slightly tilted.
In this case the distribution retains the critical form up to a cutoff set by the inverse squared drift: