Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 84 references

The impact of stochastic resetting on resource allocation: The case of Reallocating geometric Brownian motion

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Stochastic resetting tames the mean-repulsive regime of the Reallocating Geometric Brownian Motion, making both first and second moments stationary above a critical rate.

desk verdict A useful extension with a correct-looking moment classification, but the advertised infinite-self-averaging-time result rests on cross-moment equations with a factor-of-two resetting error. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.12390 v1 pith:DL26PLBL submitted 2024-11-19 cond-mat.stat-mech

Petar Jolakoski , Pece Trajanovski , Arnab Pal , Viktor Stojkoski , Ljupco Kocarev , Trifce Sandev This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mech MSC 60H1060J6082C31 PACS 05.40.-a05.10.Gg
keywords stochasticresettingreallocatinggeometricBrownianmotionnon-ergodicityself-averagingwealthinequalityeconomicmobilityFokker-Planckequationjump-diffusionprocess
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Stochastic resetting—periodically returning each agent's resource share to a common baseline—can stabilize the otherwise non-ergodic, mean-repulsive regime of the Reallocating Geometric Brownian Motion (RGBM), a standard model of resource redistribution in economics, ecology, and evolution. The paper establishes a threshold classification: for negative reallocation $\tau<0$, the first moment converges when the resetting rate exceeds $\mu-\tau$, and the second moment converges when it exceeds $2(\mu-\tau)+\sigma^2$. Above the larger threshold the full distribution becomes stationary and the population average tracks the ensemble average indefinitely, so the process behaves as if it were ergodic. This matters because it turns an unstable, concentrating dynamics into one whose mean and spread are predictable, and in wealth settings it shows a trade-off: resetting reduces inequality and raises mobility, but also lowers total growth.

What carries the argument

The key object is the jump-diffusion representation of RGBM with resetting, where a Poisson process with intensity $r$ sends the process back to $x_0$ while the remaining time the dynamics follow RGBM (Eq. 4). Itô's formula applied with $f(x)=x$ and $f(x)=x_ix_j$ yields coupled moment equations for $v(t)=E[x_i^2]$ and $q(t)=E[x_ix_j]$, which close under the self-averaging ansatz $E[x]=\langle x\rangle_N$. The relative variance $R_N(t)=\mathrm{var}(\langle x\rangle_N)/E[\langle x\rangle_N]^2$ then serves as the self-averaging criterion: the critical resetting rate is the one that makes $R_N(t)$ vanish in the long-time limit. Requiring the second-moment exponent to be negative gives $r_c=2(\mu-\tau)+\sigma^2$, and the same condition makes the Fokker--Planck equation (19) well defined with a stationary mean field.

What would settle it

Simulate $N$ agents with $\tau<0$ and $r>2(\mu-\tau)+\sigma^2$, compute the relative variance of the population mean $R_N(t)$ at long times, and compare the measured stationary mean and MSD with Eqs. (23)--(24); if $R_N(t)$ does not decay to zero or the moments do not match, the claimed infinite self-averaging time and stationary moments are false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that in RGBM with resetting and negative reallocation, the long-time behavior is fully classified by two thresholds. For $r<\mu-\tau$, the process keeps the non-ergodic, diverging character of standard RGBM. For $\mu-\tau<r<2(\mu-\tau)+\sigma^2$, the mean reaches a stationary value but the variance still diverges, so no stationary distribution exists. For $r>2(\mu-\tau)+\sigma^2$, both the first and second moments converge to the closed-form stationary values in Eqs. (23)--(24), the Fokker--Planck density stabilizes, and the self-averaging time becomes effectively infinite, meaning the population average equals the ensemble average for all practical purposes. The paper backs this with numerical simulations and with mobility statistics: rank correlation and earnings elasticity fall as resetting increases, and the probability of top-1% states decreases and stabilizes.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation leans on the assumption that the population average equals the ensemble average, $E[x]=\langle x\rangle_N$, including after replacing the time-dependent mean field by its stationary value in the Fokker--Planck equation; if this equality fails in the stabilized regime, the derived moments and thresholds do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Above $r_c$, the stationary mean and mean-square displacement are given by the explicit formulas in Eqs. (23)--(24), so one can compute long-run resource levels and dispersion without simulation.
  • For resetting rates between $\mu-\tau$ and $r_c$, the mean is stationary but the variance diverges, so interventions that stabilize only the average still leave the distribution itself unstable.
  • In the stabilized regime, the equality between population average and ensemble average holds indefinitely, which makes the non-ergodic RGBM behave like an ergodic system for practical measurements.
  • In wealth-redistribution applications, increasing the resetting rate above $r_c$ lowers wealth concentration (fewer top-1% states) and increases mobility, at the cost of a smaller total pool.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same threshold logic applied to the $n$th moment would predict convergence for $r>n(\mu-\tau)+n(n-1)\sigma^2/2$; checking this numerically would reveal whether the stabilized distribution is fully captured by its first two moments or retains heavy tails.
  • The paper's trade-off between equality and growth suggests an optimal resetting rate for a social-welfare objective that weights both concentration and total wealth; the authors flag this balance but do not solve the optimization.
  • One could test the stabilization mechanism on other non-ergodic multiplicative processes, such as resetting to a distribution rather than a point, to see whether the threshold structure survives.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper analyzes the Reallocating Geometric Brownian Motion (RGBM) model subject to stochastic resetting, focusing on the negative reallocation regime (τ<0) where the standard model is non-stationary and non-ergodic. The authors derive moment equations, identify three long-time regimes for the first and second moments as functions of the resetting rate r, and compute a relative variance R_N(t) to argue that beyond a critical resetting rate the self-averaging time becomes effectively infinite. They complement the analysis with numerical simulations and apply the results to wealth mobility and inequality measures.

Significance. If the central claims were fully substantiated, the paper would be a useful contribution to the stochastic resetting literature: it generalizes srGBM results to a mean-field reallocation model, provides a simple regime diagram (Table 1), and connects the theory to economic mobility measures. The numerical simulations, the explicit GitHub code, and the recovery of the τ=0 srGBM limit are strengths. However, the analytical derivation of the self-averaging time rests on cross-moment equations that contain resetting terms inconsistent with the model's dynamics, and the ensemble mean is given by two incompatible expressions; these issues must be resolved before the regime classification and the 'infinite self-averaging time' claim can be accepted.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3.1, Eqs. (14)-(16)] The resetting contributions in the cross-moment equations are inconsistent with Eq. (8). For f = x_i^2, Eq. (8) yields a reset term r(x_0^2 - v), so dv/dt should contain -r v, not -2r v as in Eq. (15). For f = x_i x_j with independent per-agent resetting, the jump contribution is 2r x_0 E[x] - 2r q (and r(x_0^2 - q) for common resetting), whereas Eq. (15) uses r x_0^2 - 2r q, matching neither mechanism. As a result, the relative variance R_N(t) in Eq. (16) and the associated critical resetting rate for t_c → ∞ are not reliably derived. A direct witness is the τ = 0 limit, where Eq. (15) gives v_st = r x_0^2/[2(r-μ)-σ^2] instead of the standard srGBM result r x_0^2/(r-2μ-σ^2), a discrepancy of more than a factor of 3 for the parameters used in the paper (μ=0.021, σ^2=0.01, r=0.1). This leaves the analytical support for the 'effectively infinite self-averaging time' claim in Sec. 3.1 and Table 1 currently unsupported.
  2. [Sec. 3 and Sec. 4.1, Eqs. (10) and (21)] The paper gives two different expressions for the ensemble mean that are not equivalent for τ≠0. Eq. (10) follows from Eq. (8) under the self-averaging closure E[⟨x⟩_N]=E[x] and yields dE[x]/dt = (μ-r)E[x] + r x_0, with no τ in the transient rate. Eq. (21), derived from the Fokker-Planck equation (19) with ⟨x⟩_N replaced by its stationary value, has transient rate r - μ + τ. The exact finite-N moment equation for m(t)=E[x_i] from Eq. (4) gives the Eq. (10) form because the τ terms cancel when E[⟨x⟩_N]=E[x]. Consequently, the first row of Table 1 (convergence for r > μ-τ) appears incorrect; the mean converges for r > μ. This changes the boundary between the first and second regimes, although the stationary value (Eq. (23)) is unaffected.
  3. [Sec. 4.1, Eq. (19)] The Fokker-Planck equation (19) substitutes the stationary mean-field value ⟨x⟩_N = r/(r-μ) x_0 (Eq. (20)) into the time-dependent drift. This is only justified in the long-time stationary limit, not for the transient dynamics. Using Eq. (19) to derive the time-dependent moments (21)-(22) and to compare with simulations (Fig. 3) is therefore not valid in the transient; this is the source of the spurious τ dependence in the mean that leads to the incorrect threshold in Table 1.
  4. [Sec. 3.1] The derivation of the critical resetting rate mixes exact finite-N moment equations with the self-averaging assumption (Eq. (11)) in a way that is not transparent. Equations (14)-(15) for v(t) and q(t) close exactly for finite N without invoking Eq. (11), whereas the denominator E[x_i(t)] in Eq. (16) is taken from Eq. (10), which does assume E[⟨x⟩_N]=E[x]. The paper should separate these ingredients and state which results are exact and which are self-consistent approximations; as written, the logic is difficult to verify and the 'infinite self-averaging time' conclusion relies on a closure that is itself under test.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (11)] There is a stray equals sign in the displayed relation; it should read E[f(x)] = lim_{N→∞} ⟨f(x)⟩_N.
  2. [Eq. (14)] In the second line of Eq. (14), the second sum should be over k≠j E[x_k x_j] rather than over k≠j E[x_k x_i].
  3. [Sec. 3.1] The condition for t_c = ∞ should be stated precisely, e.g., R_N(t) < 1 for all t, and an explicit formula or numerical value for the critical rate r_c should be provided rather than only plots.
  4. [Sec. 2] The notation ⟨x⟩_N is described as both 'ensemble or population average' and later as the empirical average; please clarify the distinction between ⟨x⟩_N and E[x] throughout.
  5. [Fig. 5] The x-axis label in the left panel appears truncated ('0 10'); please check the axis range and labels.
  6. [Sec. 4.2] The text states that the critical point for variance convergence occurs at r_c = 2(μ-τ)+σ^2, but this is not derived from the corrected moment equations; please ensure consistency with the corrected R_N(t) analysis.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Moderate partial circularity: the resetting rate rc that makes self-averaging 'infinite' is computed from moment equations that were closed with the self-averaging ansatz (Eq. 11) meant to be validated; no fitted predictions or uniquely load-bearing self-citation chain found.

  1. self definitional [Section 3, Eq. (11) and Section 3.1, Eqs. (12)-(16)]
    "where we utilized E[f (x)] = lim N →∞ = ⟨f (x)⟩N (11) However, due to the non-ergodic nature of the negative reallocation regime of RGBM, Eq. 11 will be valid until some critical self-averaging time, tc, but with the introduction of stochastic resetting, for some value of the resetting rate rc, the assumption will be applicable always (tc → ∞). The calculation of rc is the focus of the next section which will play a key role in calculating the moments."

    The rate rc is defined as the value at which Eq. 11 (E[f(x)] = ⟨f(x)⟩_N) becomes permanently valid. The relative variance RN(t) used to locate rc is constructed from v(t) and q(t), whose equations (Eq. 15) are obtained by inserting f = x_i^2 and f = x_i x_j into Eq. 8 and closing the mean-field terms τE[⟨x⟩_N ∂f/∂x_i] with Eq. 11. Therefore the criterion 'RN(t)→0, so self-averaging holds' is evaluated inside a model that already assumed self-averaging. rc is the stability boundary of the assumed mean-field closure, not an independent first-principles prediction. The paper is transparent about this, which makes it a self-consistency analysis rather than a hidden fit.

  2. self definitional [Section 4.1, Eqs. (19)-(20) and Table 1]
    "In the self-averaging regime, when Eq. 18 is true, the Fokker-Planck equation (2) has the following form: ... where we have substituted ⟨x(t)⟩N = r/(r − µ) x0. (20) ... To ensure the long-time limit of the mean and MSD converge, the conditions r > µ−τ and r > 2(µ−τ )+ σ^2, respectively, must be met. This gives rise to three regimes ... summarized in Table 1."

    The stationary mean field Eq. 20 is substituted into the Fokker-Planck equation before deriving the second moment and the Table 1 convergence threshold. Eq. 20 is itself the first moment obtained under the self-averaging assumption (Eq. 11, restated as Eq. 18). Hence the condition r > 2(µ−τ)+σ² for a finite stationary second moment is the stability condition of a solution constructed under the assumption whose validity it is supposed to establish. The 'infinite self-averaging time' and 'stabilized distribution' claims therefore inherit the ansatz rather than being independently derived.

full rationale

The paper contains no fitted parameters, no data-fitting disguised as prediction, and no uniqueness theorem imported from the authors. The moment and regime calculations are analytically explicit and are checked against simulations for the mean, MSD, and PDFs (Figs. 3-5). The main circularity concern is the self-averaging ansatz Eq. 11: it is used to close the first- and second-moment equations, and the same closed equations are then used to calculate the resetting rate rc at which the ansatz supposedly becomes permanently valid. This is a legitimate self-consistency analysis, but it means the headline result — effectively infinite self-averaging time in the stable regime — is equivalent to stability of the mean-field-closed moment equations, not an independent consequence of the resetting dynamics. The paper is explicit about the assumption, and the moment thresholds are nontrivial, so the partial circularity is moderate (score 4). A separate mathematical concern, not scored as circularity: Eq. 15 appears inconsistent with Eq. 8 under the paper's own common-resetting prescription (the resetting coefficients in the v and q equations differ from those obtained by applying Eq. 8 to f=x_i² and f=x_i x_j), which would undermine the quantitative RN(t) claim; this is a correctness risk rather than a circularity because the issue is an erroneous or mis-cited intermediate step, not a conclusion that reduces to its premise.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the mean-field self-averaging ansatz and standard jump-diffusion Itô calculus. No new entities, forces, or fitted parameters are introduced. The main caveat is the unproven replacement of the population average by the ensemble average, which is the entry point for potential circularity.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Mean-field replacement <x>_N = E[x] (self-averaging) in the stochastic differential equation (Eq. 4 and Eq. 11).
    Used to close the moment equations and the Fokker-Planck equation; the paper checks consistency with the relative variance but does not prove the ansatz.
  • domain assumption The Fokker-Planck equation for the resetting process (Eq. 19) uses the stationary mean value r/(r-mu) x0 for the time-dependent mean field.
    Only valid at long times; used to derive time-dependent moments Eq. 21-22.
  • standard math Standard Itô calculus for jump-diffusion processes and the Poisson resetting representation (Eq. 3), following [69] and [77].
    Background mathematical machinery, not original to this paper.
  • domain assumption The large population limit N -> infinity is taken for the analytical moments; finite-size effects are only addressed through the relative variance RN(t).
    Simulations use finite N, but the analytical results assume infinite N.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The impact of stochastic resetting on resource allocation: The case of Reallocating geometric Brownian motion." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DL26PLBL

@misc{pith2026241112390,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The impact of stochastic resetting on resource allocation: The case of Reallocating geometric Brownian motion},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DL26PLBL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.12390}
}
read the original abstract

We study the effects of stochastic resetting on the Reallocating geometric Brownian motion (RGBM), an established model for resource redistribution relevant to systems such as population dynamics, evolutionary processes, economic activity, and even cosmology. The RGBM model is inherently non-stationary and non-ergodic, leading to complex resource redistribution dynamics. By introducing stochastic resetting, which periodically returns the system to a predetermined state, we examine how this mechanism modifies RGBM behavior. Our analysis uncovers distinct long-term regimes determined by the interplay between the resetting rate, the strength of resource redistribution, and standard geometric Brownian motion parameters: the drift and the noise amplitude. Notably, we identify a critical resetting rate beyond which the self-averaging time becomes effectively infinite. In this regime, the first two moments are stationary, indicating a stabilized distribution of an initially unstable, mean-repulsive process. We demonstrate that optimal resetting can effectively balance growth and redistribution, reducing inequality in the resource distribution. These findings help us understand better the management of resource dynamics in uncertain environments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.12390 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Mean wealth behavior in different regimes. Numerical estimations for the median, mean, maximum and minimum of the mean wealth ⟨x(t)⟩N for a super sample of 103 simulations with N = 10, µ = 0.021, σ2 = 0.01, τ = −0.01. a) No resetting, r = 0, b) µ − τ < r < 2(µ − τ ) + σ 2 and c) r > 2(µ − τ ) + σ 2 . tc is critical self-averaging time, which for c) is practically infinite. The gray lines in the background are sample… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Self-averaging critical time as a function of the resetting rate, for different number [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. MEAN and MSD. Parameters: µ = 0.021, σ = √ 0.01, dt = 0.01. The resetting rates for τ = {−0.01, −0.05, −0.1} plots are r = {0.12, 0.22, 0.32} respectively, chosen to ensure the convergence of both moments. The results are the average of 103 simulation runs. This long-term behavior as a function of the resetting rate is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Long time MEAN and MSD. Parameters: µ = 0.021, σ = √ 0.01, τ = −0.01, T = 104 . 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Numerical PDFs. Parameters: µ = 0.021, σ = √ 0.01, τ = −0.01, r = 0.15 for different times. On the other hand, although the properties of the model for τ > 0 are well known, we calculate the stationary PDF in this regime under resetting using our analytical approach. T…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Numerical solution of (19) (solid line) and simulation with process (25) (markers). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Degree of freezing. Main plot shows the long time (t = 103 ) probability of observing an agent that is among the largest 1% as a function of the resetting rate. The median results are shown, and the filled region is the mininum and maximum of 103 simulations. Inset plo…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Mobility in the non-ergodic regime of RGBM. Spearman’s rank correlation as a function of the resetting rate for different values of τ (left). Intragenerational elasticity (IGE) as a function of the resetting rate and τ (right). The median results of 103 simulations are…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages

  1. [67]

    Geometric brownian motion under stochastic resetting: A stationary yet nonergodic process

    Viktor Stojkoski, Trifce Sandev, Ljupco Kocarev, and Arnab Pal. Geometric brownian motion under stochastic resetting: A stationary yet nonergodic process. Physical Review E, 104(1):014121, 2021

    work page 2021

  2. [1]

    Wealth inequality and the er- godic hypothesis: Evidence from the united states

    Yonatan Berman, Ole Peters, and Alexander Adamou. Wealth inequality and the er- godic hypothesis: Evidence from the united states. Forthcoming in Journal of Income Distribution, 2020

    2020

  3. [2]

    Wealth condensation in a simple model of economy

    Jean-Philippe Bouchaud and Marc M´ ezard. Wealth condensation in a simple model of economy. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 282(3-4):536–545, 2000

    2000

  4. [3]

    Correlation and relaxation times for a stochastic process with a fat-tailed steady-state distribution

    Z Liu and Rostislav A Serota. Correlation and relaxation times for a stochastic process with a fat-tailed steady-state distribution. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 474:301–311, 2017

    2017

  5. [4]

    Dynamical optimization theory of a diversified portfolio

    Matteo Marsili, Sergei Maslov, and Yi-Cheng Zhang. Dynamical optimization theory of a diversified portfolio. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 253(1- 4):403–418, 1998

    1998

  6. [5]

    Fokker–planck equations in the modeling of socio-economic phenomena

    Giulia Furioli, Ada Pulvirenti, Elide Terraneo, and Giuseppe Toscani. Fokker–planck equations in the modeling of socio-economic phenomena. Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences, 27(01):115–158, 2017

    work page 2017

  7. [6]

    MACARTHUR and EDW ARD O

    ROBERT H. MACARTHUR and EDW ARD O. WILSON. The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton University Press, rev - revised edition, 1967. 19

    work page 1967

  8. [7]

    Biodiversity as spatial insur- ance in heterogeneous landscapes

    Michel Loreau, Nicolas Mouquet, and Andrew Gonzalez. Biodiversity as spatial insur- ance in heterogeneous landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(22):12765–12770, 2003

    work page 2003

Show all 84 references
  1. [8]

    Simon A. Levin. Dispersion and population interactions. The American Naturalist, 108(960):207–228, 1974

    1974

  2. [9]

    Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity

    Peter Chesson. Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 31(Volume 31, 2000):343–366, 2000

    2000

  3. [10]

    Robert D. Holt. Population dynamics in two-patch environments: Some anomalous con- sequences of an optimal habitat distribution.Theoretical Population Biology, 28(2):181– 208, 1985

    1985

  4. [11]

    Evolutionary rate at the molecular level

    Motoo Kimura. Evolutionary rate at the molecular level. Nature, 217:624–626, 1968

    1968

  5. [12]

    Evolution in mendelian populations

    Sewall Wright. Evolution in mendelian populations. Genetics, 16(2):97–159, 03 1931

    1931

  6. [13]

    The causes of molecular evolution, volume 2

    John H Gillespie. The causes of molecular evolution, volume 2. Oxford University Press, USA, 1991

    1991

  7. [14]

    Crow and M

    J.F. Crow and M. Kimura. An introduction to population genetics theory. New York etc, Harper and Row, 1970

    1970

  8. [15]

    W.J. Ewens. Mathematical population genetics. Springer, 2004

    2004

  9. [16]

    Explore or exploit? a generic model and an exactly solvable case

    Thomas Gueudr´ e, Alexander Dobrinevski, and Jean-Philippe Bouchaud. Explore or exploit? a generic model and an exactly solvable case. Physical review letters, 112(5):050602, 2014

    2014

  10. [17]

    New trends in turbulence turbulence: Nouveaux aspects

    U Frisch and J Bec. New trends in turbulence turbulence: Nouveaux aspects. Les Houches-´Ecole d’´Et´ ede Physique Th´ eorique,edited by M. Lesieur, A. Yaglom, F. David (Springer, Berlin, 2002), 74, 2001

    2002

  11. [18]

    Burgers turbulence.Physics reports, 447(1-2):1– 66, 2007

    J´ er´ emie Bec and Konstantin Khanin. Burgers turbulence.Physics reports, 447(1-2):1– 66, 2007

    2007

  12. [19]

    Kinetic roughening of growing surfaces

    Joachim Krug and Herbert Spohn. Kinetic roughening of growing surfaces. Solids far from equilibrium, 1, 1991

    1991

  13. [20]

    Cambridge university press, 1995

    A-L Barab´ asi and Harry Eugene Stanley.Fractal concepts in surface growth. Cambridge university press, 1995

    1995

  14. [21]

    Kinetic roughening phenomena, stochastic growth, directed polymers and all that

    Timothy Halpin-Healy and Yi-Cheng Zhang. Kinetic roughening phenomena, stochastic growth, directed polymers and all that. aspects of multidisciplinary statistical mechan- ics. Physics reports, 254(4-6):215–414, 1995

    1995

  15. [22]

    Van Kampen

    N.G. Van Kampen. Stochastic Processes in Physics and Chemistry. North-Holland Personal Library. Elsevier Science, 2011. 20

    2011

  16. [23]

    Birkhoff

    George D. Birkhoff. Proof of the ergodic theorem. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 17(12):656–660, 1931

    1931

  17. [24]

    E. G. D. Cohen and G. Gallavotti. Journal of Statistical Physics, 96(5/6):1343–1349, 1999

    1999

  18. [25]

    Peters and W

    O. Peters and W. Klein. Ergodicity breaking in geometric brownian motion. Phys. Rev. Lett., 110:100603, Mar 2013

    2013

  19. [26]

    Small random perturbations of dynamical systems and the definition of attractors

    David Ruelle. Small random perturbations of dynamical systems and the definition of attractors. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 82:137–151, 1981

    1981

  20. [27]

    Strange kinetics of single molecules in living cells

    Eli Barkai, Yuval Garini, and Ralf Metzler. Strange kinetics of single molecules in living cells. Physics Today, 65(8):29–35, 08 2012

    2012

  21. [28]

    Weak ergodicity breaking and aging in disordered-systems

    Jean-Philippe Bouchaud. Weak ergodicity breaking and aging in disordered-systems. Journal de physique I, 2, 09 1992

    1992

  22. [29]

    Aging continuous time random walks

    Eli Barkai and Yuan-Chung Cheng. Aging continuous time random walks. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 118(14):6167–6178, 04 2003

    2003

  23. [30]

    Ergodicity breaking in wealth dynamics: The case of reallocating geometric brownian motion

    Viktor Stojkoski and Marko Karbevski. Ergodicity breaking in wealth dynamics: The case of reallocating geometric brownian motion. Physical Review E, 105(2):024107, 2022

    2022

  24. [31]

    Theory of financial risk and derivative pricing: from statistical physics to risk management

    Jean-Philippe Bouchaud and Marc Potters. Theory of financial risk and derivative pricing: from statistical physics to risk management. Cambridge university press, 2003

    2003

  25. [32]

    Evans and Satya N

    Martin R. Evans and Satya N. Majumdar. Diffusion with stochastic resetting. Phys. Rev. Lett., 106:160601, Apr 2011

    2011

  26. [33]

    Diffusion with optimal resetting

    Martin R Evans and Satya N Majumdar. Diffusion with optimal resetting. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 44(43):435001, oct 2011

    2011

  27. [34]

    Stochastic resetting and applications

    Martin R Evans, Satya N Majumdar, and Gr´ egory Schehr. Stochastic resetting and applications. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 53(19):193001, April 2020

    2020

  28. [35]

    Diffusion in a potential landscape with stochastic resetting

    Arnab Pal. Diffusion in a potential landscape with stochastic resetting. Physical Review E, 91(1):012113, 2015

    2015

  29. [36]

    Optimal search behavior and classic foraging theory

    F Bartumeus and J Catalan. Optimal search behavior and classic foraging theory. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 42(43):434002, oct 2009

    2009

  30. [37]

    Search with home returns provides advantage under high uncertainty

    Arnab Pal, Lukasz Ku´ smierz, and Shlomi Reuveni. Search with home returns provides advantage under high uncertainty. Phys. Rev. Res., 2:043174, Nov 2020

    2020

  31. [38]

    Role of substrate unbinding in michaelis–menten enzymatic reactions

    Shlomi Reuveni, Michael Urbakh, and Joseph Klafter. Role of substrate unbinding in michaelis–menten enzymatic reactions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(12):4391–4396, 2014. 21

    2014

  32. [39]

    First passage under restart

    Arnab Pal and Shlomi Reuveni. First passage under restart. Physical review letters, 118(3):030603, 2017

    2017

  33. [40]

    W.J. Bell. Searching Behaviour: The behavioural ecology of finding resources. Chapman & Hall Animal Behaviour Series. Springer Netherlands, 2012

    2012

  34. [41]

    Diffusion under time-dependent resetting

    Arnab Pal, Anupam Kundu, and Martin R Evans. Diffusion under time-dependent resetting. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 49(22):225001, apr 2016

    2016

  35. [42]

    Subdiffusive continuous-time random walks with stochastic resetting

    Lukasz Ku´ smierz and Ewa Gudowska-Nowak. Subdiffusive continuous-time random walks with stochastic resetting. Phys. Rev. E, 99:052116, May 2019

    2019

  36. [43]

    Controlling particle currents with evaporation and resetting from an interval

    Gennaro Tucci, Andrea Gambassi, Shamik Gupta, and ´Edgar Rold´ an. Controlling particle currents with evaporation and resetting from an interval. Phys. Rev. Res., 2:043138, Oct 2020

    2020

  37. [44]

    Autocorrelation functions and ergodicity in diffusion with stochastic resetting

    Viktor Stojkoski, Trifce Sandev, Ljupco Kocarev, and Arnab Pal. Autocorrelation functions and ergodicity in diffusion with stochastic resetting. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 55(10):104003, feb 2022

    2022

  38. [45]

    Cherstvy, Wei Wang, Ralf Metzler, and Igor M

    Deepak Vinod, Andrey G. Cherstvy, Wei Wang, Ralf Metzler, and Igor M. Sokolov. Nonergodicity of reset geometric brownian motion. Phys. Rev. E, 105:L012106, Jan 2022

    2022

  39. [46]

    Income inequality and mobility in geometric brownian motion with stochastic resetting: theoretical results and empirical evidence of non-ergodicity

    Viktor Stojkoski, Petar Jolakoski, Arnab Pal, Trifce Sandev, Ljupco Kocarev, and Ralf Metzler. Income inequality and mobility in geometric brownian motion with stochastic resetting: theoretical results and empirical evidence of non-ergodicity. Philosophical Transactions of the...

    2022

  40. [47]

    Resetting random walks in one-dimensional lattices with sinks

    L N Christophorov. Resetting random walks in one-dimensional lattices with sinks. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 55(15):155006, mar 2022

    2022

  41. [48]

    First passage under restart for discrete space and time: Application to one-dimensional confined lattice random walks

    Ofek Lauber Bonomo and Arnab Pal. First passage under restart for discrete space and time: Application to one-dimensional confined lattice random walks. Phys. Rev. E, 103:052129, May 2021

    2021

  42. [49]

    Riascos, Denis Boyer, Paul Herringer, and Jos´ e L

    Alejandro P. Riascos, Denis Boyer, Paul Herringer, and Jos´ e L. Mateos. Random walks on networks with stochastic resetting. Phys. Rev. E, 101:062147, Jun 2020

    2020

  43. [50]

    A first passage under resetting approach to income dynamics

    Petar Jolakoski, Arnab Pal, Trifce Sandev, Ljupco Kocarev, Ralf Metzler, and Viktor Stojkoski. A first passage under resetting approach to income dynamics. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 175:113921, 2023

    2023

  44. [51]

    Random walks on complex networks with first- passage resetting

    Feng Huang and Hanshuang Chen. Random walks on complex networks with first- passage resetting. Phys. Rev. E, 103:062132, Jun 2021. 22

    2021

  45. [52]

    Rose, Hugo Touchette, Igor Lesanovsky, and Juan P

    Dominic C. Rose, Hugo Touchette, Igor Lesanovsky, and Juan P. Garrahan. Spectral properties of simple classical and quantum reset processes. Phys. Rev. E, 98:022129, Aug 2018

    2018

  46. [53]

    Instability in the quantum restart problem

    Ruoyu Yin, Qingyuan Wang, and Eli Barkai. Instability in the quantum restart problem. Phys. Rev. E, 109:064150, Jun 2024

    2024

  47. [54]

    Experimental realization of diffusion with stochastic resetting

    Ofir Tal-Friedman, Arnab Pal, Amandeep Sekhon, Shlomi Reuveni, and Yael Roichman. Experimental realization of diffusion with stochastic resetting. The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters, 11(17):7350–7355, 2020. PMID: 32787296

    2020

  48. [55]

    Majumdar, and Sergio Ciliberto

    Benjamin Besga, Alfred Bovon, Artyom Petrosyan, Satya N. Majumdar, and Sergio Ciliberto. Optimal mean first-passage time for a brownian searcher subjected to reset- ting: Experimental and theoretical results. Phys. Rev. Res., 2:032029, Jul 2020

    2020

  49. [56]

    Ornstein-uhlenbeck process and generalizations: Particle dynamics under comb constraints and stochastic resetting

    Pece Trajanovski, Petar Jolakoski, Kiril Zelenkovski, Alexander Iomin, Ljupco Kocarev, and Trifce Sandev. Ornstein-uhlenbeck process and generalizations: Particle dynamics under comb constraints and stochastic resetting. Phys. Rev. E, 107:054129, May 2023

    2023

  50. [57]

    Steady-state moments under resetting to a distribution

    Kristian Stølevik Olsen. Steady-state moments under resetting to a distribution. Physical Review E, 108(4):044120, 2023

    2023

  51. [58]

    Orn- stein–uhlenbeck process on three-dimensional comb under stochastic resetting

    Pece Trajanovski, Petar Jolakoski, Ljupco Kocarev, and Trifce Sandev. Orn- stein–uhlenbeck process on three-dimensional comb under stochastic resetting. Mathematics, 11(16), 2023

    2023

  52. [59]

    Universal framework for record ages under restart

    Aanjaneya Kumar and Arnab Pal. Universal framework for record ages under restart. Physical Review Letters, 130(15):157101, 2023

    2023

  53. [60]

    Anomalous diffusion in random-walks with memory-induced relocations

    Axel Mas´ o-Puigdellosas, Daniel Campos, and Vicen¸ c M´ endez. Anomalous diffusion in random-walks with memory-induced relocations. Frontiers in Physics, 7:112, 2019

    2019

  54. [61]

    Mitigating long queues and waiting times with service resetting

    Ofek Lauber Bonomo, Arnab Pal, and Shlomi Reuveni. Mitigating long queues and waiting times with service resetting. PNAS nexus, 1(3):pgac070, 2022

    2022

  55. [62]

    Queues with resetting: a perspective.Journal of Physics: Complexity, 5(2):021001, 2024

    Reshmi Roy, Arup Biswas, and Arnab Pal. Queues with resetting: a perspective.Journal of Physics: Complexity, 5(2):021001, 2024

    2024

  56. [63]

    Resetting dynamics in a confining potential

    RK Singh, R Metzler, and T Sandev. Resetting dynamics in a confining potential. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 53(50):505003, 2020

    2020

  57. [64]

    Random resetting in search problems

    Arnab Pal, Viktor Stojkoski, and Trifce Sandev. Random resetting in search problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.12057, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  58. [65]

    Stochastic resetting: A (very) brief review

    Shamik Gupta and Arun M Jayannavar. Stochastic resetting: A (very) brief review. Frontiers in Physics, 10:789097, 2022

    2022

  59. [66]

    Measures of physical mixing evaluate the economic mobility of the typical individual

    Viktor Stojkoski. Measures of physical mixing evaluate the economic mobility of the typical individual. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 180:114567, 2024. 23

    2024

  60. [68]

    The fokker-planck equation, 1996

    H Risken. The fokker-planck equation, 1996

    1996

  61. [69]

    Stochastic representation of processes with resetting

    Marcin Magdziarz and Kacper Ta´ zbierski. Stochastic representation of processes with resetting. Phys. Rev. E, 106:014147, Jul 2022

    2022

  62. [70]

    S. Ken-Iti. L´ evyProcesses and Infinitely Divisible Distributions. Cambridge studies in advanced mathematics. Cambridge University Press, 1999

    1999

  63. [71]

    On the electrodynamics of moving bodies

    Albert Einstein. On the electrodynamics of moving bodies. j-ANN-PHYS-1900-4, 322(10):891–921, 1905

    1900

  64. [72]

    Smoluchowski

    M. Smoluchowski. Zur kinetischen theorie der brownschen molekularbewegung und der suspensionen. Annalen der Physik, 326:756 – 780, 03 2006

    2006

  65. [73]

    Bachelier

    L. Bachelier. Th´ eorie de la sp´ eculation. Annales scientifiques de l’´Ecole Normale Sup´ erieure, 3e s´ erie, 17:21–86, 1900

    1900

  66. [74]

    Robert C. Merton. Option pricing when underlying stock returns are discontinuous. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(1):125–144, 1976

    1976

  67. [75]

    The pricing of options and corporate liabilities

    Fishcer Black and Myron Scholes. The pricing of options and corporate liabilities. Journal of political economy, 81(3):637, 1973

    1973

  68. [76]

    Barndorff-Nielsen, T

    O.E. Barndorff-Nielsen, T. Mikosch, and S.I. Resnick. L´ evyProcesses: Theory and Applications. Birkh¨ auser Boston, 2001

    2001

  69. [77]

    Applied stochastic processes and control for jump-diffusions: modeling, analysis and computation

    Floyd B Hanson. Applied stochastic processes and control for jump-diffusions: modeling, analysis and computation. SIAM, 2007

    2007

  70. [78]

    Stochastic integral, volume 20

    Kiyosi Ito. Stochastic integral, volume 20. Procedings of the Imperial Academy, 1944

    1944

  71. [79]

    On a Stochastic Integral Equation,” Proceedings of the Japan Academy, volume 22

    Kiyosi Ito. On a Stochastic Integral Equation,” Proceedings of the Japan Academy, volume 22. Procedings of the Japan Academy, 1944

    1944

  72. [80]

    Stochastic differential equations: an introduction with applications

    Bernt Oksendal. Stochastic differential equations: an introduction with applications. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

    2013

  73. [81]

    Self-averaging of random quantum dynamics

    Marcin Lobejko, Jerzy Dajka, and Jerzy Luczka. Self-averaging of random quantum dynamics. Physical Review A, 98(2):022111, 2018

    2018

  74. [82]

    Ergodicity economics

    Ole Peters and Alexander Adamou. Ergodicity economics. London Mathematical Laboratory, 2018

    2018

  75. [83]

    Bouchaud-m´ ezard model on a random network

    Takashi Ichinomiya. Bouchaud-m´ ezard model on a random network. Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, 86(3):036111, 2012

    2012

  76. [84]

    Measuring Inequality

    Frank Cowell. Measuring Inequality. Oxford University Press, 01 2011. 24

    2011

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.