pith. sign in

arxiv: 2509.24985 · v2 · submitted 2025-09-29 · ❄️ cond-mat.stat-mech · q-bio.PE

Minimal model of self-organized clusters with phase transitions in ecological communities

Shing Yan Li , Mehran Kardar , Zhijie Feng , Washington Taylor This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 12:07 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.stat-mech q-bio.PE
keywords ecological communitiesspecies clustersphase transitionsLotka-Volterra modelniche spaceself-organizationtransfer matricescompetition strength
0
0 comments X

The pith

A minimal competition model produces self-organized species clusters and multiple sharp phase transitions by varying only one interaction strength.

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

The paper constructs a stripped-down version of the generalized Lotka-Volterra equations in which every species competes solely with its immediate neighbors in a one-dimensional niche space and all interactions share the same strength. In this setting the steady states spontaneously form clusters of coexisting similar species, and the number of distinct cluster arrangements grows exponentially with the number of species. Changing the single interaction strength triggers abrupt switches between different cluster configurations, with many of these switches piling up near a handful of critical values. The nearest-neighbor version of the model maps onto a one-dimensional statistical-mechanics chain that can be solved exactly with transfer matrices, confirming the location and character of the transitions. A sympathetic reader sees that ecological clustering and diversity can arise from local deterministic rules without any need for random differences among species pairs.

Core claim

In the minimal model, species arranged along a niche axis interact only with their neighbors through a uniform competition strength; the resulting steady states contain self-organized clusters whose sizes and combinations form an exponentially large set of possible patterns. Sharp phase transitions separate regimes with different cluster statistics, and sequences of these transitions accumulate at a small number of critical interaction strengths. The special case of purely nearest-neighbor interactions is solved exactly by the transfer-matrix method, which also yields the critical exponents and the structure of the phase diagram.

What carries the argument

Generalized Lotka-Volterra dynamics restricted to uniform nearest-neighbor interactions in niche space, which generates self-organized clusters and allows exact transfer-matrix solution for the phase structure.

If this is right

  • Varying the single interaction strength produces sharp transitions from dispersed to clustered species distributions.
  • Multiple distinct sets of cluster patterns are separated by additional transitions that accumulate near a few critical points.
  • The nearest-neighbor case maps onto a solvable statistical-mechanics chain whose transfer matrix gives the exact partition function and critical behavior.
  • An exponentially large number of stable cluster configurations exists even in the absence of interaction heterogeneity.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same neighbor-interaction rule might generate testable predictions for how species-abundance histograms shift across environmental gradients.
  • Extending the transfer-matrix approach to longer but finite interaction ranges could provide approximate analytic control over more realistic community models.
  • Observing whether real communities display abrupt reorganizations when competitive pressure changes would directly test the mechanism.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes species compete only with immediate neighbors in niche space through one shared interaction strength and that the resulting steady states contain stable self-organized clusters without any random variation in pairwise interactions.

What would settle it

Numerical integration or field data that show cluster sizes and coexistence patterns changing smoothly rather than jumping discontinuously when average interaction strength is varied by a few percent would falsify the claimed sharp phase transitions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.24985 by Mehran Kardar, Shing Yan Li, Washington Taylor, Zhijie Feng.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (b) shows the possible values of the abundances N∗ i at different α, obtained through simulations with ran￾dom sets of initial conditions. As we decrease α, phase transitions occur as new lines keep emerging at discrete values of N∗ i , signaling that new chain patterns become stable and start appearing in the final state of the com￾munity. The first chain pattern that becomes stable is a pair of clusters … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. The critical points [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. The number of stable fixed points at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In complex ecological communities, species may self-organize into clusters or clumps where highly similar species can coexist. The emergence of such species clusters can be captured by the interplay between neutral and niche theories. Based on the generalized Lotka-Volterra model of competition, we propose a minimal model for ecological communities in which the steady states contain self-organized clusters. In this model, species compete only with their neighbors in niche space through a common interaction strength. Unlike many previous theories, this model does not rely on random heterogeneity in interactions. Even in this minimal model where only the common interaction strength is varied, we find an exponentially large set of states that exhibit a rich variety of cluster patterns with different sizes and combinations. There are sharp phase transitions into the formation of clusters. There are also multiple phase transitions between different sets of possible cluster patterns, many of which accumulate near a small number of critical points. We analyze this phase structure using both numerical and analytical methods. In addition, the special case with only nearest neighbor interactions is exactly solvable using the method of transfer matrices from statistical mechanics. We analyze the critical behavior of these systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims to present a minimal model of ecological communities based on the generalized Lotka-Volterra dynamics. In this model, species are arranged in a fixed niche space and interact only with their neighbors through a single common interaction strength. By varying this parameter, the steady states self-organize into clusters of various sizes and combinations. The authors report an exponentially large number of such states, sharp phase transitions into clustering, and multiple transitions between different cluster patterns that accumulate near critical points. The nearest-neighbor interaction case is exactly solvable using transfer matrices, with numerical methods used for longer-range interactions.

Significance. If the central results are confirmed, this work is significant for showing that rich phase behavior and clustering can arise in a highly constrained ecological model without invoking heterogeneous interactions. The exact solvability via transfer matrices for the nearest-neighbor case provides a strong analytical foundation, allowing precise identification of critical points through eigenvalue analysis. This minimal setup strengthens the link between statistical mechanics and ecology, potentially explaining observed cluster patterns in real communities through simple mechanisms.

major comments (1)
  1. In the section on the nearest-neighbor case, the explicit construction of the transfer matrix from the steady-state GLV equations should be shown, together with the demonstration that its eigenvalues locate the critical values at which cluster patterns change.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract could briefly indicate how the exponentially large set of states is enumerated or counted within the transfer-matrix framework.
  2. In the model section, the precise discretization of niche space and the definition of the neighbor interaction kernel should be stated more explicitly to facilitate reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive and constructive review. We address the single major comment below and will make the requested addition to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: In the section on the nearest-neighbor case, the explicit construction of the transfer matrix from the steady-state GLV equations should be shown, together with the demonstration that its eigenvalues locate the critical values at which cluster patterns change.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit derivation will improve clarity and accessibility. In the revised manuscript we will insert a new subsection that starts from the steady-state conditions of the generalized Lotka-Volterra equations under nearest-neighbor interactions, constructs the transfer matrix element by element, and then shows how the largest eigenvalue and its crossings determine the critical interaction strengths at which the allowed cluster patterns change. The added material will include the explicit matrix for small system sizes as an illustration. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper defines a minimal generalized Lotka-Volterra model with uniform neighbor interactions in fixed niche space and solves the steady-state equations directly by varying a single interaction-strength parameter. Critical points and phase transitions are located analytically via the standard transfer-matrix method from statistical mechanics (eigenvalue analysis for nearest-neighbor case) or numerically for longer-range kernels. These steps are self-contained, rely on external mathematical techniques, and produce the reported cluster patterns and accumulation points without reducing predictions to fitted inputs, self-citations, or definitional equivalences.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model rests on the generalized Lotka-Volterra competition equations and the structural assumption of neighbor-only interactions with uniform strength; no new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • common interaction strength
    Single parameter varied to produce different cluster patterns and phase transitions; all other interactions are set equal by construction.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Steady states of the generalized Lotka-Volterra dynamics contain self-organized clusters when species interact only with niche-space neighbors.
    Invoked in the abstract as the basis for the minimal model.
  • standard math Transfer-matrix method from statistical mechanics applies directly to the nearest-neighbor interaction case.
    Used for exact solution of critical behavior.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5737 in / 1599 out tokens · 33299 ms · 2026-05-18T12:07:57.858807+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    This pattern has total abundance 1 and size 2

    A surviving species followed by an extinct species, corresponding ton= 1. This pattern has total abundance 1 and size 2

    work page

  2. [2]

    This pattern corresponds ton= 2l, im- mediately followed byn= 1 since there cannot be two adjacent clusters withn= 2l

    A group of 2lsurviving species, followed by an ex- tinct species, a surviving species, and an extinct species. This pattern corresponds ton= 2l, im- mediately followed byn= 1 since there cannot be two adjacent clusters withn= 2l. This pattern has total abundance P i N l i + 1 and size 2l+ 3, where N l 1,· · ·, N l 2l are the abundances of each species in ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    An interaction network is unstable if there is an unstable subnetwork

    work page

  4. [4]

    Note that here we only focus on networks of surviving species, but not the uninvadability for extinct species outside the networks

    An interaction network is feasible and stable if and only if there is no stable fixed point where only a proper subset of species in the network survive, and all the extinct species are uninvadable. Note that here we only focus on networks of surviving species, but not the uninvadability for extinct species outside the networks

    work page

  5. [5]

    Single cluster Here we show that for 1/2< α <1, a single cluster not interacting with other clusters must have size 1≤ n≤K+ 1, i.e., the cluster must have a fully-connected interaction network. In Sec. III A, we have already shown that the cluster can have size 1≤n≤K+ 1. It remains to show that these are the only possibilities. Roughly speaking, ifn > K+ ...

    work page

  6. [6]

    and separated byd=K−1

    Pair of clusters Here we show that for 1/2< α <1, a pair of inter- acting clusters must have the same size 2≤n≤K. and separated byd=K−1. By the proof for single clusters in the previous section, it suffices to consider clusters with size 1≤n≤K+1. To facilitate the proof, we first prove two results for the case of two non-interacting clusters C1, C2 with s...

    work page

  7. [7]

    Instead, here we prove an upper bound for the criticalα for a chain to become stable

    Chain of clusters In principle, we can also classify patterns for chains of interacting clusters with lengthl≥3 using the above techniques, but the process quickly becomes too tedious. Instead, here we prove an upper bound for the criticalα for a chain to become stable. Using similar arguments as in the previous section, one can show that within an intera...

    work page

  8. [8]

    III C to find out the constraints on the parametersz, x, y

    Patterns atα= 1/2 Here we study the stability and uninvadability of the patterns in Sec. III C to find out the constraints on the parametersz, x, y. To begin, we note from Eq. (17) that all clusters have equal sizenwhenz= 2/n, while the sizes flucutuate betweennandn+ 1 when 2/(n+ 1)< z <2/n. In particular, if we require the cluster sizes to satisfy 2≤n≤K+...

    work page

  9. [9]

    The critical points whend≥K/2 We can derive the exact value ofα d c whend≥K/2, by considering an ansatz of cluster patterns similar to those in Sec. III C. Consider two clusters separated by gap sizedwithin a community-size chain. As an ansatz of patterns with large clusters, let the abundances have the following pattern: N ∗ i =· · ·, z, y 1,· · ·, y K−d...

    work page

  10. [10]

    It becomes much more difficult to analytically deriveα c

    The critical points when1≤d < K/2 In this range ofd, neither the clusters in simulation results, nor the clusters in the ansatz in the previous sec- tion, are fully-connected in the interaction network. It becomes much more difficult to analytically deriveα c. Instead, we approximate the numerical values ofα c us- ing simulations combined with a binary se...

    work page

  11. [11]

    The transition happens when the whole interac- tion network in Eq

    The critical point atd= 0 Finally, we deriveα d=0 c , that is the critical point when the community starts to have a unique coexisting fixed point. The transition happens when the whole interac- tion network in Eq. (2) becomes stable. To find the eigenvalues ofJ ij, we make use of its translation symme- tryi→i+ 1 to write the eigenvectors as 1e ik · · ·e ...

    work page

  12. [12]

    LetN l 1,· · ·, N l 2l be the abundances of each species in a cluster of size 2l

    Uninvadable configurations Recall that stability requires the cluster sizes to be n= 1,2lwhere 1≤l≤l max. LetN l 1,· · ·, N l 2l be the abundances of each species in a cluster of size 2l. The corresponding interaction matrixJ ij is given in Eq. A14, and the abundances are N l i = X j J −1 ij .(D1) 19 By inverting the tridiagonal matrix, one can show that ...

    work page

  13. [13]

    IV, we write down the transfer matrixMfromN ∗ i toN ∗ i+1 with the appropriate Boltzmann factorse βN ∗ i+1

    Canonical ensemble To analyze the canonical ensemble (instead of grand canonical ensemble) for the set of fixed points in Sec. IV, we write down the transfer matrixMfromN ∗ i toN ∗ i+1 with the appropriate Boltzmann factorse βN ∗ i+1. We have M=   0 1 eβ 0e βN l 1 0 . . . . . . eβN l 2l 0 1 eβ 0   ,(D19) where the first two rows are ...

    work page

  14. [14]

    Recall that we need to solve the equation x2l+3 −x 2l+1 −1 = 0,(D28) and find the first two solutionsx 1, x2 with the largest magnitudes

    Correlation length We now derive an analytic approximation toξto un- derstand its asymptotic behavior. Recall that we need to solve the equation x2l+3 −x 2l+1 −1 = 0,(D28) and find the first two solutionsx 1, x2 with the largest magnitudes. First we rearrange the above and get x2l+1(x2 −1) = 1.(D29) Whenlis large,|x| 2l+1 should be large, hence|x 2 −1| sh...

    work page

  15. [15]

    Siemann and J

    E. Siemann and J. H. Brown, Gaps in mammalian body size distributions reexamined, Ecology80, 2788 (1999)

    work page 1999

  16. [16]

    C. S. Holling, Cross-scale morphology, geometry, and dy- namics of ecosystems, Ecological monographs62, 447 (1992)

    work page 1992

  17. [17]

    T. D. Havlicek and S. R. Carpenter, Pelagic species size distributions in lakes: are they discontinuous?, Limnol- ogy and Oceanography46, 1021 (2001)

    work page 2001

  18. [18]

    Graco-Roza, A

    C. Graco-Roza, A. M. Segura, C. Kruk, P. Domingos, J. Soininen, and M. M. Marinho, Clumpy coexistence in phytoplankton: the role of functional similarity in com- munity assembly, Oikos130, 1583 (2021)

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    S. Zhao, T. D. Lieberman, M. Poyet, K. M. Kauffman, S. M. Gibbons, M. Groussin, R. J. Xavier, and E. J. Alm, Adaptive evolution within gut microbiomes of healthy people, Cell host & microbe25, 656 (2019)

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    Zheng, S

    W. Zheng, S. Zhao, Y. Yin, H. Zhang, D. M. Needham, E. D. Evans, C. L. Dai, P. J. Lu, E. J. Alm, and D. A. Weitz, High-throughput, single-microbe genomics with strain resolution, applied to a human gut microbiome, Science376, eabm1483 (2022)

    work page 2022

  21. [21]

    X. Jin, F. B. Yu, J. Yan, A. M. Weakley, V. Dubinkina, X. Meng, and K. S. Pollard, Culturing of a complex gut microbial community in mucin-hydrogel carriers reveals strain-and gene-associated spatial organization, Nature Communications14, 3510 (2023)

    work page 2023

  22. [22]

    Levins, Theory of fitness in a heterogeneous environ- ment

    R. Levins, Theory of fitness in a heterogeneous environ- ment. i. the fitness set and adaptive function, The Amer- ican Naturalist96, 361 (1962)

    work page 1962

  23. [23]

    Levins, Theory of fitness in a heterogeneous environ- ment

    R. Levins, Theory of fitness in a heterogeneous environ- ment. ii. developmental flexibility and niche selection, The American Naturalist97, 75 (1963)

    work page 1963

  24. [24]

    Macarthur and R

    R. Macarthur and R. Levins, The limiting similarity, convergence, and divergence of coexisting species, The American Naturalist101, 377 (1967)

    work page 1967

  25. [25]

    MacArthur, Species packing and competitive equilib- rium for many species, Theoretical Population Biology1, 1 (1970)

    R. MacArthur, Species packing and competitive equilib- rium for many species, Theoretical Population Biology1, 1 (1970)

    work page 1970

  26. [26]

    Tilman,Resource competition and community struc- ture, 17 (Princeton university press, 1982)

    D. Tilman,Resource competition and community struc- ture, 17 (Princeton university press, 1982)

    work page 1982

  27. [27]

    Lemos-Costa, Z

    P. Lemos-Costa, Z. R. Miller, and S. Allesina, Phylogeny structures species’ interactions in experimental ecological communities, Ecology Letters27, e14490 (2024)

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    S. P. Hubbell,The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography (MPB-32)(Princeton University Press, 2001)

    work page 2001

  29. [29]

    Rosindell, S

    J. Rosindell, S. P. Hubbell, and R. S. Etienne, The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography at age ten, Trends in Ecology and Evolution26, 340 (2011)

    work page 2011

  30. [30]

    Azaele, S

    S. Azaele, S. Suweis, J. Grilli, I. Volkov, J. R. Banavar, and A. Maritan, Statistical mechanics of ecological sys- tems: Neutral theory and beyond, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 035003 (2016)

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    C. K. Fisher and P. Mehta, The transition between the niche and neutral regimes in ecology, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences111, 13111 (2014)

    work page 2014

  32. [32]

    D. A. Kessler and N. M. Shnerb, Generalized model of island biodiversity, Phys. Rev. E91, 042705 (2015)

    work page 2015

  33. [33]

    Scheffer and E

    M. Scheffer and E. H. van Nes, Self-organized similarity, the evolutionary emergence of groups of similar species, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences103, 6230 (2006)

    work page 2006

  34. [34]

    H. Fort, M. Scheffer, and E. H. van Nes, The paradox of the clumps mathematically explained, Theoretical Ecol- ogy2, 171 (2009)

    work page 2009

  35. [35]

    R. H. Whittaker, Evolution and measurement of species diversity, Taxon21, 213 (1972)

    work page 1972

  36. [36]

    Whittaker and S

    R. Whittaker and S. Levin,Niche: Theory and Applica- tion, Benchmark papers in ecology (Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, 1975)

    work page 1975

  37. [37]

    Barab´ as, R

    G. Barab´ as, R. D’Andrea, and A. M. Ostling, Species packing in nonsmooth competition models, Theoretical ecology6, 1 (2013)

    work page 2013

  38. [38]

    Hern´ andez-Garc´ ıa, C

    E. Hern´ andez-Garc´ ıa, C. L´ opez, S. Pigolotti, and K. H. Andersen, Species competition: coexistence, exclusion and clustering, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sci- ences367, 3183 (2009)

    work page 2009

  39. [39]

    H. Fort, M. Scheffer, and E. Van Nes, The clumping transition in niche competition: a robust critical phe- nomenon, Journal of statistical mechanics: theory and experiment2010, P05005 (2010)

    work page 2010

  40. [40]

    Sakavara, G

    A. Sakavara, G. Tsirtsis, D. L. Roelke, R. Mancy, and S. Spatharis, Lumpy species coexistence arises robustly in fluctuating resource environments, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences115, 738 (2018)

    work page 2018

  41. [41]

    Haraldsson and E

    M. Haraldsson and E. Th´ ebault, Emerging niche cluster- ing results from both competition and predation, Ecology Letters26, 1200 (2023)

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    A. J. Lotka,Elements of mathematical biology(Dover Publications, 1956)

    work page 1956

  43. [43]

    Petraitis,Multiple stable states in natural ecosystems (OUP Oxford, 2013)

    P. Petraitis,Multiple stable states in natural ecosystems (OUP Oxford, 2013)

    work page 2013

  44. [44]

    Levins,Evolution in changing environments: some theoretical explorations, 2 (Princeton University Press, 1968)

    R. Levins,Evolution in changing environments: some theoretical explorations, 2 (Princeton University Press, 1968)

    work page 1968

  45. [45]

    R. M. May,Stability and complexity in model ecosystems, Vol. 6 (Princeton university press, 2001)

    work page 2001

  46. [46]

    Logofet,Matrices and graphs stability problems in mathematical ecology(CRC press, 2018)

    D. Logofet,Matrices and graphs stability problems in mathematical ecology(CRC press, 2018)

    work page 2018

  47. [47]

    Marcus, A

    S. Marcus, A. M. Turner, and G. Bunin, Local and collec- tive transitions in sparsely-interacting ecological commu- nities, PLoS computational biology18, e1010274 (2022)

    work page 2022

  48. [48]

    Tonolo, M

    T. Tonolo, M. C. Angelini, S. Azaele, A. Maritan, and G. Gradenigo, Generalized lotka-volterra model with sparse interactions: non-gaussian effects and topological multiple-equilibria phase, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20887 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    R. M. May, Will a large complex system be stable?, Na- ture238, 413 (1972). 23

    work page 1972

  50. [50]

    Bunin, Ecological communities with lotka-volterra dy- namics, Physical Review E95, 042414 (2017)

    G. Bunin, Ecological communities with lotka-volterra dy- namics, Physical Review E95, 042414 (2017)

    work page 2017

  51. [51]

    Biroli, G

    G. Biroli, G. Bunin, and C. Cammarota, Marginally stable equilibria in critical ecosystems, New Journal of Physics20, 083051 (2018)

    work page 2018

  52. [52]

    Taylor and J

    W. Taylor and J. O’Dwyer, On the structure of multi- ple stable equilibria in competitive ecological systems, bioRxiv , 2024 (2024)

    work page 2024

  53. [53]

    Fried, D

    Y. Fried, D. A. Kessler, and N. M. Shnerb, Communities as cliques, Scientific reports6, 35648 (2016)

    work page 2016

  54. [54]

    Bak, Commensurate phases, incommensurate phases and the devil’s staircase, Reports on Progress in Physics 45, 587 (1982)

    P. Bak, Commensurate phases, incommensurate phases and the devil’s staircase, Reports on Progress in Physics 45, 587 (1982)

    work page 1982

  55. [55]

    Bak and R

    P. Bak and R. Bruinsma, One-dimensional ising model and the complete devil’s staircase, Physical Review Let- ters49, 249 (1982)

    work page 1982

  56. [56]

    C. W. Gardineret al.,Handbook of stochastic methods, Vol. 3 (springer Berlin, 2004)

    work page 2004

  57. [57]

    Altieri, F

    A. Altieri, F. Roy, C. Cammarota, and G. Biroli, Proper- ties of equilibria and glassy phases of the random lotka- volterra model with demographic noise, Physical Review Letters126, 258301 (2021)

    work page 2021

  58. [58]

    Redner, One-dimensional ising chain with competing interactions: Exact results and connection with other statistical models, Journal of Statistical Physics25, 15 (1981)

    S. Redner, One-dimensional ising chain with competing interactions: Exact results and connection with other statistical models, Journal of Statistical Physics25, 15 (1981)

    work page 1981

  59. [59]

    Kardar, Exact solution of the ising model on a helix, Physical Review B27, 6869 (1983)

    M. Kardar, Exact solution of the ising model on a helix, Physical Review B27, 6869 (1983)

    work page 1983

  60. [60]

    W. Cui, R. Marsland III, and P. Mehta, Diverse commu- nities behave like typical random ecosystems, Physical Review E104, 034416 (2021)

    work page 2021

  61. [61]

    Pigolotti, C

    S. Pigolotti, C. L´ opez, and E. Hern´ andez-Garc´ ıa, Species clustering in competitive lotka-volterra models, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 258101 (2007)

    work page 2007

  62. [62]

    Leimar, A

    O. Leimar, A. Sasaki, M. Doebeli, and U. Dieckmann, Limiting similarity, species packing, and the shape of competition kernels, Journal of theoretical biology339, 3 (2013)

    work page 2013

  63. [63]

    R. M. Yoshiyama and J. Roughgarden, Species packing in two dimensions, The American Naturalist111, 107 (1977)

    work page 1977

  64. [64]

    Bendavid, M

    J. Bendavid, M. D’Alfonso, J. Eysermans, C. Freer, M. Goncharov, M. Heine, L. Lavezzo, M. Moore, C. Paus, X. Shen,et al., Submit: A physics analysis facility at mit, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.01958 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Xin and Y

    G. Xin and Y. Zhong, Proving some conjectures on kekul´ e numbers for certain benzenoids by using chebyshev poly- nomials, Advances in Applied Mathematics145, 102479 (2023)

    work page 2023

  66. [66]

    da Fonseca and J

    C. da Fonseca and J. Petronilho, Explicit inverses of some tridiagonal matrices, Linear Algebra and its Applications 325, 7 (2001)

    work page 2001