Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Thermodynamic theory of voting and EU elections

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Multi-party vote shares follow the same thermal-equilibrium curve family that fits wealth inequality; the paper shows this for EU elections 1994–2024 and French presidential first rounds since 1965.

desk verdict Applying their RJ thermalization model to vote shares is a genuine extension, but the main fit claim is only visual and partly by construction. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.15119 v1 pith:MRQUC6SW submitted 2026-07-16 cond-mat.stat-mech econ.GNnlin.CDphysics.soc-phq-fin.ECq-fin.ST

Klaus M. Frahm , Dima L. Shepelyansky This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mechecon.GNnlin.CDphysics.soc-phq-fin.ECq-fin.ST
keywords Rayleigh-JeansdistributionvotingtheoryLorenzcurveParetoGinicoefficientcondensationEUelectionsstatisticalmechanicsofsociety
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

This paper claims that the uneven distribution of votes among parties and candidates is not a collection of accidents but a statistical regularity with the same mathematical shape as thermal equilibrium. The authors introduce the Thermodynamic Theory of Voting (TTV), in which each party's vote share plays the role of the energy of a mode in a system of coupled nonlinear oscillators, and interactions among electors thermalize the system into a Rayleigh-Jeans distribution. A single parameter — the rescaled energy, chosen so the model's Gini coefficient equals the real election's Gini — then fixes the entire Lorenz and Pareto curves, and those curves consistently match German and French EU elections over 30 years, the 2024 EU elections of ten EU countries, and first-round French presidential elections since 1965. If this is right, extreme vote inequality (many parties near zero, a few top parties taking most votes) is the expected condensed state of a constrained statistical system, not an anomaly. The theory constrains the shape of the field; it does not say which party or candidate will win.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Rayleigh-Jeans (RJ) distribution ρ_m = T/(E_m − μ), applied to vote shares E_m = V_m. It is the equilibrium occupation of modes in a classical system conserving total energy E = Σ E_m ρ_m and total probability Σρ_m = 1; T and μ are fixed by those two constraints. The paper tests this law with two model spectra — uniform ('RJS') and exponentially modified ('RJE') — and builds Lorenz and Pareto curves from the RJ probabilities. The single free parameter, rescaled energy ε, is set by matching Gini coefficients; the whole curve then follows. Low ε yields RJ condensation: most probability piles onto the lowest states, matching the observed pattern of many tiny parties an

What would settle it

Use an out-of-sample multi-party election, fix ε from its Gini coefficient, and compare the predicted RJ Lorenz and Pareto curves with the measured ones; the theory fails if the curves deviate beyond the scatter seen in the paper's figures. A sharper falsifier is a measured cumulative vote distribution with a genuine power-law tail over more than a decade of vote share, since the RJ curve has a different, non-power-law shape.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Vote distributions are thermal: when enough parties or candidates compete, vote fractions follow the Rayleigh-Jeans law ρ_m = T/(E_m − μ), the equilibrium of a classical oscillator system with conserved total energy and norm. Fitting one parameter, the rescaled energy ε set by the Gini coefficient, reproduces the full Lorenz and Pareto curves of seven German and seven French EU elections (1994–2024), eight other 2024 EU elections, and eleven French presidential first rounds (1965–2022). The fits imply vote condensation: in 2024 EU elections the bottom half of parties collect about 1% of votes while the top 10% take 57–68%. The same curves describe 6–16 candidate presidential fields, with low

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that voter interactions actually thermalize vote shares like a classical oscillator system, so the conserved-energy picture — not a specific model of voter psychology — determines the vote distribution.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For EU elections, the RJ model implies that high Gini values (~0.8) are the statistical norm, with vote distributions stable over 30 years; deviations (e.g., France 1994/1999, G≈0.6) coincide with fewer parties.
  • The near-linear relation G ≈ 1 − 2ε for ε ≤ 0.2 means a single inequality number directly fixes the temperature-like parameter of the election's vote distribution.
  • The TTV description extends beyond parties to individual candidates whenever the field is not too small, so the same curves describe first-round presidential elections with 6–16 candidates.
  • The theory sets a general statistical constraint on typical vote distributions, not a prediction of winners; any specific outcome is outside its scope.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the paper is right, vote inequality and wealth inequality are two instances of the same constraint-driven condensation; one could test this by checking whether countries with similar wealth Gini coefficients also have similar RJ parameters in their elections.
  • The paper's practice of fixing ε by Gini means the full Lorenz curve is a falsifiable prediction; one can test it on future elections or on other multi-candidate contests (e.g., primary elections, party leadership races) before any fit.
  • The decrease of Gini with increasing number of candidates is a quantitative prediction: for small N_p the condensation regime should weaken; comparing many elections with N_p from 6 to 40 could map the boundary of the RJ regime.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a 'thermodynamic theory of voting' (TTV) in which party vote shares are modeled as occupation probabilities rho_m = T/(E_m - mu), the Rayleigh-Jeans (RJ) distribution, for a classical oscillator system with conserved total energy and norm. The resulting Lorenz and Pareto curves are compared with vote shares from seven EU elections in Germany and France (1994-2024), the 2024 EU elections in the ten largest EU member states, and eleven first-round French presidential elections (1965-2022). The single model parameter epsilon (rescaled energy) is set by matching the empirical Gini coefficient; in four EU 2024 cases an additional spectral parameter a is fitted by minimizing the Lorenz-curve distance. The paper reports visual agreement and concludes that the RJ thermalization framework 'describes very well' the statistical distribution of votes.

Significance. If substantiated, the paper would offer a parsimonious statistical-physics description of a robust regularity in multiparty elections, connecting voting outcomes to constraint-driven condensation and providing compact formulas for Lorenz/Pareto curves. The empirical coverage is nontrivial, and the use of public election data together with explicit Lorenz/Pareto construction is a strength. However, the current evidence is essentially qualitative: epsilon is calibrated to reproduce the Gini index, the RJS versus RJE choice is made after seeing the data, and no goodness-of-fit statistic or null model is provided. The significance is therefore conditional on quantitative validation of the distributional claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [RJC and Lorenz, Pareto curves construction; Table 1] The central claim that the TTV/RJ model 'describes very well' the vote distribution is not supported by any quantitative goodness-of-fit measure. The text states that epsilon is determined such that the Gini coefficient of the RJ model coincides with the real-data value. Hence equality of G is enforced by construction, and the only evidence for the distributional claim is visual agreement of the remaining Lorenz/Pareto shape. No KS/AD statistic, residual distance, confidence band, or null model is reported for any of the 28 elections. With N_p between 13 and 41 (and 6-16 for the French presidential elections), smooth one-parameter curves may look acceptable even when the data are not RJ-distributed. A Monte Carlo or bootstrap test of the fitted RJ distribution at the observed N_p is required before the central claim can be assessed.
  2. [Fig. 3 and Supplementary Material] For PL, RO, BE, and SE the paper replaces the RJS model with the RJE model, and the additional spectral parameter a is fitted by minimizing the geometric Lorenz-curve distance to the real data. This is a second free parameter chosen post hoc for exactly those countries where RJS shows visible deviations. The paper provides no model-selection criterion (e.g., AIC/BIC or cross-validation) and no null distribution for the minimized distance. Given N_p = 13-22 in these cases, the extra parameter may simply absorb sampling fluctuations; the claimed improvement over RJS is therefore unquantified.
  3. [RJC and Lorenz, Pareto curves construction; Results] The theoretical curves are computed in the continuous limit N -> infinity, while the empirical Lorenz/Pareto curves are step functions based on a small number of parties/candidates. The statement that finite-N model curves with N = 10^4 are graphically identical addresses only the model's own discretization, not the finite-sample nature of the data. For the smallest samples (N_p = 6 in the 1965 French presidential election; N_p = 13-15 for IT and RO in 2024), visual comparison with a smooth continuous curve cannot establish distributional agreement. The comparison should be performed at the observed N_p, for example by simulating N_p draws from the fitted RJ distribution and constructing confidence bands for the Lorenz/Pareto curves.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] The manuscript contains several typos and formatting remnants: '*** Missing PACS ***' in the header, 'woth' in the RJC section, 'thenmalization' in the Introduction, 'Elsvier' in reference [11], and 'K,M,' in reference [13]. A full copyedit is needed.
  2. [Fig. 4] The x-axis label 'country (arb. unit.)' in the right panel is unhelpful. The ordering of the ten countries should be stated explicitly, for example by listing the ISO codes in the caption.
  3. [Pareto curve definition] The paper uses 'Pareto curve' for a general cumulative distribution function even when no power-law tail is being fitted or claimed. Please state this convention explicitly at first use, otherwise readers may expect a Pareto exponent analysis.
  4. [Data references] References [1]-[3] are Wikipedia and EU web pages accessed in 2026. For reproducibility, the authors should archive the downloaded datasets or provide a stable data repository.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Central 'description' claim is partly a fitted-curve report: ε is set to match the data Gini and the RJE parameter a is fit to the Lorenz curve it is then displayed against.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 'RJC and Lorenz, Pareto curves construction']
    "We point that as in [9, 10], when comparing real data with the RJS or RJE model, the value of ε is determined such that the Gini coefficient of the RJ model coincides with its value from the real data."

    ε is calibrated so that the model's Gini coefficient exactly equals the real-data Gini, which is an integral functional of the Lorenz curve being compared. The subsequent visual claim that the RJ Lorenz curve 'agrees very well' with the data therefore has its first concentration moment enforced by construction; only the residual shape is an independent test. This is calibration, not free prediction, though one parameter does not determine the whole curve.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Supplementary Material, introductory paragraph]
    "we provide for illustration or due to visible deviations between the RJE and RJS cases also RJE Lorenz and Pareto curves with values of the optimal parameter a (which minimizes the geometrical Lorenz curve distance with respect to the real data) and the associated value of ε_RJE"

    For the four RJE countries in Fig. 3 (PL, RO, BE, SE) and several SupMat cases, a is chosen by minimizing the distance to the very Lorenz curve that is then exhibited as the RJE curve 'agreeing very well' with the data. The Lorenz-curve agreement is thus a fit statistic, not an independent prediction; the Pareto curve is generated from the same fitted distribution and so provides no separate confirmation.

full rationale

The paper's physical content is an ansatz imported from the authors' earlier WTH framework: vote fractions are identified with oscillator energies and the RJ distribution is assumed after 'certain couplings and nonlinear interactions'. That is model construction, and applying it to new election data is not by itself circular. The circularity lies in the validation step. For RJS cases, ε is fixed by matching the real-data Gini coefficient, so the first moment of the Lorenz curve is matched by construction; still, the remaining Lorenz/Pareto shape is a nontrivial one-parameter prediction, giving those cases independent content. For RJE cases, the additional parameter a is explicitly fitted to minimize the geometric distance to the real Lorenz curve, so the 'good description' of that curve is partly a report of the fit. No null model, out-of-sample test, or uncertainty estimate is provided, which is a statistical weakness but not itself circularity. Because the central empirical claim is partially supported by curves whose own summary statistics and (in RJE cases) full shape were used as fitting targets, a partial circularity score of 6 is appropriate; it is not 8-10 because the RJ model family is still sufficiently restrictive that not every curve is reproduced exactly.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central machinery is borrowed from prior work on wealth thermalization. The free parameters are ε (matching the Gini coefficient), a (spectral shape for some countries), and the discrete choice of model. The axioms include the unproved analogy between vote shares and oscillator energies, and the assumption of thermalizing voter interactions. No fundamentally new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • ε (RJS rescaled energy) = varies per election, 0.076–0.403 (Table 1)
    Chosen per election so that the RJS model's Gini coefficient equals the real data Gini coefficient; the whole Lorenz curve is then plotted. This is a free parameter fitted to data.
  • a (RJE spectral parameter) = e.g., a=3.16 (PL 2024), a=3.22 (RO 2024), a=-2.35 (BE 2024), a=-2.69 (SE 2024); also for DE/FR 1994/2014 in SupMat
    Fitted per country by minimizing the Lorenz curve distance to real data for the four countries where RJS shows visible differences. Adds a second free parameter for the energy spectrum.
  • Model choice (RJS vs RJE) = discrete per country/year
    The authors choose RJS for six 2024 countries and RJE for four others based on visible deviations, a post-hoc model selection affecting the fit.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Conservation of total energy and norm in a classical oscillator system
    The RJ distribution (Eq. 1) is derived from these conserved quantities in prior works [9,10]; the paper relies on this standard derivation.
  • domain assumption Vote fractions correspond to oscillator energies/wealth
    The central analogy is declared in the Introduction: 'we extend the ideas of the WTH to elections where the vote fractions V_m correspond to wealth or energy w_m=E_m=V_m'. No microfoundation from voting behavior is provided.
  • domain assumption Interactions between electors produce thermalization
    Assumed in Introduction: 'there are certain couplings and nonlinear interactions between electors operating in the framework of classical mechanics' leading to RJ thermalization. This is the load-bearing assumption that licenses the entire theory.
  • domain assumption Number of parties is significantly higher than two
    Stated at the start: 'Of course, it is assumed that the number of parties is significantly higher than two.' The model is a many-mode statistical description; with Np=13–41 this may be marginally satisfied.
  • ad hoc to paper Continuous limit N→∞ formulas apply to small Np systems
    The theoretical curves are computed for the continuous limit while real data have only 13–41 parties; the paper states curves for N=10^4 are identical to graphical precision, but does not test how the discrepancy scales with Np.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Thermodynamic theory of voting and EU elections." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MRQUC6SW

@misc{pith2026260715119,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Thermodynamic theory of voting and EU elections},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MRQUC6SW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.15119}
}
read the original abstract

We introduce a thermodynamic theory of voting and show that it provides a good description of distribution of party votes in EU elections. The theory traces parallels between system energies of coupled nonlinear oscillators and party vote fractions. Such a classical system evolution is characterized by the conservation of total energy and probability norm that leads to the Rayleigh-Jeans (RJ) thermalization and condensation at low energy states. A similar thermalization also describes the wealth inequality in society. This feature belongs to the phenomena of constraint driven condensation known in statistical mechanics. We show that the RJ theory well depicts the Lorenz and Pareto curves obtained from the EU vote results. The theory also recovers the dispersion of votes between candidates of first round presidential elections in France.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.15119 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (Color on-line) Left: Lorenz curves of EU elections of Germany (DE; top) and France (FR, bottom) since 1994. The x-axis corresponds to the cumulated fraction of house￾holds/political parties (h) and the y-axis to the cumulated frac￾tion of wealth/obtained votes (w). The dashed black line corre￾sponds to the line of perfect equipartition w = h. The Gini co￾efficients G and number of political parties Np for all cases… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (Color on-line) As Fig. 1 for the EU 2024 elections [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (Color on-line) Density color plot of Lorenz curves for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (Color on-line) Left: Dependence of the Gini coeffi￾cient G for the EU elections of DE (red) and FR (blue) on the election year (using the same data as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (Color on-line) Europe map color plot of the Gini co [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (Color on-line) Same style as Fig. 2 but for the first [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Thermodynamic statistics of given names in USA and France

    cond-mat.stat-mech 2026-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Name popularity in the US and France is extremely unequal and has stayed that way for over a century; the authors fit this pattern with a two-parameter Rayleigh-Jeans condensation model borrowed from wealth physics.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Wikipedia contributors.Elections to the European Parlia- ment,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_to_ the_European_Parliament(Accessed July 3, 2026)

    2026

  2. [2]

    EU Parliament,https://elections.europa.eu/en/ how-elections-work/(Accessed June 25, 2026)

    2026

  3. [3]

    Wikipedia contributors.French presidential elections under the Fifth Republichttps://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/French_presidential_elections_under_the_ Fifth_Republic(Accessed July 3, 2026)

    2026

  4. [4]

    Methods of measuring the concentra- tion of wealth

    Lorenz M.O. Methods of measuring the concentra- tion of wealth. Quarterly Publications of the Amer- ican Statistical Association,1905,9, 209 (New Se- ries, No. 70);https://doi.org/10.1080/15225437. 1905.10503443(Accessed June 25, 2026)

    arXiv 1905

  5. [5]

    Sulla misura della concentrazione e della vari- abilit‘a dei caratteri

    Gini C. Sulla misura della concentrazione e della vari- abilit‘a dei caratteri. Atti del Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti 1914; 73: 1203; En- glish translation in Metron - Int. J. Statistics63 (2005) 3;https://www.dss.uniroma1.it/RePec/mtn/ articoli/2005-1-1.pdf(Accessed June 25, 2026)

    1914

  6. [6]

    Capital in the Twenty-First Century

    Piketty T. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Belk- nap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA (2014)

    2014

  7. [7]

    World Inequality Report )2022)

    Chancel L., Piketty T., Saez E., and Zucman G.et al.. World Inequality Report )2022). World Inequality Labhttps://wir2022.wid.world(Accessed on June 25, 2026)

    2022

  8. [8]

    Social and Economic Inequality

    Roach B., Rajkanikar P.J., Goodwin N., and Har- ris J. Social and Economic Inequality. An ECI Teach- ing Module on Social and Environmental Issues, Eco- nomics in Context Initiative, Global Development Policy Center, Boston University (2003),https://www.bu.edu/ eci/files/2023/05/Inequality-Module-2023.pdf(Ac- cessed June 25, 2026)

    2003

Show all 34 references
  1. [9]

    Frahm K.M., and Shepelyansky D.L.Wealth thermal- ization hypothesis and social networks, arXiv:2506.17720 [cond-mat.stat-mech] (2025); J. Stat. Phys.193(2026) 64. p-6 Thermodynamic theory of voting and EU elections

    2025 arXiv

  2. [10]

    and Shepelyansky D.L.Ther- modynamic description of wealth inequality in the world, arXiv:2606.17965[cond-mat.stat-mech] (2026)

    Frahm K.M., Ermann L. and Shepelyansky D.L.Ther- modynamic description of wealth inequality in the world, arXiv:2606.17965[cond-mat.stat-mech] (2026)

    2026 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Landau L.D., and Lifshitz E.M..Statistical physics, Elsvier, Amsterdam (1980)

    1980

  4. [12]

    Zakharov V.E., L’vov V.S., and Falkovich G.Kolmogorov spectra of turbulence I, Springer, Berlin (1992)

    1992

  5. [13]

    Frahm K,M, and Shepelyansky D.L.Thermodynamic de- scription of worldwide distribution of energy and carbon emission, arXiv:2607.07315 (2026)

    2026 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Krupa K., Tonello A., Barthelemy A., Shalaby B.M., Ben- dahmane A., Millot G., and Wabnitz S.,Observation of geometric parametric instability induced by the periodic spatial self-imaging of multimode waves, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116(2016) 183901

    2016

  7. [15]

    Connaughton C., Josserand C., Picozzi A., Pomeau Y., and Rica S.,Condensation of classical nonlinear waves, Phys. Rev. Lett.95(2005) 263901

    2005

  8. [16]

    A. Picozzi A., Garnier J., Hansson T., Suret P., Randoux S., Millot G., and Christodoulides D.N.,Optical wave turbulence: Towards a unified nonequilibrium thermody- namic formulation of statistical nonlinear optics, Phys. Rep.542(2014) 1

    2014

  9. [17]

    Baudin K., Fusaro A., Krupa K., Garnier J., Rica S., Millot G., and Picozzi A.,Classical Rayleigh-Jeans con- densation of light waves: observation and thermodynamic characterization, Phys. Rev. Lett.125(2020) 244101

    2020

  10. [18]

    Ermann L., Chepelianskii A.D., and Shepelyansky D.L., Dynamical thermalization, Rayleigh-Jeans condensate, vortexes and wave collapse in quantum chaos fibers and fluid of light, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.59(2026) 055702

    2026

  11. [19]

    Evans M.R., Majumdar S.N., Pagonabarraga I., and Trizac E.,Condensation transition in polydisperse hard rods, J. Chem. Phys.132(2010) 014102

    2010

  12. [20]

    Szavits-Nossan J., Evans M.R., and Majumdar S.N.,Con- straint driven condensation in large fluctuations of linear statistics, Phys. Rev. Lett.112(2014) 020602

    2014

  13. [21]

    Filiasi M., Livan G., Marsili M., Peressi M., Vesselli E., and Zarinelli E.,On the concentration of large deviations for fat tailed distributions, with application to financial data, J. Stat. Mech. (2014) P09030

    2014

  14. [22]

    and Shepelyansky D.L.Dynamical ther- malization and turbulence in social stratification models, CHAOS36(2026) 073117

    Frahm K.M. and Shepelyansky D.L.Dynamical ther- malization and turbulence in social stratification models, CHAOS36(2026) 073117

    2026

  15. [23]

    and Macdonald S.E.A Directional Theory of Issue Voting, American Polit

    Rabinowitz G. and Macdonald S.E.A Directional Theory of Issue Voting, American Polit. Sci. Rev.83(1)(1989) 93

    1989

  16. [24]

    and Weber R.J.A theory of voting equilib- ria, American Polit

    Myerson R.B. and Weber R.J.A theory of voting equilib- ria, American Polit. Sci. Rev.87(1)(1993) 102

    1993

  17. [25]

    Press, Cambridge UK (2003)

    Coughlin P.J.Probabilistic voting theory, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge UK (2003)

    2003

  18. [26]

    and Zyczkowski K.Mathematical aspects of degressive proportionality, Math

    Slomczynski W. and Zyczkowski K.Mathematical aspects of degressive proportionality, Math. Social Sci.63(2012) 94

    2012

  19. [27]

    and Sznajd J.Opinion evolution in closed community, Int

    Sznajd-Weron K. and Sznajd J.Opinion evolution in closed community, Int. J. Modern Physics C11(2000) 1157

    2000

  20. [28]

    and Redner S.Voter Model on Heterogeneous Graphs, Phys

    Sood V. and Redner S.Voter Model on Heterogeneous Graphs, Phys. Rev. Lett.94(2005) 178701

    2005

  21. [29]

    Galam S.Sociophysics: a review of Galam models, Int. J. Modern Physics C19(2008) 409

    2008

  22. [30]

    and Shepelyansky D.L.Opinion formation at Ising social networks, Entropy17(2026) 41

    Bukina K. and Shepelyansky D.L.Opinion formation at Ising social networks, Entropy17(2026) 41

    2026

  23. [31]

    and Yakovenko V.Statistical mechanics of money, Eur

    Dragulescu A. and Yakovenko V.Statistical mechanics of money, Eur. Phys. J. B.17(2000) 723

    2000

  24. [32]

    and Rosser J.B.Colloquium: Statisti- cal mechanics of money, wealth, and income, Rev

    Yakovenko V.M. and Rosser J.B.Colloquium: Statisti- cal mechanics of money, wealth, and income, Rev. Mod. Phys.81(2009) 1703

    2009

  25. [33]

    Boghosian B.M., Devitt-Lee A., Johnson M., Li J., Marcq J.A., and Wang H.,Oligarchy as a phase transition: the effect of wealth-attained advantage in a Fokker–Planck de- scription of asset exchange, Physica A476(2017) 15

    2017

  26. [34]

    American, November (2019) 71

    Boghosian B.M.,The inescapable casino, Sci. American, November (2019) 71. p-7 K. M. Frahm, D. L. Shepelyansky Supplementary Material for Thermodynamic theory of voting and EU elections by K. M. Frahm and D. L. Shepelyansky Laboratoire de Physique Th´ eorique, Universit´ e de T...

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.