Phase transitions and microphases in elastomers. I. Emergence of stable domains

David Andelman; Haim Diamant; Manu Mannattil

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 79 references

Phase transitions and microphases in elastomers. I. Emergence of stable domains

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Microphase separation in swollen elastomers follows from ordinary elasticity once volume conservation is enforced on a coarse-grained scale.

desk verdict Elegant mechanism for EMPS — conventional elasticity plus a nonlocal conservation law yields the observed Y-scaling — but Eq. (46) is off by orders of magnitude and the quantitative comparison is currently unreproducible. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.27516 v1 pith:4XGHJZFG submitted 2026-07-29 cond-mat.soft cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.stat-mechnlin.PSphysics.chem-ph

Manu Mannattil , Haim Diamant , David Andelman This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.softcond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.stat-mechnlin.PSphysics.chem-ph PACS 64.75.Gh83.80.Va

keywords elasticmicrophaseseparationswollenelastomersvolumeconservationnonlocalcouplingGinzburg-Landautheoryrubberelasticityphasetransitionstructurefactor

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

The paper claims that the mysterious microphase separation seen in swollen elastomers—where cooling produces stable stripes or droplets instead of macroscopic demixing—does not require exotic nonlocal elasticity. The mechanism is a nonlocal coupling between the composition order parameter and the elastic deformation field, arising entirely from polymer volume conservation when the order parameter is coarse-grained over the network mesh size. This makes the effective elastic modulus decay with wavenumber, favoring short-wavelength modulations, while interfacial energy favors long wavelengths; the competition selects a finite domain size. Using standard rubber elasticity, the theory reproduces the experimentally observed scaling: domain size decreases as the inverse square root of Young's modulus, and the transition temperature falls linearly with modulus. It also gives a phase diagram of uniform, lamellar, and hexagonal phases consistent with experiments.

What carries the argument

The key object is the nonlocal conservation relation $\nabla \cdot u = -\phi_c^{-1} \bar{\psi}(x)$, in which the displacement divergence is tied to the Gaussian-filtered composition variation $\bar{\psi}$ rather than the local $\psi$. Filtering with width $h$ (set by the network mesh size) means the network only deforms in response to composition variations on length scales larger than $h$. Fourier-transforming this constraint turns ordinary linear elasticity into an effective longitudinal modulus $M_q = M_0 \exp(-h^2 q^2)$; its competition with the interfacial term $\kappa q^2$ selects the modulation wavenumber $q_m = h^{-1} \sqrt{\ln \gamma_0}$, with $\gamma_0 = M_0 h^2 / \kappa$, and sets the microphase transition temperature $T_m = T_c - a^{-1}\left[3b \psi_0^2 + M_0 \gamma_0^{-1}(1\right]$

What would settle it

Measure the effective longitudinal modulus of a swollen elastomer at wavelengths near the microphase spacing (e.g., via forced Rayleigh scattering or micro-pillar compression); the theory predicts a drop $M_q = M_0 \exp(-h^2 q^2)$, so observing a flat, q-independent modulus would falsify the mechanism, as would finding microphases with a mesh size $h$ much smaller than the pattern period.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a nonlocal material-conservation rule, $\nabla \cdot u = -\phi_c^{-1} \bar{\psi}$, where $\bar{\psi}$ is the Gaussian-filtered order parameter, converts conventional linear elasticity into a wavenumber-dependent effective modulus $M_q = M_0 e^{-h^2 q^2}$. Competing against the interfacial free energy $\kappa q^2$, this yields a most-unstable wavenumber $q_m^2 = h^{-2} \ln(M_0 h^2 / \kappa)$, so a periodic composition pattern emerges whenever the elastocapillary number $\gamma_0 = M_0 h^2 / \kappa$ exceeds unity. Combining the rubber-elastic relations $M_0 \sim Y$ and $h^2 \sim Y^{-1}$, the paper obtains $q_m^2 \sim Y$ and a microphase separation temperature $T_m$ that decreases linearly with $Y$, quantitatively matching recent experiments. The authors furt

Load-bearing premise

The entire mechanism rests on replacing local volume conservation with a coarse-grained version, $\nabla \cdot u = -\phi_c^{-1} \bar{\psi}$; if the true constraint couples $u$ to the local composition $\psi$, the effective modulus becomes q-independent and no microphase wavelength is selected.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In isotropically swollen elastomers, the microphase domain size should scale as Y^{-1/2} and the transition temperature linearly in Y, for any isotropic normalized coarse-graining kernel (Eqs. 45-46).
Microphase separation is predicted to be a first-order transition with extremely narrow coexistence regions, explaining the experimentally observed reversibility and absence of hysteresis.
The effective q-dependent elastic modulus M_q = M_0 e^{-h²q²} implies a structure factor with a peak at fixed q_m near the transition, so scattering experiments can map the phase diagram.
The framework should extend to crosslinked polymer blends, where it predicts a nonzero S(q→0), unlike the de Gennes-style model.
Near the order-disorder transition, fluctuation (Brazovskii) effects should turn the mean-field critical point into a fluctuation-induced first-order transition, as in block copolymers.

Reading between the lines

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

Because the q_m scaling survives for any isotropic kernel, the nonlocal-conservation mechanism is a generic route to microphase separation in two-field systems (composition + displacement), so similar patterns should appear in other compressible gels, porous materials, and colloidal suspensions.
If anisotropic swelling is treated with the same nonlocal conservation rule, the effective modulus should become direction-dependent, suggesting orientation-dependent microphase morphologies and a possible connection to liquid-crystal-like elasticity.
The theory's reliance on h as the network mesh size makes the predicted q_m directly testable by independently measuring mesh size via NMR or diffusion measurements, without fitting.
The paper's claim that only longitudinal modes matter could be tested by measuring whether shear deformations at the microphase boundary alter the phase diagram; the experimental observation of channel-like structures in stiff elastomers hints that shear or nonlinear effects may matter there.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

Bottom line: this is a clever paper with a real idea. The nonlocal volume-conservation coupling — replacing the local constraint ∇·u = -ψ/φ_c by a Gaussian-filtered version — gives a q-dependent modulus M_q = M_0 e^{-h^2 q^2} and a simple explanation for why elastomers microphase-separate. The scaling predictions q_m ∝ Y^{1/2} and T_m linear in Y follow cleanly from rubber elasticity (M_0 ∝ Y, h^2 ∝ Y^{-1}) and are robust to the choice of filter. That is a genuine advance over earlier nonlocal-elasticity models and worth attention.

I also credit the authors for Sec. V, which connects their result to de Gennes' 1979 crosslinked-blend model. The scaling exponents were basically known, and they say so. That's good scholarship.

Now the soft spots, in proportion.

The main one is Eq. (46). As printed, it cannot be derived from Eq. (18). Plug Eq. (42) for M_0 and Eq. (44) for γ_0 into the elastic part of Eq. (18): you get about (1/3)(φ_c^{-1}+φ_c^{-5/3})/(φ_c^{-7/3}+φ_c^{-5/3}) · (κ/(B n^2)) Y (1+lnγ_0), i.e., a coefficient of order 10^{-4} Y for their parameter values. Eq. (46) has a coefficient of order 0.3 Y — five orders of magnitude larger. If the figures were generated with Eq. (46) as printed, the T_m shifts would be thousands of kelvin, which obviously isn't what the crosses show. So either the equation is a typo and the plotting used the correct expression, or something else is missing. Either way, as it stands the quantitative agreement in Fig. 5(b,c) is not checkable from the manuscript. That has to be fixed before publication.

Second, the numerical agreement depends on the coarse-graining length n=35, which is fit to the same experimental data it is then compared with. The scaling laws are n-independent, so the qualitative conclusion stands. But the claimed 'good agreement' of the absolute domain size and T_m should be presented as a fit, not a prediction, and the sensitivity to n should be shown.

Third, the nonlocal conservation relation, Eq. (8), is the load-bearing assumption. It is physically plausible, but it is ad hoc. The paper would be stronger with a microscopic or multiscale derivation, or at least a discussion of what experiments could discriminate it from a local coupling. As it stands, the mechanism is the main novelty, so the assumption deserves scrutiny.

The linear stability analysis, single-mode phase diagram, and Lifshitz behavior are standard but carried out correctly. I did not find internal contradictions elsewhere. The de Gennes comparison is honest and well placed.

Who should read it: anyone working on phase separation in soft solids, polymer networks, and gels. It deserves a serious referee — the idea is important and the flaws are fixable. But the referee must require the corrected Eq. (46) and a clearer account of the fitted parameters before the quantitative claims are accepted.

Recommendation: send to peer review, conditional on the authors fixing the T_m formula and showing parameter sensitivity.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a theory of elastic microphase separation (EMPS) in isotropically swollen elastomers. The model combines a Ginzburg–Landau free energy with conventional linear elasticity, coupling the displacement field to the polymer volume fraction through a Gaussian-filtered (coarse-grained) conservation law. This produces a q-dependent elastic modulus M_q = M0 e^{-h^2 q^2}, from which the most unstable wavenumber q_m^2 = h^{-2} ln γ0 and the microphase transition temperature T_m = T_c - a^{-1}[3bψ0^2 + M0 γ0^{-1}(1+ln γ0)] follow. Using standard rubber-elasticity relations, M0 ∼ Y and h^2 ∼ Y^{-1}, the theory predicts q_m^2 ∼ Y and T_m linear in Y, in qualitative agreement with the experiments of Ref. [14]. The paper also presents single-mode phase diagrams for lamellar and hexagonal phases, a Lifshitz-type fluctuation analysis, and a comparison with de Gennes' model of crosslinked blends.

Significance. If the central mechanism is valid, the paper is significant: it replaces earlier nonlocal-elasticity postulates with a more transparent nonlocal thermodynamic–elastic coupling derived from volume conservation and standard linear elasticity. The derivation of the q-dependent modulus and the scaling identities q_m^2 ∼ Y and T_m ∼ Y are clean, and the authors correctly note that these scaling exponents do not depend on the specific choice of the coarse-graining kernel. The comparison with de Gennes' classic crosslinked-blend model is instructive. However, the quantitative agreement claimed with Ref. [14] is weakened by the issues below, most importantly an apparent inconsistency in Eq. (46) and the fact that the coarse-graining number n is fitted to the same experimental data used for validation.

major comments (3)

[Sec. IV B, Eq. (46)] Equation (46) is inconsistent with Eq. (18). Substituting Eq. (42) and Eq. (44) into Eq. (18) yields T_m = T_c - a^{-1}[3bψ0^2 + (1/3) φ_c^{2/3} (κ/(B n^2)) Y (1+ln γ0)]. Equation (46), as printed, contains Y(φ_c^2+φ_c^{2/3})/(1+φ_c^{2/3})(1+ln γ0) with no factor κ/(3Bn^2). With Table I values (κ=0.013 kPa μm^2, B=0.024 kPa μm^2, n=35, φ_c=0.2), the printed formula overestimates the elastic contribution by roughly 5×10^3 and would give T_m shifts of order 10^4–10^5 K over the experimental stiffness range. Thus Eq. (46) cannot be what is plotted in Figs. 5(b), 5(c), or 6. This is load-bearing: the central experimental comparison for T_m(Y) is not reproducible from the displayed equations. The authors must correct Eq. (46) and state explicitly which expression was used for the theoretical curves.
[Sec. IV B and Table I] The coarse-graining number n is a free parameter. The text after Eq. (43) states that n 'can be determined only by comparing theoretical predictions with experimental data,' and Table I fixes n=35. Since n enters the prefactors in both Eq. (45) and the corrected version of Eq. (46), the absolute positions of the theoretical curves in Figs. 5(a) and 5(b) are adjusted to the same Ref. [14] data that they are meant to validate. The scaling exponents are parameter-free, but the claimed quantitative agreement is not. Please provide a sensitivity analysis over n (e.g., n=10, 20, 35, 50) and, if possible, an independent estimate of n from the shape of the coarse-graining kernel or from the mesh-size definition.
[Sec. II, Eqs. (6)–(8)] The central mechanism is the replacement of local polymer conservation by the coarse-grained relation ∇·u = -φ_c^{-1} \barψ. If the standard local relation ∇·u = -φ_c^{-1}ψ were used instead, M_q in Eq. (12) would be q-independent, γ0 would disappear from the q-selection, and no microphase wavelength would be stabilized. The physical reasoning in the text and Fig. 1 is plausible, but this nonlocal conservation law is introduced as a postulate rather than derived from a two-fluid or poroelastic description. The manuscript would be substantially strengthened by (i) explicitly stating the status of this assumption, and (ii) providing a concrete test—for example, comparing predictions for different filter shapes and values of n, or deriving Eq. (8) from a model in which network deformation couples only to long-wavelength composition changes.

minor comments (6)

[Fig. 5] The experimental points in Figs. 5(a)–(c) have no error bars. Please add error bars or state that the uncertainties are smaller than the symbols.
[Eq. (33)] The symbol M in the definition of τ should be M0 for consistency with Eq. (14).
[Eq. (35)] The expression for χ is missing parentheses; it should read χ = (1-γ0)/√(γ0 τ h^2).
[Sec. III B] The phrase 'as we saw from Eq. (31)' is confusing because Eq. (31) is introduced only in the next subsection. Please correct the cross-reference.
[Table I] The last row reads 'kBT T' and should be 'kBT at T = 300 K.'
[Sec. IV A] The mesh-size estimates quoted in the text ('5 nm at 800 kPa and 50 nm at 10 kPa') do not follow numerically from Eq. (41) with B = 0.024 kPa μm^2; Eq. (41) gives about 9 nm and 85 nm, respectively. Please check the numbers.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

n is fitted to the same Ref. [14] data before 'predicting' q_m, so the absolute agreement in Fig. 5(a) is partly by construction; the Y^{1/2} scaling remains independent.

fitted input called prediction [Sec. IV.B, Eqs. (43)-(45), Fig. 5(a)]
"Its precise value depends on the kernel employed in Eq. (7) and can be determined only by comparing theoretical predictions with experimental data. ... In Fig. 5(a), we compare the prediction of Eq. (45) with the experimental results of Ref. [14] and find good agreement between the two."

Eq. (45) is q_m^2 = Y (phi_c^{2/3}/(3 B n^2)) ln gamma0, with n defined in Eq. (43) as h = n xi phi_c^{-1/3}. The text explicitly says n can be determined only by comparison with experiment (Table I gives n=35). The same Ref. [14] scattering data are plotted in Fig. 5(a), so the absolute level of q_m(Y) is matched by construction; only the n-independent slope q_m^2 ~ Y is an unfitted prediction. The same fitted n also enters gamma0 = M0 h^2/kappa and hence the logarithmic factor in the T_m expression, so the T_m comparisons partially inherit the fit as well.

full rationale

The model chain is internally derived: Eq. (8) imposes nonlocal volume conservation via a Gaussian filter, which leads to M_q = M0 e^{-h^2 q^2}; minimizing Eq. (14) then gives q_m^2 = h^{-2} ln gamma0 and T_m from F_{q_m}=0. These algebraic steps are transparent and are not circular by themselves. The main circular-adjacent step is the treatment of n in Sec. IV.B. Eq. (45) contains n^2, and the text explicitly states that n 'can be determined only by comparing theoretical predictions with experimental data.' Since n=35 is chosen to match the same Fernández-Rico et al. scattering data shown in Fig. 5(a), the absolute position of the q_m(Y) curve is fitted rather than predicted. The scaling slope q_m ~ Y^{1/2} is nevertheless independent of n and follows from M0 ~ Y and h^2 ~ xi^2 ~ Y^{-1}, so the central scaling claim is not forced by the fit; I therefore do not score 6+. No load-bearing self-citation is present: the earlier Gaussian-kernel elasticity of Ref. [27] is explicitly replaced by nonlocal volume conservation, so the derivation does not reduce to a self-citation chain. Separately, and as a correctness rather than circularity concern, Eq. (46) as printed is not algebraically equivalent to Eq. (18) after substituting Eqs. (42) and (44): Eq. (18) gives an elastic prefactor (1/3) kappa phi_c^{2/3} Y/(B n^2), whereas Eq. (46) contains Y (phi_c^2 + phi_c^{2/3})/(1 + phi_c^{2/3}); for Table I values the printed coefficient is roughly 5e3 times larger, so the T_m comparison in Fig. 5(b) is not reproducible from the displayed equations. This is flagged here as a reproducibility risk, not a circularity step, and is not counted in the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central mechanism rests on a nonlocal, coarse-grained conservation law that is introduced for physical motivation but not independently derived. The scaling exponents (q_m^2 ~ Y, T_m ~ -Y) follow from rubber elasticity and the ξ^2 ~ Y^{-1} relation, but the absolute numerical predictions depend on several chosen/fitted parameters, most notably n=35.

free parameters (5)

n (coarse-graining number) = 35
Sets h = n ξ φc^{-1/3} (Eq 43, Table I). The paper states its precise value can be determined only by comparing theoretical predictions with experimental data; it controls both λ and T_m absolute values.
a (Landau quadratic coefficient) = 0.025 kPa K^-1
Phenomenological coefficient in Eq (3), chosen for the PDMS/solvent system; enters Tm slope via Eq (46).
b (Landau quartic coefficient) = 2 kPa
Phenomenological coefficient in Eq (3); sets modulation amplitude and phase diagram width.
Tc (critical temperature) = 70 degrees C
Critical temperature of the bulk Landau free energy, Eq (3); sets the absolute scale of Tm.
φc (critical volume fraction) = 0.2
Chosen critical volume fraction; enters M0, h, γ0, and all prefactors in Eqs (42)-(46).

assumptions (6)

ad hoc to paper Gaussian-coarse-grained volume conservation: ∇·u = -φc^{-1} \barψ, with \barψ the filtered order parameter.
Eqs (6)-(8). This is the load-bearing nonlocal coupling; it is introduced rather than derived from local polymer conservation, and is the source of Mq = M0 e^{-h^2 q^2}.
domain assumption The swollen elastomer is near a critical point and described by a quartic Ginzburg-Landau free energy.
Eqs (2)-(3). Standard Landau expansion retaining only even powers and a ψ^4 stability term.
domain assumption Conventional linear elasticity with Lamé moduli from Gaussian-chain rubber elasticity.
Eqs (4)-(5). Linearization about a swollen reference state; moduli λ and μ from standard rubber elasticity.
domain assumption Diffusion-dominated transport; only longitudinal elastic modes couple; shear modes are discarded.
Sec II after Eq (10). Needed to express Fel entirely in terms of ψ and obtain the q-dependent scalar modulus.
domain assumption Single-mode approximation with 2D modulations for the phase diagram.
Sec IIIB. Lamellar and hexagonal phases are represented by single sinusoidal modes; common-tangent construction yields phase boundaries.
domain assumption Swelling itself is not modeled; the system is in equilibrium at a swollen reference state with φ0 ≈ φc.
Sec II. Allows linearization and replacement of φ0 by φc in the conservation relation.

invented entities (1)

Coarse-grained volume-fraction field \barϕ (Gaussian-filtered with length h)
purpose: Enslaves displacement divergence to long-wavelength composition variations, generating the q-dependent modulus Mq = M0 e^{-h^2 q^2}.
h is tied to the fitted parameter n; there is no independent falsifiable handle outside the EMPS data used to set n.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Phase transitions and microphases in elastomers. I. Emergence of stable domains." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4XGHJZFG

@misc{pith2026260727516,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Phase transitions and microphases in elastomers. I. Emergence of stable domains},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4XGHJZFG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.27516}
}

read the original abstract

Elasticity often plays a key role in regulating phase separation in physical systems. Recent experiments have shown that elastic effects can be used to control microphase separation in swollen elastomers. Here, microphase separation arises from a mismatch between the characteristic length scales of elastic and thermodynamic interactions. In this first part of a two-part paper, we show that microphase formation in elastomers can be explained using conventional theories of elasticity through a nonlocal thermodynamic-elastic coupling arising from volume conservation. Our theory reproduces the observed dependence of phase transition temperature and domain size on elastomer stiffness in isotropically swollen elastomers. In the companion paper, we investigate the effects of anisotropic swelling and inhomogeneous elastic moduli.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.27516 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Schematics of modulated phases showing (a) lamel [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Phase diagram in the polymer volume fraction– [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Phase diagram in the ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) Scattering intensity peak [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Phase diagram in the polymer volume fraction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

79 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

[14]

Fratzl, O

P. Fratzl, O. Penrose, and J. L. Lebowitz, Modeling of phase separation in alloys with coherent elastic misfit, J. Stat. Phys.95, 1429 (1999)

1999
[1]

polarization

The solid blue curve, given by τ =−(2 + √ 6)(1−γ 0)2/γ0, marks a first-order triple line separating the lamellar phase from the two-phase coexistence region. The solid black curve defined byτ = (1−γ0)2/γ0 forγ0 < 1 is the disorder line, which distinguishes the structured-disorderd regime with qm̸= 0 fluctuations from the conventional disordered phase. The...
[2]

de Gennes, Effect of cross-links on a mixture of polymers, J

P.-G. de Gennes, Effect of cross-links on a mixture of polymers, J. Phys. Lett.40, 69 (1979)

1979
[3]

Panyukov and Y

S. Panyukov and Y. Rabin, Statistical physics of polymer gels, Phys. Rep.269, 1 (1996)

1996
[4]

Peleg, M

O. Peleg, M. Kr¨ oger, I. Hecht, and Y. Rabin, Filamentous networks in phase-separating two-dimensional gels, EPL 77, 58007 (2007)

2007
[5]

Tateno and H

M. Tateno and H. Tanaka, Power-law coarsening in network-forming phase separation governed by mechanical relaxation, Nat. Commun.12, 912 (2021)

2021
[6]

A. A. Hyman, C. A. Weber, and F. J¨ ulicher, Liquid-liquid phase separation in biology, Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 30, 39 (2014)

2014
[7]

Tanaka, Viscoelastic phase separation in biological cells, Commun

H. Tanaka, Viscoelastic phase separation in biological cells, Commun. Phys.5, 167 (2022)

2022

Show all 79 references

[8]

Zwicker, O

D. Zwicker, O. W. Paulin, and C. ter Burg, Physics of droplet regulation in biological cells, Rep. Prog. Phys.88, 116601 (2025)

2025
[9]

Onuki, Long-range interactions through elastic fields in phase-separating solids, J

A. Onuki, Long-range interactions through elastic fields in phase-separating solids, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.58, 3069 (1989)

1989
[10]

Onuki,Phase Transition Dynamics(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, Cambridge, 2002)

A. Onuki,Phase Transition Dynamics(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, Cambridge, 2002)

2002
[11]

Loudet, P

J.-C. Loudet, P. Barois, and P. Poulin, Colloidal ordering from phase separation in a liquid-crystalline continuous phase, Nature407, 611 (2000)

2000
[12]

Nishimori and A

H. Nishimori and A. Onuki, Pattern formation in phase- separating alloys with cubic symmetry, Phys. Rev. B42, 980 (1990)

1990
[13]

J. W. Cahn, On spinodal decomposition, Acta Metall.9, 795 (1961). 11

1961
[15]

Fern´ andez-Rico, S

C. Fern´ andez-Rico, S. Schreiber, H. Oudich, C. Lorenz, A. Sicher, T. Sai, V. Bauernfeind, S. Heyden, P. Carrara, L. D. Lorenzis, R. W. Style, and E. R. Dufresne, Elas- tic microphase separation produces robust bicontinuous materials, Nat. Mater.23, 124 (2024)

2024
[16]

Tanaka, S

T. Tanaka, S. Ishiwata, and C. Ishimoto, Critical behavior of density fluctuations in gels, Phys. Rev. Lett.38, 771 (1977)

1977
[17]

Tanaka, Dynamics of critical concentration fluctuations in gels, Phys

T. Tanaka, Dynamics of critical concentration fluctuations in gels, Phys. Rev. A17, 763 (1978)

1978
[18]

Li and T

Y. Li and T. Tanaka, Study of the universality class of the gel network system, J. Chem. Phys.90, 5161 (1989)

1989
[19]

Onuki, Theory of phase transition in polymer gels, inResponsive Gels: Volume Transitions I, edited by K

A. Onuki, Theory of phase transition in polymer gels, inResponsive Gels: Volume Transitions I, edited by K. Duˇ sek (Springer, Berlin, 1993) pp. 63–121

1993
[20]

Onuki, Ginzburg–Landau approach to elastic effects in the phase separation of solids, J

A. Onuki, Ginzburg–Landau approach to elastic effects in the phase separation of solids, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.58, 3065 (1989)

1989
[21]

Oudich, P

H. Oudich, P. Carrara, and L. De Lorenzis, Phase-field modeling of elastic microphase separation, J. Mech. Phys. Solids206, 106380 (2026)

2026
[22]

Qiang, C

Y. Qiang, C. Luo, and D. Zwicker, Nonlocal elasticity yields equilibrium patterns in phase separating systems, Phys. Rev. X14, 021009 (2024)

2024
[23]

O. W. Paulin, Y. Qiang, and D. Zwicker, Dynamics of phase separation in non-local elastic networks, Soft Matter 22, 1098 (2026)

2026
[24]

Fern´ andez-Rico, R

C. Fern´ andez-Rico, R. W. Style, S. Heyden, S. Wang, P. D. Olmsted, and E. R. Dufresne, Thermodynamics of microphase separation in a swollen, strain-stiffening polymer network, Soft Matter22, 330 (2026)

2026
[25]

Wang and P

S. Wang and P. D. Olmsted, The roles of elasticity and dimension in liquid-gel phase separation (2025), arXiv:2510.05415 [cond-mat.soft]

2025
[26]

F. C. Thewes, Y. Qiang, O. W. Paulin, and D. Zwicker, Phase separation with nonlocal interactions, Phys. Rev. Res.8, L022023 (2026)

2026
[27]

S. A. Safran, Scaling of poroelastic coarsening and elastic arrest in crosslinked gels (2026), arXiv:2602.09166 [cond- mat.soft]

2026 arXiv
[28]

Mannattil, H

M. Mannattil, H. Diamant, and D. Andelman, Theory of microphase separation in elastomers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 108101 (2025)

2025
[29]

Onuki and S

A. Onuki and S. Puri, Spinodal decomposition in gels, Phys. Rev. E59, R1331 (1999)

1999
[30]

Eringen, C

A. Eringen, C. Speziale, and B. Kim, Crack-tip problem in non-local elasticity, J. Mech. Phys. Solids25, 339 (1977)

1977
[31]

A. C. Eringen, Theory of nonlocal elasticity and some applications, Res. Mech.21, 313 (1987)

1987
[32]

Mannattil, D

M. Mannattil, D. Andelman, and H. Diamant, Phase transitions and microphases in elastomers. II. Anisotropy- driven morphologies, in preparation
[33]

P. J. Flory,Principles of Polymer Chemistry(Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1953)

1953
[34]

L. R. G. Treloar,The Physics of Rubber Elasticity(Oxford University Press, New York, NY, 1975)

1975
[35]

Doi, Gel dynamics, J

M. Doi, Gel dynamics, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.78, 052001 (2009)

2009
[36]

Yamaue, T

T. Yamaue, T. Taniguchi, and M. Doi, Shrinking dynamics and patterns of gels, AIP Conf. Proc.519, 584 (2000)

2000
[37]

Yamaue, T

T. Yamaue, T. Taniguchi, and M. Doi, The simulation of the swelling and deswelling dynamics of gels, Mol. Phys. 102, 167 (2004)

2004
[38]

M. S. Dimitriyev, Y.-W. Chang, P. M. Goldbart, and A. Fern´ andez-Nieves, Swelling thermodynamics and phase transitions of polymer gels, Nano Futures3, 042001 (2019)

2019
[39]

Jia and M

D. Jia and M. Muthukumar, Theory of charged gels: Swelling, elasticity, and dynamics, Gels7, 49 (2021)

2021
[40]

Onuki, Phase transition in deformed gels, J

A. Onuki, Phase transition in deformed gels, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.57, 699 (1988)

1988
[41]

Onuki, Scattering from deformed swollen gels with heterogeneities, J

A. Onuki, Scattering from deformed swollen gels with heterogeneities, J. Phys. II France2, 45 (1992)

1992
[42]

Andelman, F

D. Andelman, F. Bro¸ chard, and J.-F. Joanny, Phase tran- sitions in Langmuir monolayers of polar molecules, J. Chem. Phys.86, 3673 (1987)

1987
[43]

J. P. de Souza, A. Vodinh-Ho, and H. A. Stone, Charge stabilization and dynamics in polyelectrolyte phase sepa- ration, Soft Matter (2026)

2026
[44]

Leibler and D

S. Leibler and D. Andelman, Ordered and curved meso- structures in membranes and amphiphilic films, J. Phys. France48, 2013 (1987)

2013
[45]

Seul and D

M. Seul and D. Andelman, Domain shapes and patterns: The phenomenology of modulated phases, Science267, 476 (1995)

1995
[46]

Ronceray, S

P. Ronceray, S. Mao, A. Koˇ smrlj, and M. P. Haataja, Liq- uid demixing in elastic networks: Cavitation, permeation, or size selection?, EPL137, 67001 (2022)

2022
[47]

Q. Liu, T. Ouchi, L. Jin, R. Hayward, and Z. Suo, Elas- tocapillary crease, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 098003 (2019)

2019
[48]

Garel and S

T. Garel and S. Doniach, Phase transitions with spon- taneous modulation-the dipolar Ising ferromagnet, Phys. Rev. B26, 325 (1982)

1982
[49]

K. R. Elder and M. Grant, Modeling elastic and plastic deformations in nonequilibrium processing using phase field crystals, Phys. Rev. E70, 051605 (2004)

2004
[50]

T. Luo, B. Tan, L. Zhu, Y. Wang, and J. Liao, A review on the design of hydrogels with different stiffness and their effects on tissue repair, Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 10, 817391 (2022)

2022
[51]

G. H. Fredrickson and E. Helfand, Fluctuation effects in the theory of microphase separation in block copolymers, J. Chem. Phys.87, 697 (1987)

1987
[52]

Yu and A

Q. Yu and A. Koˇ smrlj, Pattern formation of lipid domains in bilayer membranes, Soft Matter21, 4288 (2025)

2025
[53]

K. R. Elder, M. Katakowski, M. Haataja, and M. Grant, Modeling elasticity in crystal growth, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 245701 (2002)

2002
[54]

R. M. Hornreich, M. Luban, and S. Shtrikman, Critical behavior at the onset of ⃗k-space instability on the λ line, Phys. Rev. Lett.35, 1678 (1975)

1975
[55]

P. M. Chaikin and T. C. Lubensky,Principles of Con- densed Matter Physics(Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 1995)

1995
[56]

Teubner and R

M. Teubner and R. Strey, Origin of the scattering peak in microemulsions, J. Chem. Phys.87, 3195 (1987)

1987
[57]

Komura, Mesoscale structures in microemulsions, J

S. Komura, Mesoscale structures in microemulsions, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter19, 463101 (2007)

2007
[58]

Rubinstein and R

M. Rubinstein and R. H. Colby,Polymer Physics(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003)

2003
[59]

A. C. M. Kuo, Poly (dimethylsiloxane), inPolymer Data Handbook, edited by J. E. Mark (Oxford University Press, New York, NY, 1999) pp. 411–435. 12

1999
[60]

J. E. Mark, Some interesting things about polysiloxanes, Acc. Chem. Res.37, 946 (2004)

2004
[61]

S. A. Brazovskii, Phase transition of an isotropic system to a nonuniform state, Sov. Phys. JETP41, 85 (1975)

1975
[62]

T. Koga, T. Koga, K. Kimishima, and T. Hashimoto, Long-range density fluctuations in a symmetric diblock copolymer, Phys. Rev. E60, R3501 (1999)

1999
[63]

Komura and N

S. Komura and N. Shimokawa, Dynamical Brazovskii effect, Soft Mater.6, 85 (2008)

2008
[64]

I. W. Hamley and V. E. Podneks, On the Landau– Brazovskii theory for block copolymer melts, Macro- molecules30, 3701 (1997)

1997
[65]

Tanaka,Polymer Physics: Applications to Molecular Association and Thermoreversible Gelation(Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 2011)

F. Tanaka,Polymer Physics: Applications to Molecular Association and Thermoreversible Gelation(Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 2011)

2011
[66]

Parrish, M

E. Parrish, M. A. Caporizzo, and R. J. Composto, Net- work confinement and heterogeneity slows nanoparticle diffusion in polymer gels, J. Chem. Phys.146, 203318 (2017)

2017
[67]

N. R. Richbourg and N. A. Peppas, The swollen polymer network hypothesis: Quantitative models of hydrogel swelling, stiffness, and solute transport, Prog. Polym. Sci. 105, 101243 (2020)

2020
[68]

T. P. Lodge and P. C. Hiemenz,Polymer Chemistry, 3rd ed. (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2020)

2020
[69]

S. H. Yoo, C. Cohen, and C.-Y. Hui, Mechanical and swelling properties of PDMS interpenetrating polymer networks, Polymer47, 6226 (2006)

2006
[70]

Haggerty, J

L. Haggerty, J. H. Sugarman, and R. K. Prud’homme, Diffusion of polymers through polyacrylamide gels, Polym. 29, 1058 (1988)

1988
[71]

Tsuji, X

Y. Tsuji, X. Li, and M. Shibayama, Evaluation of mesh size in model polymer networks consisting of tetra-arm and linear poly(ethylene glycol)s, Gels4, 50 (2018)

2018
[72]

M. A. Wisniewska, J. G. Seland, and W. Wang, Determin- ing the scaling of gel mesh size with changing crosslinker concentration using dynamic swelling, rheometry, and PGSE NMR spectroscopy, J. Appl. Polym. Sci.135, 46695 (2018)

2018
[73]

Ohta and K

T. Ohta and K. Kawasaki, Equilibrium morphology of block copolymer melts, Macromolecules19, 2621 (1986)

1986
[74]

R. M. Briber and B. J. Bauer, Effect of crosslinks on the phase separation behavior of a miscible polymer blend, Macromolecules21, 3296 (1988)

1988
[75]

D. J. Read, M. G. Brereton, and T. C. McLeish, Theory of the order-disorder phase transition in cross-linked polymer blends, J. Phys. II France5, 1679 (1995)

1995
[76]

Coussy,Poromechanics(John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 2004)

O. Coussy,Poromechanics(John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 2004)

2004
[77]

N. J. Derr, D. C. Fronk, C. A. Weber, A. Mahadevan, C. H. Rycroft, and L. Mahadevan, Flow-driven branching in a frangible porous medium, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 158002 (2020)

2020
[78]

O. W. Paulin, L. C. Morrow, M. G. Hennessy, and C. W. MacMinn, Fluid–fluid phase separation in a soft porous medium, J. Mech. Phys. Solids164, 104892 (2022)

2022
[79]

Tanaka, Y

H. Tanaka, Y. Nishikawa, and T. Koyama, Network- forming phase separation of colloidal suspensions, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter17, L143 (2005). 13

2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [14]

Fratzl, O

P. Fratzl, O. Penrose, and J. L. Lebowitz, Modeling of phase separation in alloys with coherent elastic misfit, J. Stat. Phys.95, 1429 (1999)

1999

[2] [1]

polarization

The solid blue curve, given by τ =−(2 + √ 6)(1−γ 0)2/γ0, marks a first-order triple line separating the lamellar phase from the two-phase coexistence region. The solid black curve defined byτ = (1−γ0)2/γ0 forγ0 < 1 is the disorder line, which distinguishes the structured-disorderd regime with qm̸= 0 fluctuations from the conventional disordered phase. The...

[3] [2]

de Gennes, Effect of cross-links on a mixture of polymers, J

P.-G. de Gennes, Effect of cross-links on a mixture of polymers, J. Phys. Lett.40, 69 (1979)

1979

[4] [3]

Panyukov and Y

S. Panyukov and Y. Rabin, Statistical physics of polymer gels, Phys. Rep.269, 1 (1996)

1996

[5] [4]

Peleg, M

O. Peleg, M. Kr¨ oger, I. Hecht, and Y. Rabin, Filamentous networks in phase-separating two-dimensional gels, EPL 77, 58007 (2007)

2007

[6] [5]

Tateno and H

M. Tateno and H. Tanaka, Power-law coarsening in network-forming phase separation governed by mechanical relaxation, Nat. Commun.12, 912 (2021)

2021

[7] [6]

A. A. Hyman, C. A. Weber, and F. J¨ ulicher, Liquid-liquid phase separation in biology, Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 30, 39 (2014)

2014

[8] [7]

Tanaka, Viscoelastic phase separation in biological cells, Commun

H. Tanaka, Viscoelastic phase separation in biological cells, Commun. Phys.5, 167 (2022)

2022