Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 49 references

Convection Patterns in Nonequilibrium Kawasaki Dynamics at Low Temperature

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A conservative lattice gas driven by a smooth macroscopic temperature gradient develops convection-driven density stripes whose number grows with system size, replacing conventional long-range order.

desk verdict Good numerics and an honest paper, but the central claim is only proven for quasi-stationary striped states, not for the true NESS. read the letter →

arxiv 2512.17827 v2 pith:5MR2XXUJ submitted 2025-12-19 cond-mat.stat-mech nlin.PS

Meander Van den Brande , Kyosuke Adachi , Francois Huveneers This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mechnlin.PS MSC 82C2282C2082B20
keywords nonequilibriumsteadystateKawasakidynamicslatticegasconvectionpatternsstripeformationlocalequilibriumlong-rangeorderphaseseparation
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 studies a two-dimensional lattice gas with conserved particles and Ising interactions, kept in contact with a heat bath whose temperature varies smoothly across the sample. Below the critical temperature such a gas normally phase-separates into high- and low-density regions, but the paper shows that a macroscopic temperature gradient destroys that familiar order. Instead, the steady state organizes into regularly spaced density stripes with circulating particle currents, and the number of stripes grows with system size, so no stripe survives as a macroscopic phase. The authors argue from local equilibrium, particle conservation, and Fickian diffusion that a temperature minimum cannot lie in the interior of a single phase, which forces stripe proliferation. They also show that the nonequilibrium steady state differs sharply from the equilibrium state with the same local temperatures, demonstrating that free-energy minimization is not a valid global organizing principle out of equilibrium.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the set of macroscopic constraints — local equilibrium (no metastable densities), the continuity equation with a Stefan condition at interfaces, and Fick's law J = -D(T,rho) grad rho — from which the paper derives an observation: a stationary density profile satisfying these constraints cannot have a minimal-temperature point in the interior of a high- or low-density region, because the maximum principle would then force the density to be constant there, contradicting the boundary values. This 'no extremum inside a phase' constraint is what drives stripe proliferation with system size. Microscopically, the currents arise because thermally created defects are cheape

What would settle it

Measure the stationary probability distribution of the local density at the point of minimal temperature in a large subcritical system. The framework predicts a locally pure phase there (density near 0 or 1), whereas a bimodal histogram indicating a mixture over phases would falsify the premise. A second decisive check is the scaling of the stripe number N(L) at fixed aspect ratio for L up to 1000: if N saturates or grows slower than any positive power of L, the claim of stripe proliferation with system size is false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under a smooth macroscopic temperature gradient, a conservative lattice gas with Ising interactions forms regularly spaced density stripes with circulating particle currents. The number of stripes grows sublinearly with system size, consistent with N ~ L^{1/2}, so the steady state has no conventional long-range order. Locally the state looks like a Gibbs state at the local temperature, but globally it differs from the equilibrium state with the same temperature profile: vacancies accumulate in the hot region in equilibrium, while the nonequilibrium dynamics produces stripes in the cold region. A macroscopic argument based on local equilibrium, conservation, and Fick's law shows that a temper

Load-bearing premise

The macroscopic argument treats the steady state as a locally pure, quasi-stationary density profile satisfying Fick's law with a positive diffusion coefficient; if the true NESS is a mixture over slowly moving stripe configurations, or if Fick's law fails near the coldest region, the maximum-principle observation and the predicted stripe scaling do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Free-energy minimization fails as a global organizing principle: the same local temperature profile gives qualitatively different steady states in equilibrium and nonequilibrium dynamics.
  • The number of stripes must diverge with system size, so the macroscopic limit has no fixed phase boundary; order exists only over intermediate distances.
  • Local equilibrium can hold while global long-range order is destroyed, so measuring local Gibbs behavior does not reveal the global steady state.
  • Interface shapes are governed by particle currents, not mean-curvature relaxation, explaining elongated and dumbbell-shaped domains.
  • The theory yields specific scaling predictions — stripe number growing as L^{1/2} and current decaying as 1/L — that can be checked in larger simulations.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same 'no extremum inside a phase' reasoning may apply to other conserved dynamics with Fick-type transport, suggesting stripe or modulated states whenever temperature has interior minima; this could be tested by varying the temperature landscape.
  • The unexplained density excess above the spontaneous value in the coldest region may be a real nonequilibrium correction to local equilibrium; measuring its system-size dependence would indicate whether the macroscopic theory needs refinement.
  • Because the theory describes quasi-stationary pure profiles rather than the full stationary ensemble, a sharper test is to measure the distribution of stripe positions over very long times; a translationally mixed stationary state would fall outside the theory's assumptions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies a two-dimensional conservative Kawasaki lattice gas with Ising interactions, coupled everywhere to a heat bath whose temperature varies smoothly on the macroscopic scale. For an x-dependent sinusoidal temperature profile below criticality, Monte Carlo simulations show the formation of regular high- and low-density stripes with persistent convection currents. The number of stripes grows sublinearly with system size (reported as N ~ L^{1/2}), and the structure-factor peak grows slower than the volume, which the authors interpret as destruction of conventional long-range order. The same phenomenology is seen for a Mexican-hat temperature profile but not for a single-dip profile, and the patterns differ qualitatively from a detailed-balance dynamics with the same local temperature profile. A macroscopic theory is then proposed, based on local equilibrium, conservation, and Fick's law, leading to a maximum-principle argument that stationary pure density profiles must fragment at temperature minima, so that the number of stripes must diverge with system size.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper identifies a genuinely new nonequilibrium ordering mechanism: a weakly driven symmetry-broken phase reorganizes into convection-stabilized stripes and loses conventional long-range order, in marked contrast to the equilibrium phase-separated state with the same local temperature. The connection to Rayleigh-Bénard-like dissipative structures is conceptually appealing. The numerical work is substantial: multiple diagnostics (density profiles, currents, structure factors, local-equilibrium checks), several temperature profiles, filling factors, initial conditions, and a symmetry-breaking boundary perturbation. The authors are also unusually explicit about the limitations of their macroscopic theory. However, the theoretical proof is conditional on assumptions that are not fully established, and those assumptions are close to the load-bearing conclusions.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV (opening), Sec. IV.D.b] The domain of the macroscopic theory is narrower than the conclusion drawn from it. The opening of Sec. IV states that the density refers to a 'locally pure state... not of a mixture' and that the theory 'can treat as stationary configurations that are microscopically quasi-stationary.' Section IV.D.b nevertheless concludes that 'the number of stripes must indeed increase with system size' for the NESS. If the true stationary measure is a y-translation-invariant superposition of slowly moving stripe states—which the paper leaves open (Sec. III.A: 'consistent with the existence of a unique steady state that is invariant under translations along y'; Sec. III.D: stable stripe counts 8≤N≤17)—then the ensemble-averaged density is homogeneous in y and can enter the forbidden interval (1−ρ_c,ρ_c). In that case Eq. (12) fails for the actual NESS and the maximum-principle Observation does not con
  2. [Sec. IV.A.c, Eq. (16)] Fick's law is asserted rather than derived. The microscopic current is computed in (D1), but the authors explicitly say they 'do not expect the diffusion coefficient to be read directly from this expression' and replace it by J=−D∇ρ with D finite and positive and otherwise unspecified. Equations (17) and the maximum-principle proof use only this constitutive relation. Thus the theoretical conclusion is conditional on an unverified hydrodynamic postulate; in particular D could be density-dependent in a more complicated way, or nonlocal terms could matter near interfaces. The paper should either derive the macroscopic current (even in a scaling limit or at leading order in a low-temperature expansion), or state Eq. (16) as an explicit phenomenological assumption and validate it locally from the measured current and density gradient inside stripe interiors.
  3. [Sec. III.G and Fig. 8] The paper reports an unexplained breakdown of the local-equilibrium prediction in the coldest region: for ρ=0.8, ρ̃(x) 'systematically exceeds the spontaneous density ρc in the coldest part by a few percent' and 'this effect does not diminish with increasing system size.' This is precisely the region where Eq. (12) is used in the proof of the Observation. The deviation does not by itself invalidate the numerics, but it is a load-bearing unresolved discrepancy: if it persists, the local-equilibrium condition is either incomplete or the identification of bulk stripe sites is biased, and the maximum-principle argument needs to be revisited.
  4. [Sec. III.D, III.F and Figs. 5, 7] The numerical support for the central scaling claim is limited to moderate sizes and a single time horizon: L_x≤200 at t=1.33×10^7 for Fig. 5, with strong integer-threshold effects; the current data in Fig. 6 show that the expected 1/L regime has not been reached; Fig. 7 shows subextensive S(k_peak) only for a few sizes and a selected subset of realizations. Since the macroscopic proof is conditional (see above), the extrapolation N∼L^{1/2} and the destruction of long-range order carry more weight than they would otherwise. A test against slow coarsening—e.g., showing that N(t) is flat for times well beyond the nucleation time at each L, or that the structure-factor peak grows slower than V with controlled error bars—would materially strengthen the claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Appendix D] Typographical errors: 'wether' should read 'whether' and 'Dykin' should be 'Dynkin'.
  2. [Sec. IV.A.a] The decomposition L=L_eq+L_non-eq at a fixed macroscopic point and the assertion that local equilibrium 'follows from the structure of microscopic dynamics' is heuristic; if it is not intended as a proof, the wording should be softened.
  3. [Sec. III.B] The sentence 'the lower panel of Fig. 1 would have to be modified so that stripes extend continuously toward the center' is difficult to parse without an overlay; please clarify the hypothetical construction.
  4. [Sec. III.D] The notation N∼L^a should specify that L is L_x at fixed aspect ratio, and the fitted exponent should be quoted with an uncertainty estimate.
  5. [Fig. 7 caption] 'over a proportion of40 realizations' should be 'over a proportion of the 40 realizations'; also check the spacing in 'of40'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the macroscopic theory is an explicit set of assumptions, and the stripe-number scaling is an independent simulation result, not a fitted prediction.

full rationale

I walked the paper's derivation chain. The macroscopic theory in Sec. IV is introduced as a set of explicit assumptions: local equilibrium (Eq. 12), conservation (Eqs. 14–15), and Fick's law (Eq. 16) with a positive, bounded diffusion coefficient. The 'Mathematical Observation' in Sec. IV.D.a is then a genuine theorem from these assumptions (using the maximum principle); its application to stripes is deductive, and it does not reduce to the observed data. The N ~ L^{1/2} scaling is presented as an empirical fit to simulations (Fig. 5), not as an output of the macroscopic equations, so it is not a fitted input renamed as a prediction. The paper explicitly limits the macroscopic argument to locally pure quasi-stationary states (Sec. IV opening), and admits unexplained deviations (Sec. III.G) and inconclusive supercritical scaling (App. C); these are scope limitations, not circular reasoning. The only self-citations (Refs. [9,10]) are contextual and not load-bearing. No load-bearing self-citation, imported uniqueness theorem, or ansatz smuggled in via citation appears. Therefore no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central theoretical claims rest on three unproven macroscopic postulates: strict local equilibrium, Fick's law with an unspecified coefficient D(T,ρ), and the neglect of curvature currents of order 1/L^2. The simulations provide independent grounding for the qualitative phenomena, but the 'mathematical observation' is conditional on these postulates. No new microscopic entities are invented; the only new object is the macroscopic constraint framework itself.

free parameters (1)
  • Diffusion coefficient D(T,ρ)
    In Eq. (16) the current is written as −D(T,ρ)∇ρ with an unspecified diffusion coefficient; D is not derived from the microscopic current (D1) and is only assumed finite and bounded away from zero. This unconstrained coefficient is load-bearing for the maximum-principle argument and for the Fick-law form of the macroscopic theory.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Local equilibrium in the NESS: every local observable approaches a Gibbs value at the local temperature T(u), no metastable densities in (1−ρ_c, ρ_c), no persistent order-1 currents.
    Sec. IV.A.a. Not proven; support is indirect (Fig. 4), and Fig. 4 shows unexplained deviations in the coldest region (Sec. III.G).
  • domain assumption Fick's law J = −D(T,ρ)∇ρ with D>0 bounded away from zero (Eq. 16).
    Sec. IV.A.c. Replaces the derived microscopic current (D1) with an unproven constitutive relation; load-bearing for the maximum-principle argument.
  • domain assumption Interface conditions: density on each side equals the spontaneous density ρ_c(T) (Eq. 13).
    Sec. IV.A.a. Follows from local equilibrium but neglects curvature corrections O(1/L) that the paper argues are subleading; needed for the proof of the observation in Sec. IV.D.a.
  • domain assumption Stefan condition (J+ − J−)·n = 0 at interfaces (Eq. 15).
    Sec. IV.A.b. Follows from particle conservation across a sharp interface; treated as a static condition on macroscopic currents.
  • standard math Strong maximum principle for elliptic equations.
    Used in Sec. IV.D.a in the proof of the observation to conclude ρ is constant from ∇·(D∇ρ)=0.
  • standard math Onsager/Yang exact spontaneous magnetization formula [38] for ρ_c(T).
    Used as external benchmark for the local-equilibrium comparison in Fig. 4 and in the definition of forbidden density interval (Eq. 12).
  • domain assumption Equilibrium 2D Kawasaki dynamics relaxes local observables on a timescale independent of system size (Refs [39–41]).
    Invoked in Sec. IV.A.a to argue local equilibrium sets in after a transient independent of L; taken from prior literature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Convection Patterns in Nonequilibrium Kawasaki Dynamics at Low Temperature." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5MR2XXUJ

@misc{pith2026251217827,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Convection Patterns in Nonequilibrium Kawasaki Dynamics at Low Temperature},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5MR2XXUJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2512.17827}
}
read the original abstract

We study a conservative stochastic lattice gas (Kawasaki dynamics) coupled in the bulk to a heat bath, which leads to standard phase separation at low uniform temperatures. Instead, a macroscopic temperature gradient drives the system into a nonequilibrium steady state. In this state, the usual long-range order is replaced by robust convection patterns, featuring regularly spaced stripe structures. We show that these nonequilibrium states differ markedly from equilibrium configurations with the same local temperature profiles. Finally, we develop a macroscopic description that captures these behaviors and provides a unified framework for understanding the observed patterns.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.17827 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Time-averaged densities (black and white) and particle currents (colored lines). Time averaging is performed over the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Equilibrium (left) and nonequilibrium (right) steady [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Time evolution of the density field. Snapshots of the particle density at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Time and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Number of high-density stripes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Particle current as a function of the system size [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Structure factor. Structure factor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: shows ρe(x) for ρ = 0.8 and various Tmean and Tamp. The dashed blue curve corresponds to ρe(x) for the stationary density in the right panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Could this represent a stationary density profile in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Two steady density profiles satisfying Eqs. (13)– [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The resulting trends indicate that part of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Scaling of the number of stripes. Number of stripes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_11.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. Scaling of the particle current across the critical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_13.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Schmittmann and R

    B. Schmittmann and R. K. P. Zia, Statistical mechan- ics of driven diffusive systems, inPhase Transitions and Critical Phenomena,Vol.17,editedbyC.DombandJ.L. Lebowitz (Academic Press, New York, 1995) pp. 3–214

    1995

  2. [2]

    Derrida, An exactly soluble non-equilibrium system: The asymmetric simple exclusion process, Physics Re- ports301, 65 (1998)

    B. Derrida, An exactly soluble non-equilibrium system: The asymmetric simple exclusion process, Physics Re- ports301, 65 (1998)

    1998

  3. [3]

    Mexican-hat

    A natural explanation is that each stripe carries a par- ticlecurrent, and currentconservationrequiresthat these currents balance at interfaces. Stripes of equal width sat- isfy this condition automatically. However, as the system size increases, fluctuations may cause distant stripes to acquire different widths, potentially degrading global pe- riodicity...

  4. [4]

    Bertini, A

    L. Bertini, A. De Sole, D. Gabrielli, G. Jona-Lasinio, and C. Landim, Macroscopic fluctuation theory for station- ary non-equilibrium states, Journal of Statistical Physics 107, 635 (2002)

    2002

  5. [5]

    Seifert, Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation the- orems and molecular machines, Reports on Progress in Physics75, 126001 (2012)

    U. Seifert, Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation the- orems and molecular machines, Reports on Progress in Physics75, 126001 (2012)

    2012

  6. [6]

    Maes, Frenesy: Time-symmetric dynamical activity in nonequilibria, Physics Reports850, 1 (2020)

    C. Maes, Frenesy: Time-symmetric dynamical activity in nonequilibria, Physics Reports850, 1 (2020)

    2020

  7. [7]

    self-organized criticality

    G. Grinstein, D.-H. Lee, and S. Sachdev, Conserva- tion laws, anisotropy, and “self-organized criticality” in noisy nonequilibrium systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.64, 1927 (1990)

    1927

  8. [8]

    P. L. Garrido, J. L. Lebowitz, C. Maes, and H. Spohn, Long-range correlations for conservative dynamics, Phys. Rev. A42, 1954 (1990)

    1954

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    Tasaki, A remark on the choice of stochastic tran- sition rates in driven nonequilibrium systems (2004), arXiv:cond-mat/0407262 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    H. Tasaki, A remark on the choice of stochastic tran- sition rates in driven nonequilibrium systems (2004), arXiv:cond-mat/0407262 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2004 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Adachi and H

    K. Adachi and H. Nakano, Power-law correlation in the homogeneous disordered state of anisotropically self- propelled systems, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 033234 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    Nakano and K

    H. Nakano and K. Adachi, Universal properties of repul- sive self-propelled particles and attractive driven parti- cles, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013074 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    Vicsek, A

    T. Vicsek, A. Czirók, E. Ben-Jacob, I. Cohen, and O. Shochet, Novel type of phase transition in a system of self-driven particles, Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 1226 (1995)

    1995

  5. [13]

    Ramaswamy, The mechanics and statistics of active matter, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics1, 323 (2010)

    S. Ramaswamy, The mechanics and statistics of active matter, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics1, 323 (2010)

    2010

  6. [14]

    M. C. Marchetti, J. F. Joanny, S. Ramaswamy, T. B. Liverpool, J. Prost, M. Rao, and R. A. Simha, Hydrody- namics of soft active matter, Rev. Mod. Phys.85, 1143 (2013)

    2013

  7. [15]

    M. E. Cates and J. Tailleur, Motility-induced phase sep- aration, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics6, 219 (2015)

    2015

  8. [16]

    Eyink, J

    G. Eyink, J. L. Lebowitz, and H. Spohn, Hydrodynam- ics of stationary non-equilibrium states for some stochas- tic lattice gas models, Communications in Mathematical Physics132, 253 (1990)

    1990

  9. [17]

    Bodineau and B

    T. Bodineau and B. Derrida, Current fluctuations in nonequilibrium diffusive systems: An additivity princi- ple, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 180601 (2004)

    2004

  10. [18]

    Bertini, A

    L. Bertini, A. De Sole, D. Gabrielli, G. Jona-Lasinio, and C. Landim, Macroscopic fluctuation theory, Rev. Mod. Phys.87, 593 (2015)

    2015

  11. [19]

    Mallick, H

    K. Mallick, H. Moriya, and T. Sasamoto, Exact solution of the macroscopic fluctuation theory for the symmetric exclusion process, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 040601 (2022)

    2022

  12. [20]

    Jona-Lasinio, Large fluctuations in non-equilibrium physics, Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics30, 253 (2023)

    G. Jona-Lasinio, Large fluctuations in non-equilibrium physics, Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics30, 253 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Bodineau and B

    T. Bodineau and B. Derrida, A perturbative approach to the macroscopic fluctuation theory, Journal of Statistical Physics192, 51 (2025)

    2025

  14. [22]

    Chandrasekhar,Hydrodynamic and Hydromagnetic Stability(Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1961)

    S. Chandrasekhar,Hydrodynamic and Hydromagnetic Stability(Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1961)

    1961

  15. [23]

    M. C. Cross and P. C. Hohenberg, Pattern formation outside of equilibrium, Rev. Mod. Phys.65, 851 (1993)

    1993

  16. [24]

    A. V. Getling,Rayleigh–Benard Convection: Structures and Dynamics(World Scientific, 1998)

    1998

  17. [25]

    R. J. Stevens, R. Hartmann, R. Verzicco, and D. Lohse, How wide must rayleigh–bénard cells be to prevent finite aspect ratio effects in turbulent flow?, Journal of Fluid Mechanics1000, A58 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    A. M. Turing, The chemical basis of morphogenesis, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of Lon- don. Series B, Biological Sciences237, 37 (1952)

    1952

  19. [27]

    Prigogine and R

    I. Prigogine and R. Lefever, Symmetry breaking insta- bilities in dissipative systems, The Journal of Chemical Physics48, 1695 (1968)

    1968

  20. [28]

    Prigogine, Structure, dissipation and life, inTheoretical physics and biology, edited by M

    I. Prigogine, Structure, dissipation and life, inTheoretical physics and biology, edited by M. Marois (North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1969) pp. 23–42. 13

    1969

  21. [29]

    G.NicolisandI.Prigogine,Self-Organization in Nonequi- librium Systems: From Dissipative Structures to Order Through Fluctuations(John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1977)

    1977

  22. [30]

    S. Katz, J. L. Lebowitz, and H. Spohn, Phase transitions in stationary nonequilibrium states of model lattice sys- tems, Phys. Rev. B28, 1655 (1983)

    1983

  23. [31]

    S. Katz, J. Lebowitz, and H. Spohn, Nonequilibrium steady states of stochastic lattice gas models of fast ionic conductors, Journal of Statistical Physics34, 497–537 (1984)

    1984

  24. [32]

    Pleimling, B

    M. Pleimling, B. Schmittmann, and R. K. P. Zia, Con- vection cells induced by spontaneous symmetry breaking, Europhysics Letters89, 50001 (2010)

    2010

  25. [33]

    Li and M

    L. Li and M. Pleimling, Formation of nonequilibrium modulated phases under local energy input, Europhysics Letters98, 30004 (2012)

    2012

  26. [34]

    P. K. Jaiswal, S. Puri, and K. Binder, Phase separation in thin films: Effect of temperature gradients, Europhysics Letters103, 66003 (2013)

    2013

  27. [35]

    Colangeli, C

    M. Colangeli, C. Giardinà, C. Giberti, and C. Vernia, Nonequilibrium two-dimensional ising model with sta- tionary uphill diffusion, Phys. Rev. E97, 030103 (2018)

    2018

  28. [36]

    Colangeli, C

    M. Colangeli, C. Giberti, C. Vernia, and M. Kröger, Emergence of stationary uphill currents in 2d ising mod- els: the role of reservoirs and boundary conditions, Eu- ropean Physical Journal Special Topics228, 69 (2019)

    2019

  29. [37]

    Giardinà, The non-equilibrium ising model in two di- mensions: a numerical study, Markov Processes and Re- lated Fields26, 167 (2020)

    C. Giardinà, The non-equilibrium ising model in two di- mensions: a numerical study, Markov Processes and Re- lated Fields26, 167 (2020)

    2020

  30. [38]

    Colangeli, C

    M. Colangeli, C. Giberti, and C. Vernia, Uphill diffusions in single and multi-species systems, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical56, 393001 (2023)

    2023

  31. [39]

    Yang, The spontaneous magnetization of a two- dimensional ising model, Physical Review85, 808 (1952)

    C.-N. Yang, The spontaneous magnetization of a two- dimensional ising model, Physical Review85, 808 (1952)

    1952

  32. [40]

    D.A.Huse,Correctionstolate-stagebehaviorinspinodal decomposition: Lifshitz-slyozov scaling and monte carlo simulations, Phys. Rev. B34, 7845 (1986)

    1986

  33. [41]

    Krząkała, Glassy properties of the kawasaki dynamics of two-dimensional ferromagnets, Phys

    F. Krząkała, Glassy properties of the kawasaki dynamics of two-dimensional ferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 077204 (2005)

    2005

  34. [42]

    A. J. Bray, Theory of phase-ordering kinetics, Advances in Physics43, 357 (1994)

    1994

  35. [43]

    Spohn and H

    H. Spohn and H. T. Yau, Bulk diffusivity of lattice gases close to criticality, Journal of Statistical Physics79, 231 (1995)

    1995

  36. [44]

    Gilbarg and N

    D. Gilbarg and N. S. Trudinger,Elliptic Partial Differen- tial Equations of Second Order, Vol. 224 (Springer, 2015). 14 Appendix A: Monte Carlo Simulations a. Stochastic Dynamics Defined by Eqs.(5)or(8). We simulate either of these dynamics using a standard kinetic Monte-Carlo...

    2015

  37. [45]

    Choose a particle at random

  38. [46]

    (5) and (8), and where∆t= 1/(4γ)

    Among the unoccupied nearest neighboring sites, select one at random with probabilityW∆t, where Wis the transition rate given in Eqs. (5) and (8), and where∆t= 1/(4γ). If a site is selected, move the particle; otherwise it remains in place. The choice∆t= 1/(4γ)guarantees that ...

  39. [47]

    Repeat steps 1–2 a total ofNtimes and then in- crement time by1unit. b. Stochastic Dynamics Defined by Eqs.(5)and(11). We now describe the algorithm used to simulate the dy- namics in which the nonequilibrium rates of Eq. (5) act everywhere, while the flip rates of Eq. (11) ar...

  40. [48]

    Choose with probability1/Lx to attempt a bound- ary flip and with probability1−1/L x to attempt a bulk exchange. 2a. In the first case, select a random site on the linex= Lx/4and flip its occupation (particle↔hole) with probabilityW ′∆t′, whereW ′ is given by Eq. (11) and∆t ′ ...

  41. [49]

    Compared with the particle-conserving dynamics, the physical time is now attached toVattempted updates per unit of time rather thanN, since the particle number isnotconserved

    Repeat steps 1–2 a total ofV=L xLy times, and then increment time by1unit. Compared with the particle-conserving dynamics, the physical time is now attached toVattempted updates per unit of time rather thanN, since the particle number isnotconserved. Timeisthusmeasuredinapropo...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.