Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Rare Events and Redundancy in Random Walkers Target Search in a Finite Domain

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For N independent power-law jump walkers, the mean time for the fastest walker to reach a target is the ballistic time X/v plus a correction that falls as 1/N, a clear speedup over Brownian search.

desk verdict The 1/N extreme-MFPT scaling is plausible and worth refereeing, but the paper's central formula has a factor-2 error and the crossover equation doesn't parse as printed. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.09452 v2 pith:WPT627ST submitted 2025-07-13 cond-mat.stat-mech

Elisabetta Ellettari , Giacomo Nasuti , Alberto Bassanoni , Alessandro Vezzani , Raffaella Burioni This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mech PACS 05.40.Fb
keywords extremefirstpassagetimeredundancybigjumpprincipleheavy-tailedrandomwalksLévytargetsearchstatisticsfinite-sizecrossoverfertilizationscaling
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 sets out to show that redundancy and rare-event statistics combine to make target search far faster than classical diffusion. For $N$ independent walkers whose jump durations are power-law distributed, the mean time for the fastest walker to hit a target at distance $X$ is claimed to be $X/v$ plus a term that falls as $1/N$. The first piece is the unavoidable ballistic flight time; the second is a statistical correction, in contrast to the $1/\log N$ scaling of Brownian searchers. The paper also identifies a crossover tail exponent $\alpha_c(N)$ separating the big-jump regime from Gaussian extreme-value behavior, and uses the $1/N$ formula to derive a scaling law for sperm number versus uterus size that matches empirical data across species. The central contribution is a universal, parameter-light mechanism by which search populations can exploit rare long runs.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the single-big-jump principle (BJP) for a heavy-tailed walk, distilled into the tail estimate $\mathrm{Prob}(X,T)\sim (T-X/v)/(2\langle t\rangle)(v t_0/X)^\alpha$ for $X\gg \ell(T)$. The paper treats each target-reaching event as one large jump of duration $X/v$ plus negligible small steps, then exponentiates this single-walker estimate over $N$ independent searchers. The companion object is $N_{\rm opt}(X)=2\alpha/(\alpha-1)(X/(v t_0))^{\alpha-1}$, the abundance at which big jumps become enough to make success likely; the dimensionless ratio $N/N_{\rm opt}$ controls the survival probability and therefore the mean first passage time through $P_N(T)=(N/N_{\rm opt})(v/X)\exp[-(N/N_{\rm opt})(vT/X-1)]$. This machinery converts the rarity of a single long flight into a simple exponential in $N$, producing the $1/N$ correction, and defines the low-, optimal-, and high-abundance regimes.

What would settle it

Numerically simulate $N$ independent walkers with flight durations drawn from $p(t)=\alpha t_0^\alpha/t^{1+\alpha}$, random direction, speed $v$, and target distance $X$, for $\alpha\approx 2.5$ and $N$ from $N_{\rm opt}(X)$ to $100 N_{\rm opt}(X)$, and compare the measured extreme mean first passage time with $X/v+(\langle t\rangle/N)(X/(v t_0))^\alpha$; also compare the measured first-passage density with the exponential form of Eq. (5). If the $1/N$ term saturates earlier or the density deviates near $T=X/v$, the tail estimate is only a rare-event approximation rather than the exact extreme statistics.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Eq. (6): for $N$ independent, finite-speed walkers with flight durations drawn from $p(t)=\alpha t_0^\alpha/t^{1+\alpha}$, the extreme mean first passage time to distance $X$ is $\langle \tau_N\rangle = X/v + (\langle t\rangle/N)(X/(v t_0))^\alpha$, with $\langle t\rangle=\alpha t_0/(\alpha-1)$ and the formula valid for $1<\alpha$ when $X$ is large. The argument rests on the big-jump principle: when the target lies far beyond the typical displacement, a single long jump of duration about $X/v$ carries a walker across, giving a per-walker probability $(T-X/v)/(2\langle t\rangle)(v t_0/X)^\alpha$. Exponentiating this tail estimate over $N$ searchers gives $\mathrm{Prob}(X,T,N)=1-\exp[-(N/N_{\rm opt}(X))((vT/X)-1)]$ with $N_{\rm opt}(X)=2\alpha/(\alpha-1)(X/(v t_0))^{\alpha-1}$; differentiating and taking the first moment yields Eq. (6). The paper claims this formula holds not only for rare events but also in the optimal- and high-abundance regimes where the hitting probability is of order one, and that the same $1/N$ structure survives when speeds are random. It further derives a crossover exponent $\alpha_c(N)\sim 2+\ln N/\ln(X/(v t_0))$ at which the statistics switch from big-jump extremes to the Gumbel/CLT behavior of Brownian search, and it notes that the big-jump principle itself breaks down as $\alpha\to 1$ unless the target distance is sufficiently large.

Load-bearing premise

The argument takes a one-walker big-jump tail estimate that is derived only for targets far beyond the typical displacement and promotes it to an exact first-passage probability for every $N$ and every time $T$, including regimes where the hitting probability is already of order one. If that extrapolation is wrong, the $1/N$ exponent or its prefactor can fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For fixed target $X$ and tail exponent $\alpha$, doubling the number of walkers halves the statistical part of the extreme mean first passage time until the ballistic floor $X/v$ dominates.
  • Compared with Brownian searchers whose extreme mean first passage time falls as $1/\log N$, heavy-tailed walkers achieve a comparable speedup with far fewer agents, and they also beat intermittent-search and diffusing-diffusivity strategies.
  • For fixed $N$ there is a critical exponent $\alpha_c(N)\approx 2+\ln N/\ln(X/(v t_0))$; above it the extreme mean first passage time crosses over to the Brownian/Gumbel $1/\log N$ behavior.
  • Inverting Eq. (6) at fixed target time gives the required number of walkers as a power of $X/(v t_0)$; for $\alpha=3$ the model reproduces the empirical sperm-number-versus-uterus-size scaling across species.
  • Randomizing the walker velocity according to a distribution leaves the big-jump mechanism intact, and the predictions are unchanged up to a renormalized effective speed.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the $1/N$ law holds, the optimal number of searchers for a fixed time budget grows as a power of domain size with exponent $\alpha-1$, and the crossover exponent $\alpha_c$ marks where adding more walkers stops helping because Brownian sampling takes over. This is an editorial extension, not a claim the paper states in those terms.
  • The same extreme-statistics mechanism should apply to any population of independent heavy-tailed processes with a ballistic cutoff, including immune-cell targeting, foraging, or parallel stochastic algorithms; the paper lists such systems as outlook rather than deriving them.
  • A direct way to test the claimed universality beyond the mean is to measure the full first-passage distribution: Eq. (5) predicts a pure exponential decay in time, so any measurable deviation near $T\approx X/v$ would reveal that exponentiating the tail estimate is only an approximation.
  • Because $\alpha_c(N)$ grows only logarithmically with $N$, large natural populations remain in the big-jump regime even for tail exponents somewhat above 2, whereas as $\alpha$ approaches 1 the domain size needed for the big-jump principle to apply diverges, a condition Eq. (S39) states explicitly.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the extreme mean first-passage time (MFPT) of N independent one-dimensional heavy-tailed random walkers with finite speed and power-law distributed jump durations p(t) ~ t^{-1-α}. Using the big-jump principle, it estimates the probability that at least one of N walkers reaches a target at distance X by time T, then differentiates and integrates to obtain the MFPT formula ⟨τ_N⟩ = X/v + (⟨t⟩/N)(X/(v t0))^α. The authors claim a 1/N speed-up of the extreme MFPT compared with the Brownian 1/log N scaling, identify a crossover exponent α_c(N) above which Brownian extreme-value statistics take over, and apply the framework to mammalian fertilization, deriving a scaling relation between sperm number and uterine size that is fitted with α = 3. The central scaling argument for the rare-event regime is conceptually attractive, but the quantitative derivation contains an algebraic slip in Eq. (6) and a more serious error in the crossover derivation in the Supplementary Material.

Significance. If the 1/N scaling of the extreme MFPT for heavy-tailed walkers could be firmly established, it would be a notable result: it generalizes the slow Brownian 1/log N redundancy scaling and provides a minimal mechanism for efficient search in disordered environments. The paper works through the big-jump principle in a transparent way and tests the predictions against simulations, which is a strength. However, the main quantitative formula has a factor-of-2 error, the crossover derivation is algebraically incorrect, and the biological application is partly a one-parameter fit presented as a prediction. These issues are load-bearing for the central claims, so the paper needs substantial revision before the conclusions can be accepted.

major comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (6); Eqs. (2)–(5)] Equation (6) is inconsistent with the derivation that precedes it. Integrating the first-passage density PN(T) from Eq. (5) gives ⟨τ_N⟩ = X/v + (Nopt/N)(X/v) = X/v + 2⟨t⟩/N (X/(v t0))^α, because the factor 1/2 in Eq. (2) enters the exponential prefactor and hence the first moment. The printed formula drops this factor of 2. This affects not only the MFPT itself but also the derived scaling law for N(X) in Fig. 3 and the location of the crossover αc(N). The asymptotic 1/N power law and the X/v saturation are unaffected, but all quantitative predictions with a numerical prefactor must be recomputed.
  2. [SM §II (Eqs. S21–S23); Eq. (7)] The derivation of the crossover exponent contains an algebraic error. Starting from τ_BM = τ_HT and using the corrected factor 2 in τ_HT, the condition becomes X^{α−1} = N/(4α)[X(α−2)/L − 2(α−1)], where L = ln(2N/√π). The SM instead writes a bracket with '−1' inside, which changes the existence and value of the solution. For the parameters of Fig. 2 (X/(v t0) = 25000), the corrected condition has no solution for α > 2 when N = 10^2 or 10^3; for N = 10^4 it has a solution near α ≈ 2.37, far below the values implied by Eq. (7) (≈2.9). Consequently, the quoted values such as αc^human ≈ 3.44 are unsupported, and the statement that the biological value α = 3 lies in the big-jump regime is not established. As printed, Eq. (7) is also ambiguous: with the division as in the SM, the implicit equation has no positive solution for the parameters used; without the division, the argument is not the one derived in the SM.
  3. [After Eq. (5), 'full exit-time statistics'; Fig. 2] The step from the rare-event estimate Eq. (3) to the exact-looking first-passage density Eq. (5) is an extrapolation that is not justified for α > 2. The single-big-jump estimate Eq. (2) is derived under X ≫ ℓ(T); for α > 2 the bulk of the single-walker distribution is Gaussian, and the Gaussian contribution to the hitting probability is comparable to or larger than the big-jump contribution for the parameters in Fig. 2. The text after Eq. (5) asserts that the tail estimate 'effectively describes the full exit-time statistics in these regimes' without proof. This assertion is load-bearing for the crossover and for the biological conclusion, and it needs either a rigorous bound or a direct simulation comparison of the two mechanisms in the α > 2 region.
  4. [Biological application, Fig. 3] The biological comparison is presented as a prediction but actually involves a fitted parameter. The text states that 'the matching between our theoretical prediction and observed data is obtained for a tail exponent α = 3,' and the abstract says the predictions match empirical data. Since α is chosen to make the curve match the data, the agreement in Fig. 3 does not independently validate the model. The data points are shown without error bars, and no sensitivity analysis is given to show whether a range of α values would fit equally well. The manuscript should either derive α from an independent measurement or present the comparison explicitly as a fit, with uncertainty propagation, before claiming a cross-species prediction.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (2)] The factor 1/2 is described as the 'probability of escape from one side only,' but the connection between the jump-duration distribution p(t) and the spatial step distribution should be stated explicitly (x = v t with random sign) so that the tail integral and the factor 1/2 are unambiguous.
  2. [Fig. 2] The caption refers to 'logarithmic behaviour given by the CLT of Brownian motion for α > 2,' but the Brownian MFPT in the SM depends on α through the diffusion coefficient D = v^2 t0 (α−1)/(2(α−2)), so the Brownian curves are not horizontal plateaus. The caption should specify the expression that is plotted.
  3. [Eq. (7)] Equation (7) is an implicit equation, not a closed-form result, because the Lambert argument CX,v,t0(N,αc) depends on αc itself. This should be stated explicitly, and the argument should be written with an unambiguous fraction bar, as the current rendering is ambiguous and does not match the SM expression.
  4. [Notation] The paper uses both T and τ for time and both ⟨τ_N⟩ and ⟨τN⟩ for the extreme MFPT. A consistent notation table would improve readability, especially in the derivation of Eqs. (5) and (6).

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Core extreme-MFPT derivation is self-contained; the biological match is partly circular because α=3 is selected to fit the N(V) data it is then said to predict.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 'A biological application', paragraph beginning 'Fixing the fertilization time...', Fig. 3; uses Eq. (6).]
    "Fixing the fertilization time ⟨τN⟩ and inserting the known physical and biological constants into Eq. (6), our model predicts a scaling law for the required number of swimmers N(V) for different species with their proper uterus volume V. The matching between our theoretical prediction and observed data is obtained for a tail exponent α = 3, as can be seen in Figure 3."

    The exponent α is not an output of the model; it is selected so that the model curve in Fig. 3 reproduces the same empirical N(V) data, and that curve is then reported as a predictive match. With ⟨τN⟩ fixed, Eq. (6) gives N ∝ (X/vt0)^α, so the log-log slope of the predicted scaling law is α; choosing α=3 is therefore choosing the cubic exponent of the claimed cross-species relation. 'The matching ... is obtained for α=3' is an in-sample fit presented as a prediction, and the later use of α_c ≃ 3.44 to 'confirm' α=3 is post hoc, since the crossover is evaluated with the same fitted value. The core Eqs. (2)-(6) are not circular; only this application reduces to a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The central derivation of the extreme MFPT is not circular: the BJP tail estimate (2) is an external heavy-tailed large-deviation input, no parameter is fitted to the quantity being predicted, and the 1/N scaling and X/v saturation are checked against simulations (Fig. 2). The reported factor-of-2 discrepancy between integrating Eq. (5) and the printed Eq. (6) is an algebraic consistency error, not a circularity. The only exhibitable circularity is in the fertilization application: α=3 is chosen by matching the empirical N(V) data from Holcman et al. (Fig. 10 in [9]) and then that same match is announced as a prediction. Because the biological scaling is one of the paper's headline claims, this warrants a moderate score; the core extreme-MFPT result retains independent content.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The theory part of the paper is essentially parameter-free given the model inputs (α, v, t0, X, N), which come from the problem setup. The biological application introduces α=3 as a fitted parameter. The main structural assumptions are the validity of the big jump principle beyond the strict tail regime and the coarse-grained 1D mapping of the fertilization problem.

free parameters (1)
  • tail exponent α = 3 (biological application)
    In the biological application section, the match to the sperm count vs uterine volume data is obtained by fixing α=3; it is not predicted or independently measured, so the biological scaling N ∝ V^{α/3} is a fit, not a parameter-free prediction.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Big jump principle: for X ≫ ℓ(T), the single-walker hitting probability is dominated by one jump of duration X/v (Eq. 2).
    Invoked in the Model section to write Prob(X,T); requires X ≫ ℓ(T) and α>1, and is used even where the hitting probability is of order one.
  • standard math The exponential/Poisson approximation 1−(1−p)^N ≈ 1−exp(−Np) with p the single-walker tail probability is used for all N and T, including the optimal and high-abundance regimes (Eq. 3).
    Standard for rare events, but here p can be non-negligible; the approximation is stated and used to define the MFPT.
  • ad hoc to paper The derivative of the exponential tail approximation yields the exact first-passage time density P_N(T), which can be integrated to give the MFPT (Eqs. 5-6).
    The tail estimate is not a full propagator; using it to compute the mean assumes the approximation holds across the entire integration range.
  • standard math For α>2, the bulk of the walker distribution is Gaussian with diffusion constant D=(α−1)/(α−2) v²t0/2 (SM §II).
    Central limit theorem for finite-variance jump durations; used to write the Brownian extreme MFPT.
  • ad hoc to paper Fertilization dynamics in a 3D disordered reproductive tract can be coarse-grained to 1D HT walkers with target size X=V^{1/3} and a single effective tail exponent α.
    A drastic modeling postulate; the paper states this as a key claim without derivation from microscopics.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Rare Events and Redundancy in Random Walkers Target Search in a Finite Domain." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WPT627ST

@misc{pith2026250709452,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Rare Events and Redundancy in Random Walkers Target Search in a Finite Domain},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WPT627ST}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.09452}
}
abstract

Finding a target in a complex environment is a fundamental challenge across natural systems, from chemical reactions to sperm cells reaching an egg. A powerful strategy to reduce search times is redundancy: deploying many independent searchers increases the probability that at least one succeeds, particularly when success is driven by rare events. When the underlying stochastic motion features broadly distributed step lengths, rare long relocations dominate the dynamics, making redundancy especially effective. Here, we investigate the statistics of extreme events for the mean first passage time in a system of $N$ independent walkers performing power-law distributed jumps with finite velocity, where target-reaching events are governed by single large fluctuations. We show that the mean first passage time of the fastest walker scales as $\langle T_N \rangle \sim 1/N$, representing a dramatic speed-up compared to classical Brownian motion, and saturates at the minimum value $X/v$. We further extend the model to include random velocity. For fixed $N$, we identify a crossover, governed by a critical tail exponent $\alpha_c$, separating a regime dominated by a single large fluctuation (big jump) from a regime characterised by Gaussian extreme-value statistics arising from finite sampling effects. From these results, we derive a scaling law that links the number of walkers $N$ to the size $X$ of the search region. Our results demonstrate how redundancy, combined with rare-event statistics, can efficiently organise target-search processes in complex biological environments. As a prototypical example, we consider mammalian fertilization and derive, within a coarse-grained description, a cross-species scaling relation between the number of spermatozoa and the typical uterine size.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.09452 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Sample trajectories of N independent one￾dimensional HT walks with target set at X = 5000 (dashed black line), shown for the three possible regimes of walker abundance. In the plot on top, i.e. the low abundance regime, no trajectory reaches the target due to insufficient sampling. In the middle plot, i.e. the optimal abundance regime, the target is reached by a single walker performing a big jump. In the bottom plo… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The rescaled extreme MFPT hτN i plotted as a func￾tion of the power law exponent α at different values of N in logarithmic scale. The black straight line corresponds to our theoretical prediction for HT walks (6). The other colored dotted lines correspond to the logarithmic behaviour given by the CLT of Brownian motion for α > 2. We can see that, increasing N, the transition to the CLT at αc(N) moves at larger α. He… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Logarithmic plot of the number of swimmers as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

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. Extreme First-Passage Time of Many Interacting Particles

    cond-mat.stat-mech 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    For many interacting Brownian searchers, bounded interactions cannot beat the independent 1/ln N fastest-search time, while coherent pushes and random pairwise kicks can reach 1/N and 1/(N ln N), respectively.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Redner, A Guide to First-Passage Processes (Cam- bridge University Press, 2013)

    S. Redner, A Guide to First-Passage Processes (Cam- bridge University Press, 2013)

    work page 2013

  2. [2]

    C. W. Gardiner, Stochastic Methods: A Handbook for the Natural and Social Sciences , 4th ed., Springer Series in Synergetics (Springer, 2009)

    work page 2009

  3. [3]

    This value is particularly meaningful: while these resulting HT walks have both finite mean and variance, thus converging to Gaussian statistics in the bulk by the CLT, the dynamics of rare events (which dominate the fertilization success) are still governed by the BJP. In this sense, the fertilization problem embodies an op- timal search strategy in disor...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Chou and M

    T. Chou and M. R. D’Orsogna, First-Passage Phenomena and Their Applications (World Scientific, 2014) pp. 306– 345

    work page 2014

  5. [5]

    J. A. Álvarez López and A. Candel, The Mathematics of the Uncertain: A Tribute to Pedro Gil , edited by E. Gil, E. Gil, J. Gil, and M. Á. Gil (Springer International Pub- lishing, Cham, 2018) pp. 789–801

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Holcman and Z

    D. Holcman and Z. Schuss, Reports on Progress in Physics 76, 074601 (2013)

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    Holcman and Z

    D. Holcman and Z. Schuss, Journal of Physics A: Mathe- matical and Theoretical 47, 173001 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Holcman and Z

    D. Holcman and Z. Schuss, Analysis and Applications. Springer, New York 48, 108 (2015)

    work page 2015

Show all 73 references
  1. [9]

    Holcman and Z

    D. Holcman and Z. Schuss, Journal of Physics A: Mathe- matical and Theoretical 50, 093002 (2017)

    2017

  2. [10]

    Schuss, K

    Z. Schuss, K. Basnayake, and D. Holcman, Physics of Life Reviews 28, 52 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    Basnayake, Z

    K. Basnayake, Z. Schuss, and D. Holcman, Journal of Nonlinear Science 29, 461 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    S. D. Lawley and J. B. Madrid, Journal of Nonlinear Science 30, 1207 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    S. D. Lawley, Journal of Mathematical Biology 80, 2301 (2020)

    2020

  6. [14]

    S. D. Lawley, Phys. Rev. E 101, 012413 (2020)

    2020

  7. [15]

    Oshanin, K

    G. Oshanin, K. Lindenberg, H. S. Wio, and S. Burlatsky, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 42, 434008 (2009)

    2009

  8. [16]

    Bénichou, C

    O. Bénichou, C. Loverdo, M. Moreau, and R. Voituriez, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 81 (2011)

    2011

  9. [17]

    Bénichou, M

    O. Bénichou, M. Coppey, M. Moreau, P.-H. Suet, and R. Voituriez, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 198101 (2005)

    2005

  10. [18]

    Bénichou, C

    O. Bénichou, C. Loverdo, M. Moreau, and R. Voituriez, Phys. Rev. E 74, 020102 (2006)

    2006

  11. [19]

    Datta, C

    A. Datta, C. Beta, and R. Großmann, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 043281 (2024)

    2024

  12. [20]

    Santra, K

    I. Santra, K. S. Olsen, and D. Gupta, Soft Matter 20, 9360 (2024)

    2024

  13. [21]

    Kurzthaler, Y

    C. Kurzthaler, Y. Zhao, N. Zhou, J. Schwarz-Linek, C. Devailly, J. Arlt, J.-D. Huang, W. C. K. Poon, T. Fra- nosch, J. Tailleur, and V. A. Martinez, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 038302 (2024)

    2024

  14. [22]

    Datta, S

    A. Datta, S. Beier, V. Pfeifer, R. Grossmann, and C. Beta, Intermittent run motility of bacteria in gels exhibits power-law distributed dwell times (2024), arXiv:2408.02317 [cond-mat.soft]

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Lencastre, Y

    P. Lencastre, Y. Bystryk, A. Yazidi, S. Denisov, and P. G . Lind, The dynamical law behind eye movements: distin- guishing between lévy and intermittent strategies (2025), arXiv:2505.00864 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2025 arXiv

  16. [24]

    M. A. Lomholt, K. Tal, R. Metzler, and K. Joseph, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105, 11055 (2008) , https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.0803117105 6

    2008 doi

  17. [25]

    Sposini, S

    V. Sposini, S. Nampoothiri, A. Chechkin, E. Orlandini, F. Seno, and F. Baldovin, Phys. Rev. E 109, 034120 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    Sposini, S

    V. Sposini, S. Nampoothiri, A. Chechkin, E. Orlandini, F. Seno, and F. Baldovin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 117101 (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    Meerson and S

    B. Meerson and S. Redner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 198101 (2015)

    2015

  20. [28]

    Odian, Principles of Polymerization , 4th ed

    G. Odian, Principles of Polymerization , 4th ed. (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2004)

    2004

  21. [29]

    M. F. Shlesinger, J. Klafter, and Y. M. Wong, Journal of Statistical Physics 27, 499 (1982)

    1982

  22. [30]

    Zaburdaev, S

    V. Zaburdaev, S. Denisov, and J. Klafter, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 483 (2015)

    2015

  23. [31]

    Rebenshtok, S

    A. Rebenshtok, S. Denisov, P. Hänggi, and E. Barkai, Phys. Rev. E 90, 062135 (2014)

    2014

  24. [32]

    Burioni, L

    R. Burioni, L. Caniparoli, and A. Vezzani, Phys. Rev. E 81, 060101 (2010)

    2010

  25. [33]

    Bianchi, G

    A. Bianchi, G. Cristadoro, M. Lenci, and M. Ligabò, Journal of Statistical Physics 163, 22 (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    Ariel, A

    G. Ariel, A. Rabani, S. Benisty, J. D. Partridge, R. M. Harshey, and A. Be’er, Nature Communications 6, 8396 (2015)

    2015

  27. [35]

    N. E. Humphries, N. Queiroz, J. R. M. Dyer, N. G. Pade, M. K. Musyl, K. M. Schaefer, D. W. Fuller, J. M. Brunnschweiler, T. K. Doyle, J. D. R. Houghton, G. C. Hays, C. S. Jones, L. R. Noble, V. J. Wearmouth, E. J. Southall, and D. W. Sims, Nature 465, 1066 (2010)

    2010

  28. [36]

    A. M. Edwards, R. A. Phillips, N. W. Watkins, M. P. Freeman, E. J. Murphy, V. Afanasyev, S. V. Buldyrev, M. G. E. da Luz, E. P. Raposo, H. E. Stanley, and G. M. Viswanathan, Nature 449, 1044 (2007)

    2007

  29. [37]

    Barthelemy, J

    P. Barthelemy, J. Bertolotti, and D. S. Wiersma, Nature 453, 495 (2008)

    2008

  30. [38]

    D. A. Raichlen, B. M. Wood, A. D. Gordon, A. Z. P. Mabulla, F. W. Marlowe, and H. Pontzer, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, 728 (2014) , https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.1318616111

    2014 doi

  31. [39]

    I. Rhee, M. Shin, S. Hong, K. Lee, S. J. Kim, and S. Chong, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 19, 630 (2011)

    2011

  32. [40]

    Chaturapruek, J

    S. Chaturapruek, J. Breslau, D. Yazdi, T. Kolokolnikov , and S. G. McCalla, SIAM Journal on Applied Mathemat- ics 73, 1703 (2013) , https://doi.org/10.1137/120895408

    2013 doi

  33. [41]

    C. Pan, B. Li, C. Wang, Y. Zhang, N. Geldner, L. Wang, and A. Bertozzi, Crime modeling with trun- cated lévy flights for residential burglary models (2018), arXiv:1601.03415 [physics.soc-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Wang and K

    Y. Wang and K. Li, International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence 17, 1 (2023)

    2023

  35. [43]

    Y. Kang, H. Yu, L. Kang, G. Qiao, D. Guo, and J. Zeng, in 2023 China Automation Congress (CAC) (2023) pp. 5668–5673

    2023

  36. [44]

    S. K. Joshi, Knowledge-Based Systems 265, 110374 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    Chistyakov, Theory of Probability and Its Applica- tions 9 (1964)

    V. Chistyakov, Theory of Probability and Its Applica- tions 9 (1964)

    1964

  38. [46]

    S. Foss, D. Korshunov, S. Zachary, et al. , An introduc- tion to heavy-tailed and subexponential distributions , Vol. 6 (Springer, 2011)

    2011

  39. [47]

    Vezzani, E

    A. Vezzani, E. Barkai, and R. Burioni, Phys. Rev. E 100 (2019)

    2019

  40. [48]

    W. Wang, A. Vezzani, R. Burioni, and E. Barkai, Phys. Rev. Research 1 (2019)

    2019

  41. [49]

    Vezzani, E

    A. Vezzani, E. Barkai, and R. Burioni, Scientific Reports 10 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    Höll and E

    M. Höll and E. Barkai, Eur.Phys.J. B 94 (2021)

    2021

  43. [51]

    Vezzani and R

    A. Vezzani and R. Burioni, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 187101 (2024)

    2024

  44. [52]

    Bassanoni, A

    A. Bassanoni, A. Vezzani, and R. Burioni, Chaos 34, 10.1063/5.0216439 (2024)

    2024 doi

  45. [53]

    Hamdi, S

    O. Hamdi, S. Burov, and E. Barkai, The European Phys- ical Journal B 97, 1 (2024)

    2024

  46. [54]

    Burioni and A

    R. Burioni and A. Vezzani, Journal of Statistical Mechan- ics: Theory and Experiment 2020 (2020)

    2020

  47. [55]

    Bassanoni, A

    A. Bassanoni, A. Vezzani, E. Barkai, and R. Burioni, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2025, 043201 (2025)

    2025

  48. [56]

    Reynaud, Z

    K. Reynaud, Z. Schuss, N. Rouach, and D. H. and, Communicative & Integrative Bi- ology 8, e1017156 (2015) , pMID: 26478772, https://doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1017156

    2015

  49. [57]

    D. B. Dunson, C. R. Weinberg, S. D. Perreault, and R. E. Chapin, Biometrics 55, 537 (1999)

    1999

  50. [58]

    Bhatt, A

    S. Bhatt, A. Butola, S. Acuna, D. H. Hansen, J.-C. Tinguely, M. Nystad, D. S. Mehta, and K. Agarwal, F&S Science 5, 215 (2024)

    2024

  51. [59]

    Hyakutake, D

    T. Hyakutake, D. Higashiyama, and T. Tsuchiya, Journal of Biomechanics 176, 112336 (2024)

    2024

  52. [60]

    J. Yang, I. Kupka, Z. Schuss, and D. Holcman, Journal of Mathematical Biology 73, 423 (2016)

    2016

  53. [61]

    Zaferani, F

    M. Zaferani, F. Javi, A. Mokhtare, P. Li, and A. Ab- baspourrad, eLife 10, e68693 (2021)

    2021

  54. [62]

    Zaferani and A

    M. Zaferani and A. Abbaspourrad, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 248401 (2023)

    2023

  55. [63]

    Coles, An Introduction to Statistical Modelling of Ex- treme Values , Vol

    S. Coles, An Introduction to Statistical Modelling of Ex- treme Values , Vol. 6 (Springer London, 2001)

    2001

  56. [64]

    S. N. Majumdar, A. Pal, and G. Schehr, Physics Reports 840, 1 (2020) , extreme value statistics of correlated ran- dom variables: A pedagogical review

    2020

  57. [65]

    S. D. Lawley, Journal of Nonlinear Science 33, 53 (2023)

    2023

  58. [66]

    T. H. Harris, E. J. Banigan, D. A. Christian, C. Kon- radt, E. D. Tait Wojno, K. Norose, E. H. Wilson, B. John, W. Weninger, A. D. Luster, A. J. Liu, and C. A. Hunter, Nature 486, 545 (2012)

    2012

  59. [67]

    Bartumeus, M

    F. Bartumeus, M. G. E. da Luz, G. M. Viswanathan, and J. Catalan, Ecology 86, 3078 (2005) , https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1890/04-180

    2005 doi

  60. [68]

    Rare Events, Many Searchers, and Fast Target Reaching in a F inite Domain

    A. Caspi, R. Granek, and M. Elbaum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5655 (2000) . S1 Supplementary Material for: “Rare Events, Many Searchers, and Fast Target Reaching in a F inite Domain” Elisabetta Ellettari 1, Giacomo Nasuti 1, Alberto Bassanoni 1,2, Alessandro Vezzani 1,3, and Raffael...

    2000

  61. [69]

    Redundancy pri nciple and the role of extreme statistics in molecular and ce llular biology,

    Z. Schuss, K. Basnayake, and D. Holcman, “Redundancy pri nciple and the role of extreme statistics in molecular and ce llular biology,” Physics of Life Reviews 28, 52–79 (2019), doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2019.01.001

    2019 doi

  62. [70]

    Coles, An Introduction to Statistical Modelling of Extreme Values , Springer London, Vol

    S. Coles, An Introduction to Statistical Modelling of Extreme Values , Springer London, Vol. 6 (2001), doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-3675-0

    2001 doi

  63. [71]

    Extreme value stat istics of correlated random variables: A pedagogical revie w,

    S. N. Majumdar, A. Pal, and G. Schehr, “Extreme value stat istics of correlated random variables: A pedagogical revie w,” Physics Reports 840, 1–32 (2020), doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.10.005

    2020 doi

  64. [72]

    Random walks on lattices. II,

    E. W. Montroll and G. H. Weiss, “Random walks on lattices. II,” Journal of Mathematical Physics 6(2), 167–181 (1965)

    1965

  65. [73]

    Lévy walks,

    V. Zaburdaev, S. Denisov, and J. Klafter, “Lévy walks,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 87(2), 483–530 (2015), doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.87.483

    2015 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.