Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Attractive n-type contact processes

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1006.5723 v2 pith:YH7L75PY submitted 2010-06-29 math.PR

classification math.PR
keywords particlesystemscontactinteractingmonotonicityprocessesattractivecertain
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Interacting particle systems are continuous time Markov processes which are used to construct models in many disciplines. Monotonicity is a property that some interacting particle systems possess. A monotone interacting particle system is called attractive. A benefit of attractiveness is that it simplifies certain calculations, one of which is the ability to use some computational algorithms to sample exactly from the stationary distribution of an ergodic process. Monotonicity is well understood for spin systems such as the contact process. Spin systems only include two particle types however, while in many applied models, it is desirable to include more species of particles. In this paper a general framework of monotonicity will be outlined for a certain class of multitype contact processes.

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. A stochastic comparison result for the multitype contact process with unequal death rates

    math.PR 2019-08 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    The paper claims a sufficient condition, lambda(β,c,α) > lambda_c, for strong survival of type 2 in the unequal-death-rate multitype contact process, but the proof's central comparison is not justified.

Pith tools