pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.06486 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-07 · ❄️ cond-mat.stat-mech

Dimensional crossover in surface growth on rectangular substrates

Ismael S. S. Carrasco , Tiago J. Oliveira This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 17:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.stat-mech
keywords surface growthdimensional crossoverKPZEdwards-WilkinsonMullins-HerringVLDSroughness scalingheight distribution
0
0 comments X

The pith

Rectangular substrates induce a crossover from two- to one-dimensional scaling in interface growth across multiple universality classes.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper extends earlier KPZ results to show that surface growth on rectangles with large aspect ratio R = Ly/Lx displays an early-time regime governed by two-dimensional exponents followed by a late-time regime governed by one-dimensional exponents. The crossover time scales as Lx raised to the two-dimensional dynamic exponent in most cases. The same transition appears in the height distribution for the VLDS class both in the growth regime and in saturation. These findings hold for Edwards-Wilkinson, Mullins-Herring, and Villain-Lai-Das Sarma classes and also produce a non-universal saturation roughness when the two lateral sizes are related by a power law.

Core claim

For sufficiently large aspect ratio R = Ly/Lx, the roughness W scales as t to the power beta_2D for t much less than tc and as t to the power beta_1D for t much greater than tc, with tc approximately equal to Lx to the power z_2D. The VLDS height distribution crosses from its two-dimensional to its one-dimensional form at the same time. In the steady state both roughness and VLDS height distribution interpolate between the two- and one-dimensional limits as R increases. When Lx equals Ly to the power delta and delta exceeds z_1D over z_2D, the temporal crossover vanishes and the saturation roughness scales as Ly to the power Lambda equal to (1 minus delta) times alpha_1D plus delta times the

What carries the argument

The aspect ratio R = Ly/Lx of the rectangular substrate, which sets the crossover time tc between the two-dimensional and one-dimensional scaling regimes.

If this is right

  • Roughness versus time splits into two distinct power-law segments separated by tc proportional to Lx^z_2D.
  • VLDS height distributions transition from their two-dimensional to one-dimensional forms across the same crossover.
  • Steady-state roughness and distributions interpolate continuously between two- and one-dimensional limits with increasing R.
  • When Lx = Ly^delta with delta larger than z_1D/z_2D the temporal crossover disappears and saturation roughness acquires the mixed exponent Lambda.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Experimental thin-film deposition on rectangular substrates with controllable aspect ratio could be used to observe the predicted crossover in roughness or height statistics.
  • The special ratio delta* = z_1D/z_2D offers a geometric knob that eliminates the time-dependent crossover and replaces it with a non-universal saturation scaling.
  • The same geometric mechanism may govern other nonequilibrium growth processes whenever the substrate has a pronounced rectangular anisotropy.

Load-bearing premise

The simulated system sizes and run times are large enough to isolate the early two-dimensional regime, the crossover, and the late one-dimensional regime without residual finite-size effects.

What would settle it

A simulation or experiment on a rectangle with very large Ly/Lx that shows either a single unchanging power-law regime in roughness versus time or a crossover time that fails to scale as Lx to the power z_2D.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.06486 by Ismael S. S. Carrasco, Tiago J. Oliveira.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: presents the temporal variation of the global roughness, W, for models in the VLDS, MH, and EW classes. Similarly to the behavior observed in [15] for KPZ systems, in all cases W starts increasing according to the 2D scaling at short times, but then, at a time tc, it crosses over to an asymptotic 1D regime. We recall that the exact exponents for the EW and MH classes are αdD = 2κ − d 2 , βdD = 2κ − d 4κ an… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Line roughness [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Temporal evolution of the (a) skewness [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Rescaled curves of the squared steady state roughnes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Temporal evolution of the surface roughness for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) from simple power-law fits to the data. For the VLDS and MH classes, we have ΛV LDS ∈ [0.653, 0.969] and ΛMH ∈ [1, 3/2]. Hence, more clear dif￾ferences can be observed in the scaling of Ws for them, depending on δ, as we may indeed see in Figs. 6(b) and 6(c). For instance, in the VLDS case, we expect to have Λ = 0.811 for δ = 1/2 and Λ = 0.890 for δ = 1/4. The exponent found in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figure… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. (a) Rescaled squared roughness [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In a recent work [Phys. Rev. E 109, L042102 (2024)], interesting dimensional crossovers [from two- to one-dimensional (2D to 1D) scaling] were found in the growth of Kardar-Parisi-Zhang (KPZ) interfaces on rectangular substrates, with lateral sizes $L_y > L_x$. Here, we extend this study to other universality classes for interface growth -- specifically, the Edwards-Wilkinson (EW), the Mullins-Herring (MH), and the Villain-Lai Das Sarma (VLDS) classes. From extensive simulations, we demonstrate that, in all systems with sufficiently large aspect ratio $\mathcal{R}=L_y/L_x$, the roughness $W$ scales with time $t$ in the growth regime as $W \sim t^{\beta_{\text{2D}}}$ for $t \ll t_c$ and $W \sim t^{\beta_{\text{1D}}}$ for $t \gg t_c$, where $t_c \sim L_x^{z_{2\text{D}}}$ in most cases. For the VLDS class, this crossover is also observed in the height distribution (HD), which approaches its characteristic probability density function for the 2D case at short times ($t \ll t_c$) and then crosses over to the asymptotic 1D HD. Dimensional crossovers are also found in the steady state regime, both in the roughness scaling as well as in the VLDS HD, which interpolate between the 2D and 1D ones as $\mathcal{R}$ increases. The particular case $L_x = L_y^{\delta}$, with $0 < \delta < 1$, is also discussed in detail and reveals interesting features of the investigated systems. For instance, there exist a `special' exponent $\delta^* = z_{1\text{D}}/z_{2\text{D}}$ such that the temporal crossover cannot be observed for $\delta > \delta^*$. Moreover, this leads the saturation roughness to display a nonuniversal scaling: $W_s \sim L_y^{\Lambda}$, with $\Lambda = (1-\delta) \alpha_{1\text{D}} + \delta \alpha_{2\text{D}}$.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript extends prior work on dimensional crossovers in KPZ interface growth to the EW, MH, and VLDS universality classes on rectangular substrates with large aspect ratio R = Ly/Lx. Using extensive simulations, it reports that the roughness W(t) crosses over from the 2D growth exponent β_2D at early times (t ≪ t_c) to the 1D exponent β_1D at late times (t ≫ t_c), with t_c ∼ L_x^{z_2D} in most cases. Analogous crossovers appear in the steady-state roughness and, for VLDS, in the height distribution (HD). The special geometry L_x = L_y^δ is analyzed in detail, revealing a critical δ* = z_1D/z_2D above which the temporal crossover disappears and the saturation roughness follows the nonuniversal form W_s ∼ L_y^Λ with Λ = (1−δ)α_1D + δ α_2D.

Significance. If the numerical evidence for clean regime separation holds, the work establishes that dimensional crossover is generic across linear and nonlinear interface growth classes, with the crossover time controlled by the 2D dynamic exponent. The identification of δ* and the resulting nonuniversal saturation scaling provides a concrete, testable prediction that could motivate analytic treatments of anisotropic geometries. The VLDS HD crossover adds a higher-order statistic that strengthens the claim beyond roughness alone.

major comments (2)
  1. [Simulation methods and results for EW/MH/VLDS roughness] The central claim requires that, for sufficiently large R, the time series W(t) exhibits extended, unambiguous power-law plateaus in the 2D and 1D regimes separated by a sharp crossover at t_c. Because computational cost scales with L_x × L_y and t_c grows with L_x, the accessible dynamic range may be too narrow to produce clean asymptotics without residual 2D-like fluctuations or saturation effects from finite Ly. The manuscript must supply effective-exponent plots, correlation-length data, or direct measurements of ξ(t)/L_x in both regimes to demonstrate that the reported β values and t_c scaling are not contaminated by crossover transients.
  2. [VLDS height-distribution analysis] For the VLDS height-distribution crossover, the claim that the PDF approaches the characteristic 2D form at t ≪ t_c and the 1D form at t ≫ t_c additionally requires adequate sampling of the distribution tails in both regimes. The paper should report the number of independent realizations, the binning procedure, and the system sizes used for the HD histograms, together with error estimates on the tail probabilities, to confirm that the observed crossover is statistically robust rather than an artifact of undersampling rare large-height events.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and introduction] The abstract states that t_c ∼ L_x^{z_2D} 'in most cases'; the main text should explicitly list the exceptions, quantify the deviations, and explain their origin (e.g., logarithmic corrections or marginal dimensions).
  2. [Notation and figures] Notation for the aspect ratio is introduced as script R but appears inconsistently in some figure captions and equations; uniform usage throughout would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive evaluation of our manuscript and for the constructive comments, which will help strengthen the presentation of our results. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Simulation methods and results for EW/MH/VLDS roughness] The central claim requires that, for sufficiently large R, the time series W(t) exhibits extended, unambiguous power-law plateaus in the 2D and 1D regimes separated by a sharp crossover at t_c. Because computational cost scales with L_x × L_y and t_c grows with L_x, the accessible dynamic range may be too narrow to produce clean asymptotics without residual 2D-like fluctuations or saturation effects from finite Ly. The manuscript must supply effective-exponent plots, correlation-length data, or direct measurements of ξ(t)/L_x in both regimes to demonstrate that the reported β values and t_c scaling are not contaminated by crossover transients.

    Authors: We agree that additional diagnostics would strengthen the evidence for clean regime separation. Although the original simulations already display clear power-law regimes and crossover scaling consistent with t_c ∼ L_x^{z_2D} across multiple system sizes, we will add effective-exponent plots β_eff(t) together with correlation-length data ξ(t)/L_x in the revised manuscript. These will explicitly confirm extended plateaus at the expected β_2D and β_1D values and the absence of significant transient contamination in the reported windows. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [VLDS height-distribution analysis] For the VLDS height-distribution crossover, the claim that the PDF approaches the characteristic 2D form at t ≪ t_c and the 1D form at t ≫ t_c additionally requires adequate sampling of the distribution tails in both regimes. The paper should report the number of independent realizations, the binning procedure, and the system sizes used for the HD histograms, together with error estimates on the tail probabilities, to confirm that the observed crossover is statistically robust rather than an artifact of undersampling rare large-height events.

    Authors: We concur that these methodological details are necessary to establish statistical robustness. In the revised version we will add an appendix (or expanded methods section) reporting the number of independent realizations (typically several hundred for smaller systems), the histogram binning procedure, the system sizes employed for the HD analysis, and error estimates on the tail probabilities obtained from bootstrap resampling. This will confirm that the observed 2D-to-1D crossover in the VLDS height distribution is not affected by undersampling. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: claims rest on independent simulations compared to literature exponents

full rationale

The paper's central results are direct numerical measurements of roughness scaling and height distributions in EW, MH, and VLDS models on rectangular lattices. These are compared to independently established 1D and 2D exponents from prior literature. The single citation to a recent KPZ study supplies context for the extension but does not justify or define any of the new claims; those claims are obtained from fresh simulations whose outputs are not forced by the cited work. No analytical derivation, ansatz, uniqueness theorem, or fitted parameter is present that reduces to a self-definition or to the same data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claims rest on the standard definitions of the EW, MH, and VLDS stochastic growth equations and the known 1D/2D scaling exponents for those classes; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The Edwards-Wilkinson, Mullins-Herring, and Villain-Lai-Das Sarma equations govern the interface evolution in their respective universality classes.
    Invoked throughout the abstract as the systems under study.
  • standard math The 1D and 2D roughness exponents β, α, z for each class are known from prior analytic or numerical work and can be used as benchmarks.
    Used to identify the observed regimes and the crossover time scaling.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5720 in / 1582 out tokens · 49048 ms · 2026-05-10T17:58:13.840731+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    —, in heat conduction on rectangular domains [4], Bose-Einstein condensates [5], quantum phase transitions [6], confined solids [7] and so on. Moreover, experimental examples include ultra-thin magnetic films [8], polymer coatings [9], layered superconductors [10], thermal [11] and quantum transport [12], bosonic gases of trapped ul- tracold atoms [13] or p...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  2. [2]

    line moments

    also apply for these other classes. The only exception is the EW class, where W displays logarithmic behav- iors in 2D; and the appropriate scaling relations for this case are devised here. The crossover in the HDs is also discussed for these classes, in both the growth and satu- ration regimes. We investigate also the interesting situ- ation where Lx = L...

    work page 2048

  3. [3]

    Crossover phenomena,

    D. J. Amit and V. Martin- Mayor, “Crossover phenomena,” in Field Theory, the Renormalization Group, and Critical Phen omena, 3rd ed. (2005) pp. 342–363

    work page 2005

  4. [4]

    Graim and D

    T. Graim and D. P. Landau, Phys. Rev. B 24, 5156 (1981); I. Hatta and R. Abe, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 31, 1097 (1983); A. Yamagata, Physica A 214, 445 (1995); K. W. Lee, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 40, L398 (2002); M. G. Gonzalez, E. A. Ghioldi, C. J. Gazza, L. O. Manuel, and A. E. Trumper, Phys. Rev. B 96, 174423 (2017)

    work page 1981

  5. [5]

    Binder, Thin Solid Films 20, 367 (1974); W

    K. Binder, Thin Solid Films 20, 367 (1974); W. Janke and K. Nather, Nucl. Phys. B 30, 834 (1993); Y. Laosiritaworn, J. Poulter, and J. B. Staunton, Phys. Rev. B 70, 104413 (2004); P. V. Prudnikov, V. V. Prudnikov, M. A. Menshikova, and N. I. Piskunova, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 387, 77 (2015); I. S. Popov, A. P. Popova, and P. V. Prud- nikov, J. Phys: Conf. S...

    work page 1974

  6. [6]

    L. Yang, P. Grassberger, and B. Hu, Phys. Rev. E 74, 062101 (2006); P. Grassberger and L. Yang, arXiv: , 0204247 (2002); K. Hattori and M. Sambonchiku, Phys. Rev. E 102, 012121 (2020)

    work page 2006

  7. [7]

    Stein and A

    E. Stein and A. Pelster, New J. Phys. 24, 023013 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Zheng, Y

    Q. Zheng, Y. Wang, L. Liang, Q. Huang, S. Wang, W. Xiong, X. Zhou, W. Chen, X. Chen, and J. Hu, Phys. Rev. Research 5, 013136 (2023)

    work page 2023

  9. [9]

    Y. Wang, J. Wang, G. Yao, Z. Fan, E. Granato, M. Kosterlitz, T. Ala-Nissila, R. Car, and J. Sun, PNAS 122, e2502980122 (2025)

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    Li and K

    Y. Li and K. Baberschke, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 1208 (1992); F. Huang, M. T. Kief, G. J. Mankey, and R. F. Willis, Phys. Rev. B 49, 3962 (1994)

    work page 1992

  11. [11]

    L. Sung, A. Karim, J. F. Douglas, and C. C. Han, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 4368 (1996)

    work page 1996

  12. [12]

    S. T. Ruggiero, T. W. Barbee, and M. R. Beasley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 1299 (1980); S. Uji, C. Ter- akura, T. Terashima, Y. Okano, and R. Kato, Phys. Rev. B 64, 214517 (2001)

    work page 1980

  13. [13]

    Ghosh, W

    S. Ghosh, W. Bao, D. L. Nika, S. Sub- rina, E. P. Pokatilov, C. N. Lau, and A. A. Balandin, Nature Mater. 9, 555 (2010); N. Sakhavand and R. Shahsavari, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 7, 18312 (2015); L. Dong, Q. Xi, D. Chen, J. Guo, T. Nakayama, Y. Li, Z. Liang, J. Zhou, X. Xu, and B. Li, Natl. Sci. Rev. 5, 500 (2018)

    work page 2010

  14. [14]

    Gehring, K

    P. Gehring, K. Vaklinova, A. Hoyer, H. M. Benia, V. Skakalova, G. Argentero, F. Eder, J. C. Meyer, M. Burghard, and K. Kern, Sci. Rep. 5, 11691 (2015)

    work page 2015

  15. [15]

    Vogler, R

    A. Vogler, R. Labouvie, G. Barontini, S. Eggert, V. Guar - rera, and H. Ott, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 215301 (2014); G. Biagioni, N. Antolini, A. A. na, M. Modugno, A. Fioretti, C. Gabbanini, L. Tanzi, and G. Mod- ugno, Phys. Rev. X 12, 021019 (2022); R. Shah, T. J. Barrett, A. Colcelli, F. Orucevi´ c, A. Trombettoni, and P. Kr¨ uger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 1...

    work page 2014

  16. [16]

    K. K. Umesh, J. Schulz, J. Schmitt, M. Weitz, G. von Freymann, and F. Vewinger, Nature Phys. 20, 1810 (2024)

    work page 2024

  17. [17]

    I. S. S. Carrasco and T. J. Oliveira, Phys. Rev. E 109, L042102 (2024)

    work page 2024

  18. [18]

    Kardar, G

    M. Kardar, G. Parisi, and Y.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 889 (1986)

    work page 1986

  19. [19]

    Chi, C.-C

    C.-Y. Chi, C.-C. Chang, S. Hu, T.-W. Yeh, S. B. Cronin, and P. D. Dapkus, Nano Lett. 13, 2506 (2013); H. Schmid, M. Borg, K. Moselund, L. Gignac, C. M. Breslin, J. Bruley, D. Cutaia, and H. Riel, Appl. Phys. Lett. 106, 233101 (2015); G. Murillo, I. Rodr ´ ıguez-Ruiz, and J. Esteve, Cryst. Growth Des. 16, 5059 (2016); J. Winnerl, M. Kraut, S. Artmeier, and...

    work page 2013

  20. [20]

    X. Yuan, D. Pan, Y. Zhou, X. Zhang, K. Peng, B. Zhao, M. Deng, J. He, H. H. Tan, and C. Ja- gadish, Appl. Phys. Rev. 8, 021302 (2021); B. Wang, Y. Zeng, Y. Song, Y. Wang, L. Liang, L. Qin, J. Zhang, P. Jia, Y. Lei, C. Qiu, Y. Ning, and L. Wang, Crystals 12, 1011 (2022)

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    S. F. Edwards and D. R. Wilkinson, Proc. R. Soc. Lon- don, Ser. A 381, 17 (1982)

    work page 1982

  22. [22]

    W. W. Mullins, J. Appl. Phys. 28, 333 (1957); C. Her- ring, in Phys. Powder Metall. , edited by W. E. Kingston (McGraw-Hill, New York, USA, 1951)

    work page 1957

  23. [23]

    Villain, J

    J. Villain, J. Phys. I 1, 19 (1991); Z.-W. Lai and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2348 (1991)

    work page 1991

  24. [24]

    J. M. Kim and J. M. Kosterlitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 2289 (1989)

    work page 1989

  25. [25]

    B. A. Mello, A. S. Chaves, and F. A. Oliveira, Phys. Rev. E. 63, 041113 (2001)

    work page 2001

  26. [26]

    T. J. Oliveira, K. Dechoum, J. A. Redinz, and F. D. A. A. Reis, Phys. Rev. E 74, 011604 (2006)

    work page 2006

  27. [27]

    Family, J

    F. Family, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen 19, 441 (1986)

    work page 1986

  28. [28]

    J. M. Kim and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 2903 (1994)

    work page 1994

  29. [29]

    Krug, Phys

    J. Krug, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 2907 (1994)

    work page 1994

  30. [30]

    Y. Kim, D. K. Park, and J. M. Kim, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 27, L533 (1994)

    work page 1994

  31. [31]

    Barabasi and H

    A.-L. Barabasi and H. E. Stanley, Fractal Concepts in Surface Growth (Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, England, 1995)

    work page 1995

  32. [32]

    Krug, Adv

    J. Krug, Adv. Phys. 46, 139 (1997)

    work page 1997

  33. [33]

    H. K. Janssen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1082 (1997). 10

    work page 1997

  34. [34]

    I. S. S. Carrasco and T. J. Oliveira, Phys. Rev. E 94, 050801(R) (2016)

    work page 2016

  35. [35]

    I. S. S. Carrasco and T. J. Oliveira, Phys. Rev. E 99, 032140 (2019)

    work page 2019

  36. [36]

    [33] and the ν values reported there for LC1 and LC2 models are exchanged

    There is a typo in Table III of Ref. [33] and the ν values reported there for LC1 and LC2 models are exchanged

    work page

  37. [37]

    F. D. A. Aar˜ ao Reis, Phys. Rev. E 70, 031607 (2004)

    work page 2004

  38. [38]

    T. J. Oliveira and F. D. A. Aar˜ ao Reis, Phys. Rev. E 76, 61601 (2007)

    work page 2007

  39. [39]

    T. J. Oliveira, Phys. Rev. E 106, L062103 (2022)

    work page 2022