Paper detail

Polynomial sequences for bond percolation critical thresholds

In this paper, I compute the inhomogeneous (multi-probability) bond critical surfaces for the (4,6,12) and (3^4,6) lattices using the linearity approximation described in (Scullard and Ziff, J. Stat. Mech. P03021), implemented as a branching process of lattices. I find the estimates for the bond percolation thresholds, p_c(4,6,12)=0.69377849... and p_c(3^4,6)=0.43437077..., compared with Parviainen's numerical results of p_c \approx 0.69373383 and p_c \approx 0.43430621 . These deviations are of the order 10^{-5}, as is standard for this method, although they are outside Parviainen's typical standard error of 10^{-7}. Deriving thresholds in this way for a given lattice leads to a polynomial with integer coefficients, the root in [0,1] of which gives the estimate for the bond threshold. I show how the method can be refined, leading to a sequence of higher order polynomials making predictions that likely converge to the exact answer. Finally, I discuss how this fact hints that for certain graphs, such as the kagome lattice, the exact bond threshold may not be the root of any polynomial with integer coefficients.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.