Paper detail

The delayed uncoupled continuous-time random walks do not provide a model for the telegraph equation

It has been alleged in several papers that the so called delayed continuous-time random walks (DCTRWs) provide a model for the one-dimensional telegraph equation at microscopic level. This conclusion, being widespread now, is strange, since the telegraph equation describes phenomena with finite propagation speed, while the velocity of the motion of particles in the DCTRWs is infinite. In this paper we investigate how accurate are the approximations to the DCTRWs provided by the telegraph equation. We show that the diffusion equation, being the correct limit of the DCTRWs, gives better approximations in $L_2$ norm to the DCTRWs than the telegraph equation. We conclude therefore that, first, the DCTRWs do not provide any correct microscopic interpretation of the one-dimensional telegraph equation, and second, the kinetic (exact) model of the telegraph equation is different from the model based on the DCTRWs.

preprint2012arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.