Vivien Lecomte and Julien Tailleur J. Stat. Mech. (2007) P03004 doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2007/03/P03004
Vivien Lecomte1,2 and Julien Tailleur3
Show affiliations
| Figure 1. A history of the system between time t0 = 0 and time t. |
| Figure 2. Numerical evaluation of (1/L)ψQ(s) for the Simple Exclusion Process (N = 200, L = 400). (a) Comparison between direct numerical measurement (blue crosses) and results from thermodynamic integration (red circles). (b) Comparison between numerical results (red circles) and analytical prediction (22) valid for small s (blue line). |
Figure 3. Plot of the large deviation function
(1/L)ψQ(s) of the asymmetric simple exclusion process, for
L = 400 sites and
N = 200 particles. The jump rates are p = 1.2 and q = 0.8, whence . Blue crosses and red circles correspond to direct computation and thermodynamic integration, respectively. The asymmetry appears when comparing the extreme points
s = ± 9.5. |
Figure 4. (a) Average profile ρ for s = 0.3. To minimize the overall current, the system develops an asymmetric shock, where only the front particles can jump easily. (b) A typical configuration for . The particles are distributed almost uniformly. Note that with s < 0 gives a similar result. |
Figure 5. (a) Plot of the large deviation function
(1/L)ψK(s) associated to the number of events K in the contact process in a field (L = 120 sites). (b) The dynamical phase transition occurs at
sc ~ 0.057. This is exemplified by plotting for different system sizes (L = 4 in black, 8 in red, 15 in blue and 50 in magenta). |
Vivien Lecomte and Julien Tailleur J. Stat. Mech. (2007) P03004
Charlotte Gils et al J. Stat. Mech. (2007) P09011
N R Soman et al 2008 Nanotechnology 19 185102
Ram Brustein and Amos Yarom J. Stat. Mech. (2008) P07025
Yang Liu et al 2007 Nanotechnology 18 424017
Martin Sieber 2002 J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 35 L613
S. Blondin et al. 2008 ApJ 682 724
Ignasi Ribas et al. 2005 ApJ 622 680
M. J. Pivovaroff et al. 2001 ApJ 554 161
P. Panuzzo et al. 2007 ApJ 656 206