Charlotte Gils et al J. Stat. Mech. (2007) P09011 doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2007/09/P09011
Charlotte Gils, Helmut G Katzgraber and Matthias Troyer
Show affiliations
Figure 1. Schematic plot of the interaction potential
U(r) (equation (2)) between two particles with relative distance
r = |ri–rj|. For the particles feel an attraction; otherwise the potential is zero. Note that the model is defined in the limit . (a) The interaction potential as introduced in [11] with a hard-core radius
h = 1. (b)
The interaction potential modified in order to avoid a trivial particle collapse with a hard-core radius
R/4 < h < R/2. |
| Figure 2. Configuration of particles after 2 × 108 Monte Carlo steps for r0 = 10, R = 100, h = 30 (i.e., Tc ≈ 0.33), T = 0.1, N = 120 and an average particle spacing ρ–1/2 ≈ 88.3. |
| Figure 3. Configuration snapshot after 3 × 109 Monte Carlo steps for r0 = 10, R = 100, h = 30 (i.e., Tc ≈ 0.33), T = 0.1, N = 1200 and an average particle distance ρ–1/2 ≈ 108 (i.e., a smaller density than in figure 2). A polycrystalline structure with randomly oriented patches of hexagonal crystal is found. |
Figure 4. Particle configurations for N = 1000 particles (r0 = 10, R = 100, h = 30, ) in a system with average particle distance
ρ–1/2 ≈ 167. (a) Initial random configuration, (b) configuration snapshot after
2 × 107 MC steps, (c) configuration snapshot after
2 × 108 MC steps, and (d) after 5 × 109 MC steps. As in figure 3, a polycrystalline structure emerges. |
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
Laura Silva et al. 1998 ApJ 509 103