R Lambiotte and S Redner J. Stat. Mech. (2007) L10001 doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2007/10/L10001
R Lambiotte1,2 and S Redner3
Show affiliations
| Figure 1. Illustration of an update for the vacillating voter on the square lattice (left and middle). For the configuration on the right, the central voter flips with probability 5/6 because out of the six ways of selecting two neighbors, only one choice leads to both neighbors agreeable (dashed). |
Figure 2. Exit probability versus the density of voters x for the case N = 16, N = 25 and N = 100. |
Figure 3. Exit probability as a function of the initial density of voters x for a one-dimensional system composed of 25, 36 and 1000 voters respectively. The voter model result, , that follows from magnetization conservation is shown for comparison. |
Figure 4. Double logarithmic plot of the number of voters versus time on the square lattice starting from a
4 × 4 square of voters in a background of voters. |
Figure 5. Exit probability as a function of the initial density of voters x for a square lattice of 16, 25, 36 and 49 voters, respectively, with periodic boundary conditions. |
| Figure 6. Snapshots of the vacillating (left) and pure (right) voter model on a 50 × 50 lattice starting with a random zero-magnetization state after 100 time steps. The correlation function C1 equals 0.31 (left) and 0.59 (right) respectively. |
R Lambiotte and S Redner J. Stat. Mech. (2007) L10001
Miquel Montero J. Stat. Mech. (2007) P04002
Fumihiko Matsui et al 2009 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 190 012111
Emiel de Smit et al 2009 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 190 012161
Dylan Walker et al J. Stat. Mech. (2007) P06010
Hangfeng Ji et al 2007 Nanotechnology 18 445704
Jeong San Kim and Barry C Sanders 2008 J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 41 495301
Iwan Jensen J. Stat. Mech. (2004) P10008
Ramon Ferrer i Cancho and Albert Díaz-Guilera J. Stat. Mech. (2007) P06009
Richard A Neher et al J. Stat. Mech. (2008) P01011