Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 54 references

Critical dynamical fluctuations in reaction-diffusion processes

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that at the critical point of a one-dimensional reaction-diffusion model, the rescaled magnetisation converges to an explicit cubic stochastic differential equation while all other density fluctuations stay Gaussian with…

desk verdict A real small-a theorem plus a conditional general-a branch that depends on an unproved log-Sobolev inequality. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.20008 v1 pith:EJFDCKZF submitted 2025-05-26 math.PR math-phmath.MP

Benoit Dagallier , Claudio Landim This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.PRmath-phmath.MP MSC 60K3582C2260F1782C31
keywords criticalslowdownreaction-diffusionequationGlauber-Kawasakidynamicsmagnetisationfluctuationscubicstochasticdifferentialrelativeentropymethodlog-Sobolevinequalitydensityfluctuationfield
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper studies a one-dimensional interacting particle system built from two dynamics — a particle-conserving exclusion process and a spin-flip (Glauber) reaction — tuned to sit exactly at a dynamical phase transition. Its central claim is that the critical slowdown of the dynamics at this point is caused by a single observable: the global density, or magnetisation, of the system. The paper proves that, on the critical time-scale and with the critical scaling $n^{3/4}$, the rescaled magnetisation converges to the solution of an explicit non-linear stochastic differential equation with cubic drift, so its fluctuations are non-Gaussian; simultaneously, every other observable equilibrates so quickly that the density field on mean-zero test functions converges to a Gaussian field, white in time and coloured in space, with a covariance the paper computes in closed form. A reader should care because this is a proof from the microscopic dynamics that the slow/fast decoupling assumed by critical-dynamics heuristics can hold in a short-range model, precisely where local equilibrium fails because the non-linearity at the transition is global, involving powers of the density itself.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a relative-entropy estimate in which the reference measure is chosen to encode the slow mode. The plain product measure fails: the magnetisation term $\sqrt n\int f (Y^n)^2\,d\nu^n_{1/2}$ cannot be absorbed by the energy (carré du champ), so the paper first tilts by the magnetisation, $\nu^n_U \propto e^{nU(m/n)}$, which cancels that term and yields the unconditional small-$a$ result. The second, more important object is the kernel $g = g_{\gamma,a}$, the unique smooth solution of the boundary-value problem $$g''(x) - c_{\delta,b}g(x) - \tfrac14\int_{\mathbb{T}} g'(x-z)g'(z)\,dz + \tfrac{b}{2}\int_{\mathbb{T}} g(x-z)g(z)\,dz = 0, \quad g'(0+)-g'(1-) = -16\delta b,$$ with Fourier coefficients $\lambda^-_\ell = [4\pi^2\ell^2 + 2b(1+2\delta) - |4\pi^2\ell^2 - 2b(1-2\delta)|]/(b+2\pi^2\ell^2)$. Tilting the product measure by the quadratic form $\exp[\tfrac{1}{2n}\sum_{i\ne j} g_{i,j}\bar\eta_i\bar\eta_j]$ makes the adjoint $L^*_n 1$ contain no leading-order two-point term — the boundary condition exactly cancels $16\gamma a\sqrt n\sum_i\bar\eta_i\bar\eta_{i+1}$ — leaving only four-point and higher correlations, which are then controlled by energy estimates, concentration inequalities, and large-deviation bounds restricting the magnetisation. Fast modes are handled through log-Sobolev inequalities for the dynamics at fixed magnetisation.

What would settle it

Estimate numerically the log-Sobolev constant of the fixed-magnetisation tilted measure $\nu^{n,m}_g$ for the nearest-neighbour exchange Dirichlet form, say at $a=1$, $\theta=0$ and $n$ up to a few hundred: if the constant grows faster than order $n^2$ for some $a>0$, the free-energy bound (Theorem 2.10) and with it the large-$a$ branch of Theorems 2.3 and 2.7 fail, settling the conjecture behind Assumption B.5. A second, direct check: simulate the rescaled magnetisation at $a > a_0$ and test the cubic drift $-2a\theta y - 2ay^3$ with quartic-moment bounds; a systematic mismatch would pinpoint the same failure.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is Theorem 2.3: with the reaction coefficient $\gamma = \tfrac12(1-\theta/\sqrt n)$ and the generator accelerated by $\sqrt n$, starting from any initial distribution whose relative entropy against the uniform measure is $O(\sqrt n)$ and whose magnetisation converges weakly, the rescaled magnetisation $Y^n_t = n^{-3/4}\sum_{i\in\mathbb{T}_n}(\eta_i(t)-\tfrac12)$ converges in $L^p$ path space, $1<p<\tfrac43$, to the unique solution of $$dY_t = -2a\$\theta$ Y_t\,dt - $2aY_t^{3}$\,dt + \sqrt a\,dW_t,$$ and the density fluctuation field acts by projection: for every smooth $H$, the integral $\int_0^t |Y^n_s(H) - \langle H\rangle Y^n_s|\,ds$ vanishes in expectation as $n\to\infty$. Theorem 2.7 completes the picture: on mean-zero test functions the Gaussian-scaled field $n^{-1/2}\sum_i \bar\eta_i(t)H(i/n)$ converges in finite-dimensional distributions to a Gaussian field with covariance $\mathbf{1}_{t=s}\{\tfrac14(H,G) + \tfrac{a}{2}(H,(-\Delta)^{-1}G)\}$, independent of the initial condition. The small-reaction regime $a\le a_0$ is proven unconditionally; the full range of $a$ is conditional on a conjectured log-Sobolev inequality that the paper flags as not yet known.

Load-bearing premise

The results for every strength $a$ of the reaction term rest on Assumption B.5, a log-Sobolev inequality for the tilted fixed-magnetisation measures $\nu^{n,m}_g$ with constant of order $n^2$, which the paper itself states is "conjectured to be true" and "not known at the moment"; only the small-$a$ regime is proven unconditionally.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At criticality the density field collapses onto one scalar: for every smooth $H$, $\int_0^t |Y^n_s(H) - \langle H\rangle Y^n_s|\,ds$ vanishes in expectation, so the magnetisation carries all slow fluctuation information.
  • Magnetisation fluctuations are non-Gaussian at scale $n^{3/4}$: they follow $dY_t = -2a\theta Y_t\,dt - 2aY_t^3\,dt + \sqrt a\,dW_t$, the cubic drift arising from the degenerate quartic term in the reaction potential $V$ at $\gamma = 1/2$.
  • All fast observables remain Gaussian: the covariance $\mathbf{1}_{t=s}\{\tfrac14(H,G) + \tfrac{a}{2}(H,(-\Delta)^{-1}G)\}$ is white in time and coloured in space, and the limiting field does not depend on the initial condition.
  • The slowdown is quantified: critical fluctuations evolve on the $\sqrt n$ time-scale, and the special kernel $g$ with explicit Fourier coefficients makes the two-point correlations cancel so the slow/fast decoupling works for arbitrary $a$.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If Assumption B.5 is eventually proved, the same slow/fast recipe — identify the conserved slow observables, tilt the reference measure to cancel two-point correlations, then prove log-Sobolev bounds on fixed-conserved-quantity slices — should apply to any conservative critical dynamics with finitely many slow modes.
  • The covariance relation $\tfrac14 \mathrm{id} + \tfrac{a}{2}(-\Delta)^{-1} = (4\,\mathrm{id} - g^0)^{-1}$ suggests that in dimension two or higher the fast-mode Gaussian field ceases to be a function because $(-\Delta)^{-1}$ diverges, exactly the obstruction the paper identifies for generalising beyond one dimension.
  • A numerical estimation of the log-Sobolev constant of $\nu^{n,m}_g$ at moderate $n$ across a range of $a$ would directly test the paper's conditional branch: quadratic growth in $n$ would confirm the conjecture, while faster growth would pinpoint where the free-energy estimate breaks.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies a one-dimensional Glauber+Kawasaki reaction-diffusion process at the critical point γ = (1/2)(1 − θ/√n). With the magnetisation rescaled by n^{3/4} and time accelerated by √n, the authors claim that the magnetisation converges in L^p path space to the solution of the non-linear stochastic ODE dY_t = −2aθY_t dt − 2aY_t^3 dt + √a dW_t, and that the density fluctuation field projects onto this magnetisation. A second theorem asserts that mean-zero Gaussian-scaled density fluctuations converge to a time-white, space-coloured Gaussian field with explicit covariance. The proof develops a relative-entropy/free-energy method with tilted reference measures: first a magnetisation-tilted product measure ν_U for small a, then a two-point-tilted measure ν_g for all a. The all-a branch is explicitly made conditional on Assumption B.5, a conjectured log-Sobolev inequality for the tilted canonical measures.

Significance. If the small-a results are correct, they constitute a substantial rigorous advance: they give quantitative critical slowdown, identify the single slow observable, and derive non-Gaussian magnetisation fluctuations and explicit Gaussian fast-mode covariances for a short-range microscopic model. The proof strategy, especially the decoupling of slow and fast modes and the construction of the kernel g in Proposition 2.9, is ingenious and technically demanding. The paper is commendably honest in flagging the conjectural nature of its key log-Sobolev input. However, the advertised general-a results are not currently theorems: they rest on a conjecture that the text itself states is not known, and the known weaker form with an extra log n factor would break the main Gronwall/free-energy argument. The unconditional small-a branch remains a solid, publishable contribution.

major comments (2)
  1. [Assumption B.5; Remark B.6; Theorems 2.3(ii), 2.10; Section 6, Eq. (6.84)] The general-a branch of the paper is conditional on Assumption B.5, which is a conjectured log-Sobolev inequality for the tilted canonical measures ν_{n,m}^g. Section 6 states that this inequality is 'conjectured to be true' and 'not known at the moment', and Remark B.6 explains that for g ≠ 0 only a modified Dirichlet-form version with an additional log n prefactor is currently known. This is load-bearing: Lemma 6.10 and Eq. (6.84) use the slicewise log-Sobolev inequality to convert entropy controls into a multiple of δ n^{5/2} Γ, and the log n prefactor would leave an unbounded remainder, destroying the Gronwall derivation of Theorem 2.10. Consequently Theorems 2.3(ii) and 2.7 for all a > 0 are conditional statements, not established theorems. The authors should either prove Assumption B.5, or explicitly restructure the paper so that the abstract and introduction present the all-a statements as conditional on a conjecture and reserve the unconditional claims for a ≤ a0.
  2. [Section 8, Proposition 8.1 and the paragraph following Eq. (8.1)] Theorem 2.7 asserts convergence in finite-dimensional distributions of the fast-mode field, but the proof establishes Proposition 8.1 only for a single time t and for asymptotic independence from the initial σ-algebra F_0. The text asserts that linearity of y^n and the Markov property are enough to extend this to several times, but the required induction is not given. One needs to apply the Markov property at intermediate times and check that the estimates in Proposition 8.1 hold uniformly in the random initial law at those times. Please supply this induction or state Theorem 2.7 only for one-time marginals.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Theorem 2.3(i)] In the statement of Theorem 2.3(i), the expression 'YN_s(H)' appears to be a typo; it should be the fluctuation field, presumably Y^n_s(H), to match Eq. (7.3).
  2. [Eq. (2.24)] The scalar magnetisation and the density fluctuation field are both denoted by Y^n_t / Yn_t in Eq. (2.24), which is confusing; please use distinct notation for the process and the field throughout.
  3. [Theorem 2.10 and Theorems 2.3(ii), 2.7] The results that depend on Assumption B.5 are labelled as theorems without the qualifier 'conditional' in their displayed statements; please mark them explicitly (e.g. 'Conditional Theorem') so that the dependence on a conjectured log-Sobolev inequality is visible without reading the proof.
  4. [Remark B.6] Remark B.6 states that a modified Dirichlet-form version of (B.25) is known for a range of a, but gives no theorem number or precise range; please add a precise reference and statement so the reader can verify what is actually known.
  5. [Abstract and Introduction] The abstract says 'We prove' and the introduction describes the main results without prominently stating that the general-a versions are conditional on Assumption B.5; even if the main text is clear, the front matter should carry this caveat.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the kernel g is constructed to cancel adjoint terms, the SDE and covariance are derived from the microscopic dynamics, and the general-a branch is explicitly conditional on a conjectured log-Sobolev bound.

full rationale

The paper's derivation is not circular. The limiting SDE (2.25) is obtained from the semimartingale decomposition (2.17)-(2.23) by balancing drift and quadratic variation, with no parameter fitted to the target limit. The reference measures nu_U and nu_g are constructed to cancel specific adjoint terms: in (4.16) the choice of U cancels the n^{3/2} terms, and in (6.62)-(6.63) the boundary condition g'(0+)-g'(1-) = -16 gamma a cancels the term 16 gamma a sqrt(n) sum_i eta_i eta_{i+1}; the remaining four-point terms are then bounded. The fast-mode covariance (2.31) is computed from the quadratic variation in (8.32)-(8.44), not imposed. Proposition 2.9 determines g by solving (2.44) with a boundary condition and explicit Fourier formula (2.45)-(2.46); the covariance identity in Remark 2.13 is checked from that formula, so it is a posteriori. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The main caveat is that the general-a versions of Theorems 2.3(ii) and 2.7 depend on Assumption B.5, which the text itself states is 'conjectured to be true' and 'not known at the moment' (Section 6; Remark B.6); this is a genuine open assumption and a correctness risk, but it is an explicit conditional hypothesis rather than a circular import. Self-citations such as [3], [6], and [10] are motivational or contextual and are not load-bearing: for example, Remark B.6 cites [3] only for a weaker log-Sobolev bound with an additional log n prefactor, not for the main theorems. No circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim has no fitted empirical constants. The hand-chosen scaling exponents are included as free parameters because they are selected to produce a nontrivial limit. The main unproved input is Assumption B.5, a conjectured log-Sobolev inequality; all other listed axioms are imported proven results or standard theorems. No new physical entity is introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Magnetisation rescaling b_n = n^{3/4} = n^{3/4}
    Chosen from the balance conditions (2.21)-(2.23) so that drift and martingale are both O(1); the theorem's statement depends on this hand-chosen scaling.
  • Time acceleration v_n = sqrt(n) = sqrt(n)
    Chosen together with b_n in Section 2.1; the generator is sqrt(n) L_n and the limiting SDE appears on this time scale.
assumptions (5)
  • ad hoc to paper Log-Sobolev inequalities for the tilted canonical measures nu_{n,m}^g (Assumption B.5)
    Conjectured and stated as not known at the moment; used to prove Theorem 2.10, Theorem 2.3(ii) and Theorem 2.7 for arbitrary a > 0.
  • domain assumption Dynamical large deviation principle for the empirical measure of the rescaled Glauber+Kawasaki process (Theorem 2.5 of [38])
    Imported from prior work by Landim and Tsunoda; used in Appendix A to obtain uniform concentration bounds used throughout Sections 6-8.
  • standard math Log-Sobolev inequality for uniform canonical simple exclusion measures [51,39]
    Used in Section 5 Step 2 and in the proof of Proposition 7.5 for the small-a unconditional branch.
  • standard math Local central limit theorem for i.i.d. Bernoulli sums [44, Theorems VII.4-6]
    Used in Lemma 5.10 and Proposition 5.8 to compare canonical and grand-canonical expectations.
  • standard math Well-posedness of the limiting nonlinear SDE (2.25) [35, Theorem 5.5.15]
    Underpins uniqueness of the limiting law Q_alpha in Theorem 2.3 and Corollary 7.2.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Critical dynamical fluctuations in reaction-diffusion processes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EJFDCKZF

@misc{pith2026250520008,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Critical dynamical fluctuations in reaction-diffusion processes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EJFDCKZF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.20008}
}
read the original abstract

We consider a one-dimensional microscopic reaction-diffusion process obtained as a superposition of a Glauber and a Kawasaki dynamics. The reaction term is tuned so that a dynamical phase transition occurs in the model as a suitable parameter is varied. We study dynamical fluctuations of the density field at the critical point. We characterise the slowdown of the dynamics at criticality, and prove that this slowdown is induced by a single observable, the global density (or magnetisation). We show that magnetisation fluctuations are non-Gaussian and characterise their limit as the solution of a non-linear SDE. We prove, furthermore, that other observables remain fast: the density field acting on the fast modes (i.e. on mean-0 test functions) and with Gaussian scaling converges, in the sense of finite dimensional distributions, to a Gaussian field with space-time covariance that we compute explicitly. The proof relies on a decoupling of slow and fast modes relying in particular on a relative entropy argument. Major technical difficulties include the fact that local equilibrium does not hold due to the non-linearity, and proving replacement estimates on diverging time intervals due to critical slowdown.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Adams, J.J.F

    R.A. Adams, J.J.F. Fournier.Sobolev spaces. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Academic Press (2003)

    work page 2003

  2. [2]

    Bauerschmidt and T

    R. Bauerschmidt and T. Bodineau. Spectral gap critical exponent for Glauber dynamics of hierarchical spin models. Commun. Math. Phys.373(3), 1167–1206 (2020)

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Bauerschmidt, T

    R. Bauerschmidt, T. Bodineau, B. Dagallier. Kawasaki dynamics beyond the uniqueness threshold. Probability Theory and Related Fields (2024).https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00440-024-01326-9

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Bauerschmidt, B

    R. Bauerschmidt, B. Dagallier. Log-Sobolev inequality for near critical Ising models. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics77, 2568–2576 (2024)

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Bertini, E

    L. Bertini, E. Presutti, B. Rüdiger, E. Saada. Dynamical Fluctuations at the Critical Point: Convergence to a Nonlinear Stochastic PDE. Teor. Veroyatnost. i Primenen.38, no. 4, 689–741 (1993); reprinted in Theory Probab. Appl.38, no. 4, 586–629 (1993)

    work page 1993

  6. [6]

    Bodineau, B

    T. Bodineau, B. Dagallier. Large deviations for out of equilibrium correlations in the symmetric simple exclusion process. Electron. J. Probab.29, 1–96 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Bodineau, M

    T. Bodineau, M. Lagouge. Current Large Deviations in a Driven Dissipative Model. J Stat Phys139, 201–218 (2010). 89

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    Boucheron, G

    S. Boucheron, G. Lugosi, P. Massart.Concentration inequalities: A nonasymptotic the- ory of independence.Oxford university press, 2013

    work page 2013

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    T. Brox, H. Rost. Equilibrium fluctuations of stochastic particle systems: the role of conserved quantities. Ann. Probab.12, 742–759 (1984)

    1984

  2. [10]

    Dagallier

    B. Dagallier. Fluctuations and correlations in weakly asymmetric simple exclusion on a ring subject to an atypical current. Ann. Probab.53 (3), 1079–1137 (2025). https: //doi.org/10.1214/24-AOP1729

    2025 doi

  3. [11]

    Fluctuationsandcorrelationsinweaklyasymmetricsimple exclusion on a ring subject to an atypical current

    B.Dagallier.Supplementto: “Fluctuationsandcorrelationsinweaklyasymmetricsimple exclusion on a ring subject to an atypical current". Ann. Probab53 (3), 1079–1137 (2025)

    2025

  4. [12]

    D. A. Dawson. Critical dynamics and fluctuations for a mean-field model of cooperative behaviour. Journal of Statistical physics,31, 29–85 (1983)

    1983

  5. [13]

    De Masi, P

    A. De Masi, P. A. Ferrari, J. L. Lebowitz. Reaction-diffusion equations for interacting particle systems. Journal of Statistical physics,44, 589–644 (1986)

    1986

  6. [14]

    Di Nezza, G

    E. Di Nezza, G. Palatucci and E. Valdinoci. Hitchhiker’s guide to the fractional Sobolev spaces. Bull. Sci. math.136, 521–573 (2012)

    2012

  7. [15]

    Farfan, C

    J. Farfan, C. Landim, K. Tsunoda. Static large deviations for a reaction–diffusion model. Probability Theory and Related Fields,174, 49–101 (2019)

    2019

  8. [16]

    Ferreira, V.A

    J.C. Ferreira, V.A. Menegatto. Eigenvalues of integral operators defined by smooth positive definite kernels. Integr. eq. oper. theory64, 61–81 (2009)

    2009

  9. [17]

    T. Funaki. Interface motion from Glauber-Kawasaki dynamics of non-gradient type. Arxiv preprint arXiv:2404.18364 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Funaki, C

    T. Funaki, C. Landim, S. Sethuraman. Linear fluctuation of interfaces in Glauber- Kawasaki dynamics. Arxiv preprint arXiv:2412.04015 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Funaki, P

    T. Funaki, P. van Meurs, S. Sethuraman, K. Tsunoda. Motion by Mean Curvature from Glauber-Kawasaki Dynamics with Speed Change. Journal of Statistical Physics190, 1–30 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10955-022-03044-9

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    Funaki, K

    T. Funaki, K. Tsunoda. Motion by Mean Curvature from Glauber–Kawasaki Dynam- ics. Journal of Statistical Physics 177, 183–208 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10955-019-02364-7

    2019

  13. [21]

    Göetze, H

    F. Göetze, H. Sambale, A. Sinulis. Higher order concentration for functions of weakly dependent random variables. Electron. J. Probab.24, 1–19 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    Gonçalves, M

    P. Gonçalves, M. Jara. Nonlinear Fluctuations of Weakly Asymmetric Interacting Par- ticle Systems. Archives for Rational Mechanics and Analysis 212, 597–644 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00205-013-0693-x 90

    2014 doi

  15. [23]

    Gonçalves, M

    P. Gonçalves, M. Jara, M. Simon. Second Order Boltzmann–Gibbs Principle for Poly- nomial Functions and Applications. Journal of Statistical Physics166, 90–113 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10955-016-1686-6

    2017 doi

  16. [24]

    Grazieschi, K

    P. Grazieschi, K. Matetski, H. Weber. The dynamical Ising-Kac model in 3D converges to Φ4

  17. [25]

    Probability Theory and Related Fields (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    M. Z. Guo, G. C. Papanicolaou, S. R. S. Varadhan. Nonlinear diffusion limit for a system with nearest neighbor interactions. Communications in Mathematical Physics 118, 31–59 (1988)

    1988

  19. [27]

    M. Hairer. A theory of regularity structures. Inventiones mathematicae198, 269–504 (2013)

    2013

  20. [28]

    Hohenberg and B.I

    P.C. Hohenberg and B.I. Halperin. Theory of dynamic critical phenomena. Rev. Mod. Phys. 49 3, 435–479 (1977)

    1977

  21. [29]

    Huang, K

    R. Huang, K. Matetski and Hendrik Weber. Scaling limit of a weakly asymmetric simple exclusion process in the framework of regularity structures. arXiv preprint arxiv:2505.00621 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  22. [30]

    M. Iberti. Convergence of Glauber dynamic on Ising-like models with Kac interaction to Φ2n 2 . arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.00948 (2017)

    2017 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Jacod, A

    J. Jacod, A. N. Shiryaev. Limit theorems for stochastic processes. Second edition. Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathe- matical Sciences],288. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003

    2003

  24. [32]

    M. Jara, C. Landim. The stochastic heat equation as the limit of a stirring dynamics perturbed by a voter model. Ann. Appl. Probab.33, 4163–4209 (2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    M. Jara, O. Menezes. Non-equilibrium fluctuations for a reaction-diffusion model via relative entropy. Markov Processes and Related Fields26, 95–124 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    Jara and O

    M. Jara and O. Menezes. Non-Equilibrium Fluctuations of Interacting Particle Systems, 2018, arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.09526

    2018 arXiv

  27. [35]

    G.Jona-Lasinio, C.Landim, M.E.Vares.Largedeviationsforareactiondiffusionmodel. Probab. Theory Related Fields97, 339–361 (1993)

    1993

  28. [36]

    Karatzas, S

    I. Karatzas, S. Shreve. Brownian motion and stochastic calculus. Vol. 113. Springer Science & Business Media, 1991

    1991

  29. [37]

    Kipnis, C

    C. Kipnis, C. Landim.Scaling Limits of Interacting Particle Systems, Grundlheren der mathematischen Wissenschaften320, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, New York, 1999

    1999

  30. [38]

    Landim, G

    C. Landim, G. Panizo, H. T. Yau. Spectral gap and logarithmic Sobolev inequality for unbounded conservative spin systems. Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré, Prob. et Stat. 38, 739–777 (2002). 91

    2002

  31. [39]

    Landim, K

    C. Landim, K. Tsunoda. Hydrostatics and dynamical large deviations for a reaction- diffusion model. Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré, Prob. et Stat.54, 51-74 (2018)

    2018

  32. [40]

    Lee, H.T

    T.Y. Lee, H.T. Yau. Logarithmic Sobolev inequality for some models of random walk. Ann. Probab.26, 1855–1873 (1998)

    1998

  33. [41]

    Lifshitz

    I.M. Lifshitz. Kinetics of ordering during second-order phase transitions. Sov. Phys. JETP 15, 939–942 (1962)

    1962

  34. [42]

    Lubetzky, A

    E. Lubetzky, A. Sly. Critical Ising on the Square Lattice Mixes in Polynomial Time. Communications in Mathematical Physics313, 815–836 (2012)

    2012

  35. [43]

    Mottoni, M

    P. Mottoni, M. Schatzman. Geometrical evolution of developed interfaces. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society347, 1533–1589 (1995). https://doi.org/10. 2307/2154960

    1995

  36. [44]

    Mourrat, H

    J.-C. Mourrat, H. Weber. Convergence of the two-dimensional dynamic Ising-Kac Model to Φ4

  37. [45]

    Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics70, 717–812 (2017)

    2017

  38. [46]

    V. V. Petrov. Sums of Independent Random Variables , Springer Verlag, New York (1975)

    1975

  39. [47]

    H. Rost. Hydrodynamik gekoppelter diffusionen: Fluktuationen im gleichgewicht. In Dynamics and Processes: Proceedings of the Third Encounter in Mathematics and Physics, held in Bielefeld, Germany Nov. 30–Dec. 4, 1981, pp. 97–107. Berlin, Hei- delberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2006

    1981

  40. [48]

    H. Shen, H. Weber. Glauber dynamics of 2D Kac–Blume–Capel model and their stochas- tic PDE limits, Journal of Functional Analysis275, no. 6, 1321–1367 (2018)

    2018

  41. [49]

    Spohn, H

    H. Spohn, H. T. Yau. Bulk diffusivity of lattice gases close to criticality. Journal of Statistical Physics79, 231–241 (1995)

    1995

  42. [50]

    Tsunoda, in preparation

    K. Tsunoda, in preparation

  43. [51]

    K. Yang. Kardar–Parisi–Zhang Equation from Long-Range Exclusion Processes. Com- munications in Mathematical Physics 400, 1535–1663 (2023). https://doi.org/10. 1007/s00220-022-04628-y

    2023

  44. [52]

    K. Yang. Fluctuations for Some Nonstationary Interacting Particle Systems via Boltz- mann–Gibbs Principle. Forum of Mathematics, Sigma11 (2023, e32). https://doi. org/10.1017/fms.2023.27

    2023 doi

  45. [53]

    H. T. Yau. Logarithmic Sobolev inequality for generalized simple exclusion processes. Probab. Th. Related Fields109, 507–538 (1997)

    1997

  46. [54]

    H. T. Yau. Relative entropy and hydrodynamics of Ginzburg-Landau models. Letters in Mathematical Physics22, 63–80 (1991). 92

    1991

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.