1: \documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,amsmath,amssymb,floatfix,superscriptaddress]{revtex4}

2: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files 

3: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point 

4: \usepackage{bm}% bold math

5: \usepackage{hyperref} 

6: \usepackage{latexsym}

7: 

8: \def\a{\alpha}

9: \def\b{\beta}

10: \def\g{\gamma}

11: \def\r{{\bf r}}

12: 

13: \begin{document}

14: 

15: \title{Ordering of Random Walks: The Leader and the Laggard}

16: \author{D. ben-Avraham}\email{qd00@clarkson.edu}

17: \affiliation{Department of Physics, Clarkson University, Potsdam, New York

18: 13699-5820}

19: \author{B. M. Johnson}

20: \affiliation{Department of Physics, Clarkson University, Potsdam, New York

21: 13699-5820}

22: \author{C. A. Monaco}

23: \affiliation{Department of Physics, Clarkson University, Potsdam, New York

24: 13699-5820}

25: \author{P.~L.~Krapivsky}\email{paulk@bu.edu}

26: \author{S. Redner}\email{redner@bu.edu}

27: \affiliation{Center for BioDynamics, Center for Polymer Studies, and

28:   Department of Physics, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215}

29: \date{\today}

30: 

31: \begin{abstract}

32:   We investigate two complementary problems related to maintaining the

33:   relative positions of $N$ random walks on the line: (i) the leader problem,

34:   that is, the probability ${\cal L}_N(t)$ that the leftmost particle remains

35:   the leftmost as a function of time and (ii) the laggard problem, the

36:   probability ${\cal R}_N(t)$ that the rightmost particle never becomes the

37:   leftmost.  We map these ordering problems onto an equivalent

38:   $(N-1)$--dimensional electrostatic problem.  From this construction we

39:   obtain a very accurate estimate for ${\cal L}_N(t)$ for $N=4$, the first

40:   case that is not exactly soluble: ${\cal L}_4(t)\propto t^{-\beta_4}$, with

41:   $\beta_4=0.91342(8)$.  The probability of being the laggard also decays

42:   algebraically, ${\cal R}_N(t)\propto t^{-\gamma_N}$; we derive

43:   $\gamma_2=1/2, \gamma_3=3/8$, and argue that $\gamma_N\to N^{-1}\ln N$ as

44:   $N\to\infty$.

45: 

46: \end{abstract}

47: \pacs{02.50.Cw, 05.40.-a, 05.50.+q, 87.18.Sn}

48: \maketitle

49: 

50: \section{Introduction} 

51: 

52: Consider $N$ identical and independent random walkers that are initially

53: located at $x_1(0)<x_2(0)<\cdots< x_{N}(0)$ on an infinite line

54: \cite{remark}.  There are many interesting questions that can be posed about

55: the order of the particles.  For example, what is the probability that {\it

56:   all\/} walkers maintain their relative positions up to time $t$, that is,

57: $x_1(\tau)<x_2(\tau)<\cdots< x_{N}(\tau)$ for all $0\leq \tau\leq t$?  By

58: mapping this {\it vicious random walk\/} problem onto the diffusion of a

59: single effective particle in $N$ dimensions and then exploiting the image

60: method for the diffusion equation, this ordering probability was found

61: \cite{Fi84,HF84} to decay asymptotically as $t^{-\alpha_N}$ with

62: $\alpha_N=N(N-1)/4$.  Many additional aspects of this problem have been

63: investigated within the rubrics of vicious random walks

64: \cite{Fi84,FG88,For90,G99,Baik00,KT02,CK02} and ``friendly'' random walks

65: \cite{GV02,KGV00}.

66: 

67: In this work, we study two related and complementary random walk ordering

68: problems.  In the ``leader'' problem, we ask for the probability ${\cal

69:   L}_N(t)$ that the initially leftmost particle in a group of $N$ particles

70: remains to the left of all the other particles up to time $t$

71: \cite{N83,Br91,Ke92,Kr96,Re99,Gr02}.  In the ``laggard'' problem, we are

72: concerned with the probability ${\cal R}_N(t)$ that the initially rightmost

73: particle from a group of $N$ particles never attains the lead (becomes

74: leftmost).  These two probabilities ${\cal L}_N(t)$ and ${\cal R}_N(t)$ decay

75: algebraically

76: \begin{equation}

77: \label{LR}

78: {\cal L}_N(t)\propto t^{-\beta_N}\;,\qquad 

79: {\cal R}_N(t)\propto t^{-\gamma_N}\;,

80: \end{equation}

81: as $t\to\infty$ and our basic goal is to determine the exponents $\beta_N$

82: and $\gamma_N$.

83: 

84: These ordering problems arise in a variety of contexts.  Physical

85: applications include wetting phenomena \cite{Fi84,HF84} and three-dimensional

86: Lorentzian gravity \cite{DL02}.  A more probabilistic application is the

87: ballot problem \cite{N83}, where one is interested in the probability that

88: the vote for a single candidate remains ahead of all the other candidates

89: throughout the counting; this is just a restatement of the leader problem.

90: Another example is that of the lamb and the lions \cite{Kr96,Re99}, in which

91: one is interested in the survival of a diffusing lamb in the presence of many

92: diffusing lions.  In one dimension, a lamb that was initially in the lead

93: must remain the leader to survive.

94: 

95: For the leader problem, exact results are known for small $N$ only:

96: $\beta_2=1/2$ and $\beta_3=3/4$ \cite{N83,Av88,FG88,Re01}, while

97: $\beta_N\to\ln\,(4N)/4$ for large $N$ \cite{Ke92,Kr96,Re99,Gr02}.  This slow

98: increase arises because adding another particle has little effect on the

99: survival of the leader when $N$ is large.  For $N\geq 4$, no exact results

100: are available and one focus of our work is to obtain an accurate estimate of

101: $\beta_N$ for the case $N=4$.  We accomplish this by mapping the reaction

102: onto an equivalent electrostatic potential problem due to a point charge

103: within an appropriately-defined three-dimensional domain.  This mapping

104: provides both an appealing way to visualize the reaction process and an

105: accurate estimate of the survival exponent $\beta_4$.  

106: 

107: For the laggard problem, we employ the same method as in the leader problem

108: to obtain $\gamma_3=3/8$.  We also estimate the asymptotic behavior of ${\cal

109:   R}_N$ and find $\gamma_N\to N^{-1}\ln N$ as $N\to\infty$.  As is expected,

110: a laggard in a large population likely remains a laggard.  Therefore the

111: probability of remaining a laggard decays very slowly with time for large

112: $N$.

113: 

114: In the next section, we review known results about the leader problem in a

115: 3-particle system.  In Sec.~III, we outline the electrostatic formulation of

116: the leader problem and then apply it to the 4-particle system in Sec.~IV.  A

117: numerical solution of the pertinent Laplace equation gives

118: $\beta_4=0.91342(8)$, a significant improvement over the previously-quoted

119: estimate $\beta_4\approx 0.91$ \cite{Br91}.  In Sec.~V, we turn to the

120: laggard problem and give an asymptotic estimate for the exponent $\gamma_N$.

121: Concluding remarks and some open questions are given in Sec.~VI.

122: 

123: \section{Conventional Approach to the Leader Problem}

124: 

125: We begin by mapping the original problem of $N$ diffusing particles $x_1,

126: x_2,\ldots, x_{N}$ on the line onto a single effective diffusing particle

127: located at $\big(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_{N}\big)$ in $N$-dimensional space.  The

128: particle order constraints on the line translate to bounding hyperplanes

129: within which the effective particle is confined \cite{Fi84,Re01}.  The

130: effective particle is absorbed if it hits one of these boundaries.  For the

131: leader problem, the explicit shape of these bounding hyperplanes can be

132: easily worked out for the cases $N=2$ and $N=3$; we will later extend this

133: analysis to the 4-particle system.

134: 

135: For 2 particles, their separation undergoes simple diffusion and the process

136: terminates when the separation equals zero.  Thus the survival probability of

137: the leader decays as $t^{-1/2}$.  To fix notation and ideas for later

138: sections, we now study the 3-particle system.  For a leader at $x_1(t)$ and

139: particles at $x_2(t)$ and $x_3(t)$, we view these coordinates as equivalent

140: to the isotropic diffusion of a single effective particle at

141: $\big(x_1(t),x_2(t),x_3(t)\big)$ in three dimensions.  Whenever this

142: effective particle crosses the plane $A_{ij}\!:\,x_i=x_j$, the original

143: walkers at $x_i$ and $x_j$ in one dimension have reversed their order.  There

144: are three such planes $A_{12}, A_{13}, A_{23}$ that divide space into $6$

145: domains, corresponding to the $3!$ possible orderings of the three walkers

146: (Fig.~\ref{planes}(a)).  These planes all intersect along the $(1,1,1)$ axis.

147: 

148: We may simplify this description by projecting onto the plane $x_1+x_2+x_3=0$

149: that contains the origin and is perpendicular to the $(1,1,1)$ axis.  Now the

150: plane $A_{12}$ may be written parametrically as $(a,a,b)$ and its

151: intersection with the plane $x_1+x_2+x_3=0$ is the line $(a,a,-2a)$.

152: Likewise, the intersections of $A_{13}$ and $A_{23}$ with the plane

153: $x_1+x_2+x_3=0$ are $(a,-2a,a)$ and $(-2a,a,a)$, respectively

154: (Figs.~\ref{planes}(b)).

155: 

156: \begin{figure}[ht] 

157:  \vspace*{0.cm}

158:  \includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{planes.eps}

159:  \includegraphics*[width=0.3\textwidth]{lines.eps}

160: \caption{The order domains for 3 particles in (a) the full

161:   3-dimensional space, and (b)~projected onto the subspace perpendicular to

162:   the $(1,1,1)$ axis.  The notation $ijk$ is shorthand for $x_i<x_j<x_k$.

163:   The allowed region corresponding to survival of a leader ($x_1<x_2, x_3$)

164:   is indicated by the darker shading, while the lighter shaded region

165:   corresponds to the laggard problem ($x_3\not < x_1,x_2$).   }

166: \label{planes}

167: \end{figure}

168: 

169: The survival of the leader corresponds to the effective particle remaining

170: within the adjacent domains 123 and 132 in Fig.~\ref{planes}(b).  The

171: background particles at $x_2$ and $x_3$ are allowed to cross, but the leader

172: at $x_1$ always remains to the left of both $x_2$ and $x_3$.  The union of

173: these two domains defines a wedge of opening angle $120^{\circ}$.  Since the

174: survival probability of a diffusing particle within a wedge of arbitrary

175: opening angle $\varphi$ and absorbing boundaries decays asymptotically as

176: $t^{-\pi/2\varphi}$ \cite{CJ59}, we deduce the known result that the leader

177: survival probability exponent is $\beta_3=3/4$.

178: 

179: \section{Electrostatic Formulation}

180: 

181: For more than 3 particles, the domain for the effective particle is

182: geometrically more complex and the corresponding solution to the diffusion

183: equation does not seem tractable.  We therefore recast the survival

184: probability of the effective diffusing particle in terms of the simpler

185: problem of the electrostatic potential of a point charge within the same

186: geometric domain \cite{Re01}.  Let $S(t)$ be the survival probability of a

187: diffusing particle within an infinite wedge-shaped $d$-dimensional domain

188: with absorbing boundary conditions.  Let $V(r)$ be the electrostatic

189: potential due to a point charge within the same domain, with $V=0$ on the

190: boundary.  Generically, these two quantities have the asymptotic behaviors

191: \begin{eqnarray}

192: \label{asymp}

193: &&S(t)\propto t^{-\b}\;,\qquad t\to\infty\;,\nonumber\\

194: &&V(r)\propto r^{-\mu}\;,\qquad r\to\infty\;.

195: \end{eqnarray}

196: 

197: More relevant for our purposes, these two quantities are simply related by

198: \cite{Kr96,Re99,Re01}

199: \[

200: \int_0^t S(t)\,dt\sim\int^{\sqrt{t}}V(r)\,r^{d-1}dr\;.

201: \]

202: This equivalence arises because the integral of the diffusion equation over

203: all time is just the Laplace equation.  Thus the time integral of the

204: survival probability has the same asymptotic behavior as the spatial integral

205: of the electrostatic potential over the portion of the domain that is

206: accessible by a diffusing particle up to time $t$.  Substituting the

207: respective asymptotic behaviors from Eqs.~(\ref{asymp}), and noting that the

208: allowed wedge domain for an $N$-particle system has dimension $N-1$, we

209: obtain the fundamental exponent relation

210: \begin{equation}

211: \label{beta_mu}

212: \b=\frac{\mu-N+3}{2}\;.

213: \end{equation}

214: Thus the large-distance behavior of the electrostatic potential within a

215: specified domain with Dirichlet boundary conditions also gives the long-time

216: survival probability of a diffusing particle within this domain subject to

217: the same absorbing boundary conditions.  From this survival probability, we

218: can then determine the original ordering probability.

219: 

220: To illustrate this approach, let us determine the various ordering

221: probabilities of 3 particles on the line in terms of the equivalent

222: electrostatic problem.  In fact, it is simpler to work backwards and find the

223: equivalent ordering problem that corresponds to a specific wedge domain, For

224: example, consider the $60^\circ$ wedge 123 in Fig.~\ref{planes}.  If the

225: effective particle remains within this wedge, the initial particle ordering

226: on the line is preserved.  This corresponds to the vicious random walk

227: problem in which no particle crossings are allowed.  To obtain the asymptotic

228: behavior of the potential of a point charge interior to this wedge, let us

229: assume that $V({\bf r}) \sim r^{-\mu}f(\varphi)$ as $r\to\infty$.

230: Substituting this ansatz into the 2-dimensional Laplace equation, we obtain

231: the eigenvalue equation $f''(\varphi)=-\mu^2f(\varphi)$, subject to

232: $f(\varphi)=0$ on the wedge boundaries.  For the $60^\circ$ wedge, the

233: solution with the smallest eigenvalue is $f(\varphi)=\sin(3\varphi)$.  Thus

234: $\mu=3$, leading to the known result $\b=(\mu-N+3)/2=3/2$, for 3 vicious

235: walkers.

236: 

237: \section{4-Particle System} 

238: 

239: The state of the system may be represented by an effective diffusing particle

240: in 4 dimensions.  By projecting onto the 3-dimensional subspace

241: $x_1+x_2+x_3+x_4=0$ that is orthogonal to the $(1,1,1,1)$ axis, the order

242: domains of the original particles can be reduced to 3 spatial dimensions.  In

243: this 3-dimensional subspace, the boundary $A_{12}\!:\,x_1=x_2$ becomes the

244: plane $(a,a,b,c)$, with $2a+b+c=0$.  Likewise, $A_{13}$ may be written

245: parametrically as $(a,b,a,c)$, where again $2a+b+c=0$.  Thus the locus

246: $L_{123}\equiv A_{12}\cap A_{13}\!:\,x_1=x_2=x_3$ is the line $(a,a,a,-3a)$.

247: This body diagonal joins the nodes 4 and $\overline{4}$ in Fig.~\ref{cube}.

248: Along this axis, the original particle coordinates on the line obey the

249: constraint $x_1=x_2=x_3$, with $x_4<x_3$ on the half-axis closer to node 4

250: and $x_4>x_3$ on the half-axis closer to node $\overline{4}$.  A similar

251: description applies to the axes $L_{124}=(a,a,-3a,a)$ between 3 and

252: $\overline{3}$, $L_{134}=(a,-3a,a,a)$ between 2 and $\overline{2}$, and

253: $L_{234}=(-3a,a,a,a)$ between 1 and $\overline{1}$.

254: 

255: \begin{figure}[ht] 

256:  \vspace*{0.cm}

257:  \includegraphics*[width=0.35\textwidth]{cube.eps}

258: \medskip\vspace{0.5cm}

259:  \includegraphics*[width=0.47\textwidth]{cube-schematic.eps}

260: \caption{Top: Cardboard model of the ordering domains for 4 particles on the 

261:   line after projection into the subspace perpendicular to $(1,1,1,1)$.  This

262:   structure consists of only 6 intersecting planes.  Each plane bisects the

263:   cube and is defined by the equality of two coordinates.  Lower: Schematic

264:   of the same system.  The wedge $ijkl$ denotes the region where

265:   $x_i<x_j<x_k<x_l$.  The union of six such ordering wedges, corresponding to

266:   the leader problem $x_1<x_2,x_3,x_4$, are labeled.  This domain is bounded

267:   by the rays $0\overline{2}$, $0\overline{3}$, $0\overline{4}$, where the

268:   origin is the dashed circle at the intersection of the axes

269:   $L_{14,23}\equiv u$, $L_{12,34}\equiv v$, and $L_{13,24}\equiv w$.  One

270:   constraint plane, $x_1=x_3$, is shown shaded (outside the cube).  }

271: \label{cube}

272: \end{figure} 

273: 

274: The locus where $x_1=x_2$ and $x_3=x_4$ simultaneously, is the line

275: $L_{12,34}\equiv A_{12}\cap A_{34}=(a,a,-a,-a)$.  Likewise,

276: $L_{13,24}=(a,-a,a,-a)$, and $L_{14,23}=(a,-a,-a,a)$.  Viewed in the

277: orthogonal 3-subspace, the $6$ planes $A_{ij}$ intersect in $7$ lines ($4$

278: $L_{ijk}$ and $3$ $L_{ij,kl}$), and divide the subspace into $24$

279: semi-infinite wedges, as shown in Fig.~{cube}(b).  Each of these wedges

280: corresponds to one of the $4!$ orderings of the walkers in one dimension.

281: 

282: We first illustrate the electrostatic formulation of this system for the

283: vicious random walk problem.  Since the initial particle order is preserved,

284: the effective diffusing particle remains within a single wedge $ijkl$ in

285: Fig.~\ref{cube}.  As outlined in the previous section, the survival

286: probability of this effective particle corresponds to the electrostatic

287: potential of a point charge within this one wedge, with the boundary surfaces

288: held at zero potential.  To solve this electrostatic problem, it is

289: convenient to place the point charge at the symmetric location

290: $(u,v,w)=(0,1,1/2)$ within the wedge 1234, where the $(u,v,w)$ axes are

291: defined in Fig.~\ref{cube}.  From the image method, the potential due to

292: a point charge within one wedge is equivalent to the potential of an array of

293: 24 symmetrically-placed point charges consisting of the initial charge and 23

294: image charges, with positive images at $-(0,1,1/2)$, $\pm(0,1,-1/2)$,

295: $\pm(\pm 1/2,0,1)$, $\pm(1,\pm 1/2,0)$, and negative images at

296: $\pm(\pm 1/2,1,0)$, $\pm(0,\pm 1/2,1)$, and $\pm(0,1,\pm 1/2)$.  Using

297: Mathematica the asymptotic behavior of the potential in wedge 1234 (where the

298: original charge is placed) due to this charge array is

299: \[

300: V(r) = a_1r^{-7} + a_2r^{-11} + a_3r^{-13} + a_4r^{-15} +\cdots\;.

301: \]

302: (The coefficients $a_i$ depend on the location of the charge and on the

303: orientation of {\bf r}.)  Using the exponent relation~(\ref{beta_mu}), the

304: asymptotic survival probability of $4$ vicious walkers is given by

305: \[

306: S(t) = b_1t^{-3} + b_2t^{-5} + b_3t^{-6} + b_4t^{-7} +\cdots\;.

307: \]

308: The leading behavior confirms the known result \cite{Fi84,HF84}, and we

309: obtain the form of the corrections as well.  As an amusing aside, notice that

310: an $r^{-7}$ dependence for the potential is normally achieved by a 64-pole

311: charge configuration.  The high symmetry of the 24 charges in the ordering

312: problem leads to a multipole field normally associated with at least 64 point

313: charges.

314: 

315: We next turn to the leader problem.  This system corresponds to the

316: electrostatic problem within the combined domain of the 6 wedges marked 1234,

317: 1243, 1423, 1432, 1342, and 1324, in Fig.~\ref{cube}.  The resulting

318: domain is a tetrahedral corner, with its apex at the center of the cube, that

319: is flanked by the rays $0\overline{2}$, $0\overline{3}$, and $0\overline{4}$.

320: Despite the simplicity of this domain, we are unable to solve this

321: electrostatic problem analytically and we have instead studied the problem

322: numerically.

323: 

324: In the allowed region of the cube in Fig.~\ref{cube}, we discretize

325: space and solve the electrostatic potential of a point charge by using

326: successive over-relaxation, with the domain boundaries at zero potential.

327: For simplicity, the charge is chosen to be at the symmetric point $(1,1,1)$.

328: For the outer faces of the cube we use two different boundary conditions:

329: (a)~absorbing ($V=0$), and (b)~reflecting, ($dV/dn=0$, where $n$ is the

330: direction normal to the surface).  The true potential -- that of the infinite

331: wedge -- lies between these two extremes.  We also exploit the symmetry about

332: the $(1,1,1)$ diagonal and use only the domain marked 1234 in

333: Fig.~\ref{cube}, with absorbing boundary conditions on the plane

334: $34\overline{3}\overline{4}$, and reflecting boundary conditions on the

335: planes $12\overline{1}\overline{2}$ and $14\overline{1}\overline{4}$.  As

336: already discussed, the outer cube face, $1\overline{3}2\overline{4}$, is

337: taken to be reflecting or absorbing.  This space savings allows us to carry

338: out computations for a cube of $500$ lattice spacings on a side.

339: 

340: \begin{figure}[ht] 

341:  \vspace*{0.cm}

342:  \includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{local-exp.eps}

343: \caption{Local exponent $\mu(r)$, as a function of $1/r$ for the

344:   tetrahedral wedge with absorbing $(+)$ and reflecting $(\circ)$ finite-size

345:   boundary conditions at the outer face of the cube. }

346: \label{local-exp}

347: \end{figure} 

348: 

349: While the power-law decay of the potential sets in quickly, the finite-size

350: effect is pronounced and it is perceptible already at 25 lattice spacings

351: away from the charge.  This is the primary limitation on the accuracy of our

352: exponent estimate.  Nevertheless, the local exponent $\mu(r)=-d\ln V(r)/d\ln

353: r$ varies only at the fourth digit (Fig.~\ref{local-exp}).  The approach of

354: the local exponent to the asymptotic limit also suggests that $V(r)$ has the

355: form $V(r)\sim r^{-\mu}+Ar^{-4}$.  Assuming that this is the case,

356: extrapolation of the data in Fig.~\ref{local-exp} gives

357: $\mu=2.82684\pm0.00016$, where the error bar is the difference in the

358: extrapolated value of $\mu(r)$ from the two different boundary conditions.

359: {}From the exponent correspondence given in Eq.~(\ref{beta_mu}), we thereby

360: obtain, for the lead probability,

361: \begin{equation}

362: \label{b4}

363: {\cal L}_4(t)\sim t^{-\beta_4}+At^{-3/2}\;,\qquad \beta_4=0.91342(8)\;,

364: \end{equation}

365: 

366: 

367: It is hard to match this numerical accuracy with that from direct simulations

368: of the survival of the leader.  We simulated $10^9$ realizations of the

369: system; this gives extremely linear data for the time dependence of the

370: leader survival probability on a double logarithmic scale.  To estimate the

371: exponent $\beta_4$, we computed the local slopes of the survival probability

372: versus time in contiguous time ranges between $t$ and $1.5t$ when plotted on

373: a double logarithmic scale.  These local exponents are plotted against

374: $1/\ln_{1.5}t$ (Fig.~\ref{beta-direct}).  The results are compatible but much

375: less accurate than Eq.~(\ref{b4}).

376: 

377: \begin{figure}[ht] 

378:  \vspace*{0.cm}

379:  \includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{beta-direct.eps}

380: \caption{Direct simulation results for the local exponent in the survival

381:   probability for $10^9$ configurations.  The arrow indicates our estimate

382:   for $\beta_4$ from Eq.~(\ref{b4}).}

383: \label{beta-direct}

384: \end{figure} 

385: 

386: \section{The Laggard Problem}

387: 

388: In the laggard problem, we study the probability that the initially rightmost

389: particle at $x_{N}$ has never been the leader during the time interval

390: $(0,t)$.  The laggard problem can also be recast into the diffusion of a

391: single effective particle within an $N$--dimensional wedge-shaped region,

392: with absorbing domain boundaries.  This mapping leads to the basic conclusion

393: that every particle that is initially not in the lead exhibits the same

394: asymptotic behavior as the last particle.  Indeed, for any particle $i$

395: initially at $x_i$, the regions $x_i\not <x_1,\ldots, x_{i-1},

396: x_{i+1},\ldots,x_{N}$ are isomorphic.  The initial condition merely fixes the

397: location of the effective particle in this allowed region.  Another

398: fundamental observation is that the allowed regions of the effective particle

399: for the leader and the laggard problems are {\em complementary} for all $N$.

400: 

401: For two particles, the probability that the laggard does not become the

402: leader obviously decays as $t^{-1/2}$, {\it i.e.}, $\gamma_2=1/2$.  The case

403: $N=3$ is more interesting but also solvable.  The condition that a particle

404: initially at $x_3$ never attaining the lead ($x_3\not<$ $x_1,x_2$) is

405: equivalent to the effective particle remaining with the lighter shaded region

406: in Fig.~\ref{planes}(b).  Since the opening angle of the resultant wedge is

407: $\varphi=4\pi/3$, the corresponding survival probability decays as

408: $t^{-3/8}$, implying that $\gamma_3=3/8$.

409: 

410: We have performed direct numerical simulations of the process to

411: estimate the exponent $\gamma_N$ for $N=3, 4,5$, and 6.  Each simulation is

412: based on $10^6$ realizations in which $N-1$ particles are initially at the

413: origin, while the laggard is at $x=1$.  Each simulation is run until the

414: laggard achieves the lead or $10^5$ time steps, whichever comes first.  From

415: the survival probability, we estimate $\gamma_N\approx 0.35, 0.30, 0.26$, and

416: $0.23$ for $N=3$ -- 6, respectively.  Since we know that $\gamma_3=0.375$,

417: the discrepancy of 0.025 between the simulation result and the theory is

418: indicative of the magnitude of systematic errors in this straightforward

419: numerical approach.

420: 

421: While it appears difficult to determine the exponent $\gamma_N$ analytically

422: for general $N>3$, the situation simplifies in the large $N$ limit because

423: the position of the leader becomes progressively more deterministic.  Indeed,

424: the probability density $P_N(y,t)$ that the leader is located at distance $y$

425: from the origin (assuming that all particles are initially at the origin) is

426: \cite{Re99}

427: \begin{eqnarray*}

428: \label{Ln}

429: P_N(y,t)={N\, e^{-y^2/4Dt}\over \sqrt{4\pi D t}}

430: \left[1-{1\over 2}\,{\rm erfc}\left(-{y\over \sqrt{4Dt}}\right)\right]^{N-1},  

431: \end{eqnarray*}

432: where ${\rm erfc}(x)=1-{\rm erf}(x)$ is the complementary error function.

433: Performing a large $N$ analysis, we find that the probability density

434: $P_N(y,t)$ approaches a Gaussian

435: \begin{equation}

436: \label{Lnasymp}

437: P_N(y,t)\to {1\over \sqrt{2\pi \sigma^2}}\,

438: \exp\left\{-{(y+y_*)^2\over 2\sigma^2}\right\},

439: \end{equation}

440: with the mean and the variance of this distribution given by

441: \begin{equation}

442: \label{ysigma}

443: y_*=z\sqrt{4Dt}\,, \qquad 

444: \sigma^2={Dt\over z^2}\,,

445: \end{equation}

446: where $z$ is determined from the transcendental relation

447: \begin{equation}

448: \label{z}

449: z\,e^{z^2}={N\over \sqrt{4\pi}}. 

450: \end{equation}

451: Consequently, the parameter $z$ diverges as $z\approx \sqrt{\ln N}$ when

452: $N\to\infty$.  The ratio of the dispersion to the mean displacement thus

453: decreases as $\sigma/y_*\approx (2\ln N)^{-1}$, so that the position of the

454: leader indeed becomes more deterministic as $N\to\infty$.

455: 

456: Therefore in the large $N$ limit we can assume that the leader is moving

457: deterministically and its position is given by $-y_*(t)$.  Then the

458: probability that the laggard never achieves the lead is equivalent to the

459: probability that a diffusing particle initially at the origin does not

460: overtake a receding particle whose position is varying as $-y_*(t)$.  This

461: corresponds to the solution to the diffusion equation in the expanding region

462: $x\in(-y_*(t),\infty)$ with an absorbing boundary condition at the receding

463: boundary $x=-y_*$.  When $y_*\propto t^{1/2}$, this diffusion equation can be

464: solved exactly by reducing it to a parabolic cylinder equation in a fixed

465: region.  However, in the limit $t\to\infty$, we can obtain asymptotically

466: correct results much more simply.  Because the absorbing boundary recedes

467: from the laggard particle relatively quickly, we solve the problem by

468: assuming that the density $P(x,t)$ of the laggard particle approaches a

469: Gaussian with yet unknown amplitude ${\cal R}_N(t)$ \cite{Kr96,Re99}:

470: \begin{equation}

471: \label{Pn}

472: P(x,t)={{\cal R}_N(t)\over \sqrt{4\pi D t}}\,

473: \exp\left\{-{x^2\over 4Dt}\right\}.  

474: \end{equation}

475: Although this distribution does not satisfy the absorbing boundary condition,

476: the inconsistency is negligible since the exponential term in Eq.~(\ref{Pn})

477: is of order $N^{-1}$ at the boundary $y=y_*$.  

478: 

479: The probability ${\cal R}_N(t)$ is now found self-consistently by equating the

480: ``mass'' loss to the flux:

481: \begin{equation}

482: \label{Pnrel}

483: {d {\cal R}_N\over dt}=D{\partial P\over \partial x}\Big|_{x=-y_*}

484: \end{equation}

485: Using Eq.~(\ref{Pn}) to compute the flux we convert Eq.~(\ref{Pnrel}) into

486: \begin{equation}

487: \label{Pndif}

488: {d {\cal R}_N\over dt}=-{z^2\over N}\,{{\cal R}_N\over t},

489: \end{equation}

490: {}from which the exponent $\gamma_N$ is $z^2/N$.  This is of course valid

491: only in the large $N$ limit.  Taking this limit in Eq.~(\ref{z}) we obtain

492: \begin{equation}

493: \label{psin} 

494: \gamma_N={\ln N\over N}-{\ln\ln N\over 2N}+\ldots .

495: \end{equation}

496: Thus as $N$ gets large, the probability that the laggard never attains the

497: lead decays extremely slowly with time.  This fits with the naive intuition

498: that if the number of particles is large a laggard initially is very likely

499: to remain a laggard.  Each additional particle makes it even less likely that

500: the laggard could achieve the lead.  Amusingly, this asymptotic exponent

501: predictions is numerically close to the previously-quoted results from direct

502: numerical simulations of the laggard problem.

503: 

504: \section{Concluding Remarks}

505: 

506: We investigated two dual random walk ordering problems in one dimension: (i)

507: what is the probability that a particle, that is initially in the lead,

508: remains in the lead and (ii) what is the probability that a particle, that is

509: initially not in the lead, never achieves the lead?  These problems are most

510: interesting in one spatial dimension because of the effective correlations

511: between the interacting particles.  These correlations are absent in two

512: dimensions and greater, so that an $N$-particle system reduces to a

513: 2-particle system \cite{Kr96,Re99,CK02}.

514: 

515: We determined the respective exponents $\beta_N$ and $\gamma_N$ associated

516: with the lead and laggard probabilities for general $N$.  Both exponents can

517: be determined by elementary geometric methods for $N=2$ and 3 and by

518: asymptotic arguments for $N\to\infty$.  Our new results are the following:

519: (i) a precise estimate for $\beta_4$ and (ii) the large-$N$ behavior of

520: $\gamma_N$.

521: 

522: A simple generalization is to allow each particle $i$ to have a distinct

523: diffusion coefficient $D_i$.  The exponents $\beta_N$ and $\gamma_N$ will now

524: depend on the diffusion coefficients, except for $N=2$, where $\beta_2$ and

525: $\gamma_2$ always equal 1/2.  The case $N=3$ is still solvable by introducing

526: rescaled coordinates $y_i=x_i/\sqrt{D_i}$ to render the diffusion of the

527: effective particle isotropic, after which the mapping to the wedge can be

528: performed straightforwardly.  We thus find

529: \begin{eqnarray*}

530: \beta_3&=&\left\{2-{2\over\pi}\,

531: \cos^{-1} {D_1\over\sqrt{(D_1+D_2)(D_1+D_3)}}\right\}^{-1}\;,\\

532: \gamma_3&=&\left\{2+{2\over\pi}\,

533: \cos^{-1} {D_3\over\sqrt{(D_1+D_3)(D_2+D_3)}}\right\}^{-1}\;.

534: \end{eqnarray*}

535: An amusing special case is the case of a stationary laggard, for which

536: $\gamma_3=1/3$.  

537: 

538: Finally, it is also worth mentioning a promising development to solve the

539: diffusion equation in the domains defined by the ordering of one-dimensional

540: random walks.  This is the recent discovery of deep connections between

541: vicious walkers and random matrix theory \cite{G99,Baik00,KT02}.  These allow

542: one to not only re-derive the exponent $\alpha_N$ of the original vicious

543: random walk problem, but also lead to many new results.  It would be extremely

544: useful if these techniques could be extended to the leader and laggard

545: problems.

546: 

547: \acknowledgments

548: 

549: We are grateful to NSF grants PHY-0140094 (DbA) and DMR9978902 (PLK and SR)

550: for partial financial support of this research.

551: 

552: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% REFERENCES %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

553: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

554:   

555: \bibitem{remark} We assume that all random walkers have the same

556:   diffusion coefficient $D$ if not stated otherwise.  For distinct

557:   diffusivities $D_i$ for each particle, one may rescale each coordinate by

558:   $x_i\to y_i=x_i/\sqrt{D_i}$ so that the motion of the effective particle is

559:   again isotropic.

560:   

561: \bibitem{Fi84} M. E. Fisher, ``Walks, walls, wetting, and melting'', 

562:   J.\ Stat.\ Phys.\ {\bf 34}, 667--729 (1984).

563:   

564: \bibitem{HF84} D.~A.~Huse and M.~E.~Fisher, 

565:   ``Commensurate wetting, domain walls, and dislocations'', 

566:   Phys.\ Rev.\ B {\bf 29}, 239--270 (1984).

567:   

568: \bibitem{FG88} M. E. Fisher and M. P. Gelfand, ``The reunions of three

569:   dissimilar vicious walkers'', J.\ Stat.\ Phys.\ {\bf 53}, 175 (1988).

570: 

571: \bibitem{For90} P.~J.~Forrester, ``Exact solution of the lock step model of

572:   vicious walkers'', J.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 23}, 1259--1273 (1990).

573: 

574: \bibitem{G99} D. J. Grabiner, ``Brownian motion in a Weyl chamber,

575:   non-colliding particles, and random matrices'', 

576:   Ann.\ Inst.\ H. Poincar\'e.  Prob.\ Stat. {\bf 35}, 177--204 (1999).

577: 

578: \bibitem{Baik00} J.~Baik, ``Random vicious walkers and random matrices'', 

579:   Commun.\ Pure\ Appl.\ Math. {\bf 53}, 1385--1410 (2000).

580: 

581: \bibitem{KT02} M.~Katori and H.~Tanemura, 

582:   ``Scaling limit of vicious walks and two-matrix model'', 

583:   Phys.\ Rev.\ E {\bf 66}, 011105 (2002).

584:   

585: \bibitem{CK02} J.~Cardy and M.~Katori, ``Families of vicious walkers'',

586:   {\it cond-mat}/0208228 (2002). 

587: 

588: \bibitem{GV02} A.~J.~Guttmann and M.~V\"oge, ``Lattice paths: 

589:   vicious walkers and friendly walkers'', 

590:   J.\ Statist.\ Plann.\ Inf. {\bf 101}, 107--131 (2002).

591: 

592: \bibitem{KGV00} G.~Krattenthaler, A.~J.~Guttmann, and X.~G.~Viennot, 

593:   ``Vicious walkers, friendly walkers and Young tableaux: II With a wall'',

594:    J.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 33}, 8835--8866 (2000).

595: 

596: \bibitem{N83} H.~Niederhausen, ``The ballot problem with three candidates'', 

597:   Eur.\ J.\ Combinatorics {\bf 4}, 161--167 (1983).

598: 

599: \bibitem{Br91} M. Bramson and D. Griffeath, ``Capture problems for

600:   coupled random walks," in {\it Random Walks, Brownian Motion, and

601:     Interacting Particle Systems: A Festschrift in Honor of Frank Spitzer\/},

602:   R. Durrett and H. Kesten, eds., pp. 153--188 (Birkh\"auser, Boston, 1991).

603:   

604: \bibitem{Ke92} H. Kesten, ``An absorption problem for several Brownian

605:   motions'', in {\it Seminar on Stochastic Processes, 1991\/}, E. {\c C}inlar,

606:   K. L. Chung, and M. J. Sharpe, eds. (Birkh\"auser, Boston, 1992).

607:   

608: \bibitem{Kr96} P. L. Krapivsky and S. Redner, ``Kinetics of a

609:   diffusive capture process: Lamb besieged by a pride of lions'', J. Phys. A

610:   {\bf 29}, 5347--5357 (1996).

611:   

612: \bibitem{Re99} S. Redner and P. L. Krapivsky, ``Capture of the lamb:

613:   Diffusing predators seeking a diffusing prey'', 

614:   Am.\ J. Phys. {\bf 67}, 1277--1283 (1999).

615:   

616: \bibitem{Gr02} Numerical simulations also suggest a logarithmic dependence

617:   on $N$, but with a different prefactor.  See 

618:   P.~Grassberger, ``Go with the winners: a general Monte Carlo strategy'',

619:   Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun. {\bf 147}, 64--70 (2002).

620:   

621: \bibitem{DL02} B.~Dittrich and R.~Loll, ``A hexagon model for 3D Lorentzian

622:   quantum cosmology'', {\it hep-th}/0204210 (2002). 

623: 

624: \bibitem{Av88} D. ben-Avraham, ``Computer simulation methods for

625:   diffusion-controlled reactions'', J.\ Chem.\ Phys.\ {\bf 88}, 941 (1988).

626:   

627: \bibitem{Re01} S. Redner, {\it A Guide to First-Passage Processes\/} 

628:   (Cambridge University Press, 2001). 

629: 

630: \bibitem{CJ59} H. S. Carslaw and J. C. Jaeger, {\it Conduction of Heat in

631:     Solids} (Oxford University Press, Oxford, U. K., 1959).

632:   

633: % \bibitem{remark2} Such are the vicissitudes of $N$ dimensional space!  Note

634: %   that the solid angle subtended by the domain of the leader problem is

635: %   $1/(N+1)$ of the full space, while the rectangular corner and the

636: %   half-space sustain $1/2^N$ and $1/2$ of the total angle, respectively.

637: 

638: \end{thebibliography}

639: \end{document}

640: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

641: 

642: P. Grassberger and W. Nadler,

643: ```Go with the winners' -- simulations'', cond-mat/0010265 (2000);

644: 

645: 

646: 

647: In the case of an ``energetic'' laggard, the diffusivity of

648: the rest of the particles can be ignored and thus the probability that the

649: laggard remains a laggard decays as $t^{-1/2}$.  

650: 

651: 

652:  Eq.~(\ref{eigen})

653: in this domain now is\xu $f(\varphi)=\sin(3\varphi/2)$.  Thus we obtain

654: $\mu=3/2$, from which we deduce the known result $\b_2=3/4$.

655: 

656: 

657: %For $N\geq 3$, fragmentary numerical results exist: $\beta_3\approx0.91$,

658: %$\beta_4\approx 1.032$, and $\beta_{10}\approx 1.4$ \cite{Br91}.

659: 

660: This domain also suggests a

661: general form for the leading correction to the survival of the lamb.

662: %To test our numerics, we first looked at a

663: %rectangular corner, for a cube of $200$ units on the side, and found the

664: %expected result (from the method of images) that $V(r)\sim r^{-\mu}$,

665: %$\mu=4$, to within five digits.

666: 

667: 

668:   For example, the probability that a diffusing particle at

669: $x_1$ never achieves the lead from among a population of 3 independent

670: diffusing particles, that is, $x_1\not>x_2, x_3$, is equivalent to the

671: probability that the effective particle remains within the union of the

672: domains 123, 213, 132 and 312.  

673: 

674: In Sec.~V, we determine the domain shape for the

675: electrostatic problem that corresponds to the lamb and lions problem for

676: $N>3$.  We discuss how this mapping can be used to obtain rigorous bounds for

677: the exponent $\beta_N$.  

678: 

679: We speculate that the two limits, $N$-dimensional half-space and rectangular

680: corner, dominate the problem of the lamb and lions.  The half-space has

681: exponent $\mu=N-1$, and $\beta=1/2$.  This suggests that for large $N$ the

682: lamb and lions might perhaps be regarded as a perturbation of this case, with

683: $\mu=N-1+{\cal O}(\ln N)$.  For the rectangular corner, $\mu=2N-2$ and

684: $\beta=N/2$.  This behavior might express itself as a leading perturbation to

685: the survival of the lamb.  This seems indeed to be the case, at least for

686: $N=3$.

687: 

688: The domain for the lamb $x_1$ and lions can be bounded between two

689: hyper-cones, with $01$ as their axis of symmetry.  The cone with opening

690: angle $2\theta_1$; $\cos\theta_1=1/N$ encloses the domain, while that with

691: opening angle $2\theta_2$; $\cos\theta_2=\sqrt{2/N(N-1)}$ is circumscribed in

692: the domain. $\theta_1$ is the angle between the axis $01$ and

693: $0\overline{i}$, and $\theta_2$ is the angle between $01$ and

694: $(0\overline{i}+0\overline{j})/2$.  The values of $\mu$ for the two

695: hyper-cones would provide useful bounds to $\mu$ (and hence to $\beta$) of

696: the lamb and lions.  They may help resolve the question of the asymptotic

697: behavior in the limit $N\to\infty$.

698: 

699: % The intermediate situation of $N>4$, but not infinite remains open.  For the

700: % leader problem, for example, the allowed region for the effective particle is

701: % a hyper-wedge defined by the constraints $x_1< x_2, x_3,\ldots x_{N}$.  We

702: % may again project onto the $(N-1)$-dimensional subspace

703: % $x_1+x_2+\cdots+x_{N}=0$ that is orthogonal to the diagonal $(1,\ldots,1)$.

704: % This space is divided by $N(N-1)/2$ hyper-surfaces $A_{ij}:\,x_i=x_j$ into

705: % $N!$ domains, corresponding to all distinct particle orderings.  The ray

706: % $L_{23\cdots N}=(-(N-1)a,a,a,\dots,a)$ is the locus where

707: % $x_2=x_3=\cdots=x_{N}$.  We denote this ray 01 because it is equivalent to

708: % that same ray in Fig.~\ref{cube}.  The $N$ rays 0$\overline{j}$ with

709: % $\overline{j}\ne 1$, define the allowed domain of the leader in the

710: % $N$-particle system.  Although this domain is simple to specify, the solution

711: % to the diffusion equation in this domain appears challenging.

712: 

713: % The angle between any two flanking rays $0\overline{i}$ and $0\overline{j}$

714: % is $\cos(0\overline{i},0\overline{j})=-1/N$.  In the limit $N\to\infty$, this

715: % angle approaches $\pi/2+1/N$, so that the apex of the allowed domain becomes

716: % progressively closer to the corner of a hypercube.  On the other hand, the

717: % angle between any flanking ray $0\overline{i}$ and the $01$ symmetry axis of

718: % the domain approaches $\pi/2-1/N$ in the large $N$ limit.  From this

719: % viewpoint, the domain approaches the half-space limited by a plane

720: % perpendicular to 01~\cite{remark2}.

721: