1: %\documentclass[11pt]{article}
2: \documentclass[prl,aps,preprint]{revtex4}
3: \topmargin -0.5 cm
4: \textwidth 16.0 cm
5: \oddsidemargin -0.0 cm
6: \linespread{1.6}
7: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2}
8: \begin{document}
9: \setcounter{page}{1}
10: \date{\today}
11: \title{Anisotropy and percolation threshold in a multifractal support}
12:
13: \author{ L. S. Lucena, J. E. Freitas, G. Corso, and R. F. Soares. }
14:
15: \affiliation{ International Center for Complex Systems and
16: Departamento de F{\'\i}sica Te\'orica e Experimental,
17: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Campus Universit\'ario
18: 59078 970, Natal, RN, Brazil.}
19:
20:
21: \begin{abstract}
22:
23: Recently a multifractal object, $Q_{mf}$, was proposed
24: to study percolation properties in a multifractal support.
25: The area and the number of
26: neighbors of the blocks of $Q_{mf}$ show a non-trivial behavior.
27: The value of the probability of occupation at the percolation
28: threshold, $p_{c}$, is a function of $\rho$, a parameter
29: of $Q_{mf}$ which is related to its anisotropy.
30: We investigate the relation between $p_{c}$
31: and the average number of neighbors of the blocks as well as the
32: anisotropy of $Q_{mf}$.
33:
34: %
35: \end{abstract}
36:
37: \maketitle
38:
39: \section{1- Introduction}
40:
41: Due to the work of many physicists, and particularly to the
42: contributions of Dietrich Stauffer, percolation theory has
43: became a powerful tool in Science describing phenomena in
44: many areas as geology, biology, magnetism, or social phenomena
45: \cite{stauffer,perc3}. Despite the enormous success of
46: percolation it has been a theory studied in a
47: support (lattice) that has a single dimension.
48: The only references relating percolation and multifractality
49: concern to the multifractal properties of some quantities of the
50: spanning cluster at the percolation threshold \cite{multperc1,multperc2}.
51:
52: Recently, a model to study percolation in a multifractal was
53: proposed \cite{last} in the literature. In fact, the authors have
54: created an original multifractal object, $Q_{mf}$, and an efficient
55: way to estimate its percolation properties. In this work we study in
56: detail the method to estimate $p_c$ for this multifractal and
57: discuss the relation between $p_c$, some topologic characteristics,
58: and the anisotropy of $Q_{mf}$.
59:
60: The multifractal object we develop, $Q_{mf}$, is an intuitive generalization of
61: the square lattice \cite{last}. Suppose that in the construction of the square
62: lattice we use the following algorithm: take a square of size $1$ and
63: cut it symmetrically with vertical and horizontal lines. Repeat this process
64: $n$-times; at the $n^{th}$ step we have a regular square
65: lattice with $2^n \times 2^n$
66: cells. The setup algorithm of $Q_{mf}$ is quite similar, the main difference
67: is that we do not cut
68: the square in a symmetric way. In section $2$ we
69: explain in detail this algorithm.
70:
71: The development of $Q_{mf}$ has a twofold motivation.
72: Firstly, there are systems like oil reservoirs
73: that show multifractal properties \cite{Hermann}
74: and are good candidates to be modeled by such
75: object. Secondly, there is indeed a much more general scope:
76: we want to study percolation phenomena
77: in lattices that are not regular, but that
78: are multifractal in the geometrical
79: sense. It is important to know how site percolation transition happens in
80: lattices in which the cells vary in size and also in the number of neighbors.
81:
82:
83:
84: In this work we analyse some geometric and topologic properties of
85: the percolation cluster generated on $Q_{mf}$ at the percolation threshold.
86: The paper is organized as follows: in
87: \S2 we present the process of construction
88: of $Q_{mf}$ and the algorithm for the estimation of $p_c$,
89: in \S3 we show the numerical simulations concerning the
90: percolation threshold $p_c$ and the topologic properties of $Q_{mf}$; and
91: finally in \S4 we present our final remarks and comments.
92:
93:
94:
95: \section{2- The Model}
96:
97: In this section we show the process of building of the multifractal $Q_{mf}$
98: and the key concepts to estimate $p_c$.
99: We start with a square of linear size $1$ and a partition parameter
100: $0<\rho<1$. For reasons that will be clear
101: later, $\rho = \frac{s}{r}$, where $s$ and
102: $r$ are integers. We call the multifractal built from this
103: parameter $\rho$ as the "$\rho-Q_{mf}$", or "$(r,s)-Q_{mf}$".
104:
105:
106:
107: The first step, $n=1$, consists of two sections of
108: the square: a vertical and an horizontal.
109: Initially the square is cut in two pieces of
110: area $\frac{r}{s+r}= \frac{1}{1+\rho}$ and
111: $\frac{s}{s+r}= \frac{\rho}{1+\rho}$ by a vertical line.
112: This process is shown in figure \ref{fig1}(a), where we use as an example
113: $\rho = \frac{s}{r} = \frac{2}{3}$.
114: The horizontal cut in which we use the same partition $\rho$
115: is shown in figure \ref{fig1}(b).
116: The first partition of the square generates
117: four rectangular blocks: the largest one of area $(\frac{\rho}{1+\rho})^2$,
118: two of area $\frac{\rho}{(1+\rho)^2}$ and the
119: smallest one of area $(\frac{1}{1+\rho})^2$.
120: The difference between the largest area and the smallest one increases
121: as $\rho \rightarrow 0$, moreover, the blocks get
122: more and more stretched in this limit.
123: Therefore $\rho$ measures the anisotropy of
124: $Q_{mf}$.
125:
126:
127: In the second step, $n=2$, we
128: repeat the same process of vertical and horizontal
129: sections as in step $1$. Generically we get $2^{2 n}$ blocks after
130: the $n^{th}$-step.
131: The partition process produces a set of blocks with a variety of areas.
132: We call a set of all elements with the same area as
133: a $k$-set.
134: At the $n^{th}$-step of the algorithm the
135: partition of the square in blocks
136: follows the binomial rule:
137: \begin{equation}
138: A= \sum_{k=0}^n \> C_k^n \> \left(\frac{\rho}{1+\rho}\right)^k
139: \left(\frac{1}{1+\rho}\right)^{n-k} =
140: \left(\frac{\rho + 1}{\rho + 1}\right)^n = 1.
141: \label{bino2}
142: \end{equation}
143: The number of elements of a $k$-set is $C_k^n$.
144: In reference \cite{last} we see that as $n \rightarrow \infty$ all the $k$-sets
145: determine a monofractal whose dimension is $d_k = lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \frac{log \> C_n^k \>
146: \> s^k \>r^{(n-k)} }{log \> (s+r)^\frac{n}{2} }$. In this limit, the ensemble of all
147: $k$-sets engenders the multifractal object $Q_{mf}$ itself.
148:
149: Figure \ref{fig2} shows a picture of $Q_{mf}$
150: for $\rho = \frac{1}{3}$ and $n=4$. We use
151: the following code color: blocks of equal area have the same tonality. In
152: other words, all the blocks of a same $k$-set
153: share a common gray-tone.
154: The general view of the object shows an anisotropic, heterogeneous lattice with
155: a non-trivial topology. The anisotropy of $Q_{mf}$ will change the percolation
156: threshold as we investigate in the next section. Before
157: that we study in more detail the problem of percolation.
158:
159:
160:
161: The main subject of this work is the study of percolation properties of
162: $Q_{mf}$. To perform such a task we develop a percolation algorithm.
163: The percolation algorithm for $Q_{mf}$
164: start mapping this object into the
165: square lattice. The square lattice should be large enough that
166: each line segment of $ Q_{mf}$
167: coincides with a line of the lattice, this condition
168: imposes that $\rho$ is a rational number
169: (it means, $r$ and $s$ are integers).
170: Therefore we consider that the square lattice is more
171: finely divided than $Q_{mf}$. In this way all blocks
172: of the multifractal are
173: composed by a finite number of cells of the square lattice.
174: To explain the percolation algorithm we suppose that $Q_{mf}$
175: construction is at step $n$.
176: We proceed the percolation algorithm by choosing at
177: random one among the $2^{2 n}$ blocks of
178: $ Q_{mf}$ independent of its size or number of neighbors.
179: Once a block is chosen all the cells
180: in the square lattice corresponding to this block are considered as
181: occupied. Each time a block of $ Q_{mf}$ is chosen
182: the algorithm check if the occupied cells at the underlying square
183: lattice are connected in such a way to form a spanning percolation
184: cluster. The algorithm to check percolation is similar to the one used in
185: \cite{ziff,freitas0,freitas2,freitas3}.
186:
187: \section{3- Numerical Results}
188:
189: In this section we show numerical results concerning the percolation
190: threshold. Before the numerics we introduce some definitions.
191: We call lattice the square lattice underlying $Q_{mf}$.
192: Following the literature \cite{stauffer} we call $p$ the probability
193: of occupation of
194: a lattice site. $R_L$ is the probability that for a site occupation $p$ there exists a
195: contiguous cluster of occupied sites which crosses completely the square lattice
196: of size $L$.
197: $p_c$ is the probability of occupation at the percolation threshold.
198: There are several ways \cite{ziff} to define $R_L$. We use two of them:
199: $R_L^e$ is the probability that there exits a cluster crossing
200: either the horizontal or the vertical direction, and $R_L^b$ is the
201: probability that there exits a cluster crossing
202: both directions. At the limit
203: of infinite lattice size $R_L^e$ and $R_L^b$ converge to a common value
204: for the square lattice case. Besides we call $p_c^e$ the value of
205: $p_c$ estimated from $R_L^e$, it means, the average $p_c$ over lattices that
206: percolate in one direction, the horizontal or the vertical. And, similarly,
207: $p_c^b$ the value of $p_c$ estimated from $R_L^b$.
208:
209:
210:
211:
212: Figure \ref{fig3} illustrates the behavior of $p_c^e$ and $p_c^b$ for $7$ different
213: lattice sizes. Two typical values of $\rho$ are used: $\rho = \frac{2}{3}$
214: (solid line) and $\rho = \frac{1}{4}$ (dashed line). In \ref{fig3}
215: (a) we show both $p_c$ versus
216: $\frac{1}{L}$, the upper values corresponds to $p_c^b$
217: and the bottom values to $p_c^e$. The lattice size, $L=(r+s)^n$,
218: corresponds to $4 \leq n \leq 10$, in both cases $r+s=5$. The data of the
219: upper branch of the figure collapse into
220: a single curve, diversly from the lower branch. In other words,
221: the curves of $(2,3)-Q_{mf}$ and $(4,1)-Q_{mf}$ share roughly the same
222: $p_c^e$ but diverse $p_c^b$. The reason for this feature is the strong
223: anisotropy of $(4,1)-Q_{mf}$ compared to the case
224: $(2,3)-Q_{mf}$. The anisotropy of the percolation
225: cluster does not affect $p_c$ in both
226: directions, but it affects $p_c$ in one direction.
227: In fact, the percolation in both
228: directions comes from an average over both directions, in such situation,
229: any eventual anisotropy of the percolation cluster vanishes
230: because of the average.
231:
232: An useful way to define $p_c$ is to take the average
233: value $p_{c_{ave}} = \frac{p_c^e + p_c^b}{2}$.
234: In figure \ref{fig3}(b) we plot $p_{c_{ave}}$ versus $\frac{1}{L}$
235: corresponding to the same data figure \ref{fig3}(a). We observe in this figure that
236: both curves converge to a saturation value that is not the same.
237: The difference between the two cases is related to the curve
238: of $p_c^b$. The anisotropy (stretching of the blocks) due to
239: $\rho$ implies an anisotropy in the percolation cluster. Such anisotropy
240: determines that the percolation cluster does not have a
241: correlation length independent of the direction. Because the percolation
242: cluster is anisotropic the symmetry between $p_c^e$ and $p_c^b$ should
243: fail. Therefore, we expect that for smaller $\rho$ (more anisotropy in
244: the multifractal) a greater difference in $p_{c_{ave}}$ will appear.
245: Figure \ref{fig4} confirm this tendency for diverse values of $\rho$.
246:
247: Figure \ref{fig4} shows $\bar p_c$ versus $\rho$. To obtain $\bar p_c$ we
248: make an average of $p_{c_{ave}}$ after the saturation process, it means,
249: for $n \geq 8$. The parameter
250: $\rho$ is indicated in the figure.
251: These values are also shown in Table $I$. The straight line
252: in the figure is the linear fitting of the data.
253: We focus our attention on two
254: features of the figure: the general tendency of decreasing
255: $p_c$ with $\rho$,
256: and the anomalous case $(3,1)-Q_{mf}$. The main tendency of
257: decreasing $p_{c}$ with $\rho$ we have discussed in connection
258: with anisotropy. We comment the anomalous situation
259: of $(3,1)-Q_{mf}$ in relation to
260: topologic properties of $Q_{mf}$ which are analyzed in
261: what follows.
262:
263:
264: The object $Q_{mf}$ is build of a set of blocks $i$ with different areas,
265: $A_i$, and number of neighbors, $\zeta_i$. The number $\zeta_i$ is a central
266: quantity in the study of topology.
267: A topologic quantity, that is important in the investigation of the percolation
268: threshold, is $\zeta_{ave}$ which is an average of $\zeta_i$ over
269: $Q_{mf}$. It means $\zeta_{ave} = \frac{\sum_{i} \zeta_i }{N} $
270: where $N=2^{2\>n}$ is the total
271: number of blocks and the sum in the numerator is performed over the full
272: multifractal. Typically $\zeta_{ave}$ is a number that does not
273: increase with $n$, but attains a constant value after
274: $n \approx 6$. We plot in Table $I$ this topologic quantity for $n=8$
275: and several values of $\rho$.
276:
277: \centerline{\it Table I}
278: \begin{tabbing}
279: $(s,r)$ \hspace{0.6cm} \= (1,1) \hspace{0.7cm} \= (4,3) \hspace{0.7cm}\= (3,2) \hspace{0.7cm} \= (2,1) \hspace{0.7cm} \= (5,2) \hspace{0.7cm} \=(3,1) \hspace{0.7cm} \= (4,1) \hspace{0.7cm} \= (5,1)\\
280: \hspace{0.2cm} $p_{c}$ \hspace{0.6cm} \= 0.5929 \hspace{0.4cm} \= 0.5262 \hspace{0.4cm} \= 0.5262 \hspace{0.4cm} \= 0.5256 \hspace{0.4cm} \= 0.5252 \hspace{0.4cm} \= 0.5253 \hspace{0.4cm} \= 0.5243 \hspace{0.5cm} \= 0.5241 \\
281: \hspace{0.2cm} $ \zeta_{ave} $ \hspace{0.6cm} \= 999 \hspace{0.6cm} \= 5.436 \hspace{0.7cm} \= 5.436 \hspace{0.6cm} \= 5.434 \hspace{0.7cm} \= 5.436 \hspace{0.6cm} \= 5.426 \hspace{0.7cm} \= 5.436 \hspace{0.6cm} \= 5.436 \\
282:
283: \end{tabbing}
284:
285: We observe in the row of $ \zeta_{ave} $ that all these values are roughly the same,
286: the exception corresponds to the case of the $(3,1)-Q_{mf}$.
287: The conclusion we take is that the variation of the average
288: number of neighbors causes the fluctuation in percolation threshold observed in
289: figure \ref{fig4}. The $p_c$
290: of the $(3,1)-Q_{mf}$ is a little bit greater than the other cases
291: because it has a smaller average number of neighbors.
292: In other words, because each
293: block of the $(3,1)-Q_{mf}$, in the average, has less neighbors,
294: it percolates with more difficulty than
295: the tendency among its group.
296:
297:
298:
299: \section{4- Final Remarks}
300:
301: To summarize we analyze in this work the role of the anisotropy and the
302: average number of neighbors of $Q_{mf}$ on its
303: percolation threshold, $p_c$. The multifractal object is
304: composed by a set of blocks with different areas and number of neighbors.
305: As the parameter defining $Q_{mf}$, $\rho$, goes to
306: zero, the multifractal becomes more and more anisotropic. This
307: anisotropy reflects in the percolation cluster creating an asymmetry
308: between $p_c^e$ and $p_c^b$.
309:
310: The anisotropy of $Q_{mf}$ is evident when we compare
311: $p_c^e$ and $p_c^b$. The observed
312: curves of $p_c^e$ show a similar behavior, in contrast to
313: the curves of $p_c^b$. Actually, the measure of $p_c^b$ makes
314: an average over both directions which erases any anisotropic
315: effect of the percolation cluster. This erasing effect does not
316: exist when we measure $p_c^e$. The anisotropy of $Q_{mf}$
317: decreases with $\rho$ (with $\rho \rightarrow 0$ the blocks
318: became more stretched).
319:
320:
321: A special case in our analysis is the $(3,1)-Q_{mf}$. This
322: case is singular compared to others analyzed cases.
323: For a same number of blocks,
324: the $(3,1)-Q_{mf}$ case has less neighbors than the multifractal blocks
325: corresponding to other values of $\rho$.
326: This phenomenon is intrinsic to the topology
327: of $Q_{mf}$. It implies that the $(3,1)-Q_{mf}$
328: is less connected, and, as a consequence, it shows more difficulty to
329: percolate. Therefore the case of the $(3,1)-Q_{mf}$
330: has a percolation threshold
331: slighter greater then its neighbors in the $\rho$ sequence.
332: In a future work we intend to
333: study in more detail the effect of other topologic properties on
334: the percolation properties.
335:
336:
337:
338:
339: \vspace{2cm}
340:
341: The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of Conselho Nacional
342: de Desenvolvimento Cient{\'\i}fico e Tecnol{\'o}gico (CNPq)-Brazil,
343: FINEP and CTPETRO.
344:
345:
346: \vspace{1cm}
347: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
348: %
349: %
350: %\bibitem{perc1} A. Bunde and H. Havlin (eds.) {\it Fractals and Disordered Systems}
351: %(Springer, Berlin, 1991).
352:
353: \bibitem{stauffer} D. Stauffer and A. Aharony,
354: {\it Introduction to Percolation Theory}, (Taylor $\&$ Francis, London, 1994)
355: %
356:
357: \bibitem{perc3} M. Sahimi, {\it Applications of Percolation Theory},
358: (Taylor \& Francis, Bristol, 1994).
359:
360: \bibitem{multperc1} K.P.N. Murthy, L.K. Gallos, P. Argyrakis, K. N. Kehr,
361: Phys. Rev E, {\bf 54} 6922 (1996).
362:
363: \bibitem{multperc2} O. Stenull and H. K. Jenssen, Phys. Rev. E, {\bf 65} 045104
364: (2002).
365:
366: \bibitem{last} G. Corso, J. E. Freitas, L. S. Lucena, R. F. Soares,
367: cond-mat/0212530.
368:
369: \bibitem{Hermann} F. Herrmann, {\it A Scaling Medium Representation,
370: a Discussion on Well-logs, Fractals and Waves.} PhD Thesis,
371: Delft University of Technology, (1997).
372:
373:
374: \bibitem{ziff} M. E. J. Newman and R. M. Ziff, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 85}
375: 4104 (2000).
376: %
377: %\bibitem{bp2} L. S. Lucena, L. R. da Silva and S. Roux, Physica A {\bf 266}
378: %86 (1999).
379:
380: \bibitem{freitas0} J. E. de Freitas, L. S. Lucena and S. Roux, Physica A
381: {\bf 266} 81 (1999).
382:
383:
384: \bibitem{freitas2} J. E. de Freitas and L. S. Lucena,
385: IJMPC, {\bf 11} 1581 (2000).
386:
387: \bibitem{freitas3} J. E. de Freitas, L. S. Lucena, and S. Roux, Phys. Rev. E,
388: {\bf 64}, 051405 (2001).
389:
390: %\bibitem{Hewet} T. A. Hewett, {\it Fractal Distribution of Reservoir Heterogeneity and
391: %Their Influence on Fluid Transport,} 61${th}$ Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition on the
392: %Society of Petroleum Engineers, (1998).
393: %
394:
395:
396: %
397:
398: \end{thebibliography}
399: %
400:
401: \vspace{1cm}
402:
403: \centerline{FIGURE LEGENDS}
404:
405: \begin{figure}[ht]
406: \begin{center}
407: \caption{ The initial step, $n=1$, in the formation of $Q_{mf}$.
408: In (a) a vertical line cut the
409: square in two pieces according to $\rho$.
410: Two horizontal lines sectioning the rectangles by
411: the same ratio are depicted in (b). The underlying square lattice
412: is depicted with thick lines. }
413: \label{fig1}
414: \end{center}
415: \end{figure}
416: %
417: \begin{figure}[ht]
418: \begin{center}
419: \caption{The object $Q_{mf}$ for $\rho = \frac{1}{3}$ and $n=4$, we
420: introduce a square inside the figure to help the visualization. }
421: \label{fig2}
422: \end{center}
423: \end{figure}
424: %
425: \begin{figure}[ht]
426: \begin{center}
427: \caption{In (a) we show $p_c$ versus $\frac{1}{L}$ for
428: $\rho = \frac{2}{3}$ (solid line) and
429: $\rho = \frac{1}{4}$ (dashed line). The upper values correspond to $p_c^b$
430: and the lower values to $p_c^e$; it is used $4 \leq n \leq 10$.
431: In (b) we plot $p_{ave}$
432: versus $\frac{1}{L}$ for the same data. }
433: \label{fig3}
434: \end{center}
435: \end{figure}
436: %
437: %
438: \begin{figure}[ht]
439: \begin{center}
440: \caption{The $\bar p_c$ versus $\rho$.
441: The chosen values
442: of $\rho$ are indicated in the figure. The straight line
443: corresponds to the linear fitting.}
444: \label{fig4}
445: \end{center}
446: \end{figure}
447: %
448:
449: %
450: %
451:
452: %
453:
454: %
455:
456:
457: \end{document}
458:
459:
460:
461:
462: