Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 263

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 93 of the 93 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Power laws and self-organized criticality in theory and nature

Open access
Marković, Dimitrije, Gros, Claudius·2014·Physics Reports
DOI 10.1016/j.physrep.2013.11.002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Power laws and distributions with heavy tails are common features of many complex systems. Examples are the distribution of earthquake magnitudes, solar flare intensities and the sizes of neuronal avalanches. Previously, researchers surmised that a single general concept may act as an underlying generative mechanism, with the theory of self organized criticality being a weighty contender. The power-law scaling observed in the primary statistical analysis is an important, but by far not the only feature characterizing experimental data. The scaling function, the distribution of energy fluctuations, the distribution of inter-event waiting times, and other higher order spatial and temporal correlations, have seen increased consideration over the last years. Leading to realization that basic models, like the original sandpile model, are often insufficient to adequately describe the complexity of real-world systems with power-law distribution. Consequently, a substantial amount of effort has gone into developing new and extended models and, hitherto, three classes of models have emerged. The first line of models is based on a separation between the time scales of an external drive and an internal dissipation, and includes the original sandpile model and its extensions, like the dissipative earthquake model. Within this approach the steady state is close to criticality in terms of an absorbing phase transition. The second line of models is based on external drives and internal dynamics competing on similar time scales and includes the coherent noise model, which has a non-critical steady state characterized by heavy-tailed distributions. The third line of models proposes a non-critical self-organizing state, being guided by an optimization principle, such as the concept of highly optimized tolerance. We present a comparative overview regarding distinct modeling approaches together with a discussion of their potential relevance as underlying generative models for real-world phenomena. The complexity of physical and biological scaling phenomena has been found to transcend the explanatory power of individual paradigmal concepts. The interaction between theoretical development and experimental observations has been very fruitful, leading to a series of novel concepts and insights.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.physrep.2013.11.002

Cites

93 of 93 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 263

Metadata

Authors
Marković, D., & Gros, C.
Venue
Physics Reports
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-03
Volume
536
Issue
2
Pages
41-74
ISSN
0370-1573 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.physrep.2013.11.002
OpenAlex
W2091872011
Cited by
263
References
93
FWCI
6.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.