Hubbry Logo
Percolation thresholdPercolation thresholdMain
Open search
Percolation threshold
Community hub
Percolation threshold
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Percolation threshold
Percolation threshold
from Wikipedia

The percolation threshold is a mathematical concept in percolation theory that describes the formation of long-range connectivity in random systems. Below the threshold a giant connected component does not exist; while above it, there exists a giant component of the order of system size. In engineering and coffee making, percolation represents the flow of fluids through porous media, but in the mathematics and physics worlds it generally refers to simplified lattice models of random systems or networks (graphs), and the nature of the connectivity in them. The percolation threshold is the critical value of the occupation probability p, or more generally a critical surface for a group of parameters p1, p2, ..., such that infinite connectivity (percolation) first occurs.[1]

Percolation models

[edit]

The most common percolation model is to take a regular lattice, like a square lattice, and make it into a random network by randomly "occupying" sites (vertices) or bonds (edges) with a statistically independent probability p. At a critical threshold pc, large clusters and long-range connectivity first appear, and this is called the percolation threshold. Depending on the method for obtaining the random network, one distinguishes between the site percolation threshold and the bond percolation threshold. More general systems have several probabilities p1, p2, etc., and the transition is characterized by a critical surface or manifold. One can also consider continuum systems, such as overlapping disks and spheres placed randomly, or the negative space (Swiss-cheese models).

To understand the threshold, you can consider a quantity such as the probability that there is a continuous path from one boundary to another along occupied sites or bonds—that is, within a single cluster. For example, one can consider a square system, and ask for the probability P that there is a path from the top boundary to the bottom boundary. As a function of the occupation probability p, one finds a sigmoidal plot that goes from P=0 at p=0 to P=1 at p=1. The larger the square is compared to the lattice spacing, the sharper the transition will be. When the system size goes to infinity, P(p) will be a step function at the threshold value pc. For finite large systems, P(pc) is a constant whose value depends upon the shape of the system; for the square system discussed above, P(pc)=12 exactly for any lattice by a simple symmetry argument.

There are other signatures of the critical threshold. For example, the size distribution (number of clusters of size s) drops off as a power-law for large s at the threshold, ns(pc) ~ s−τ, where τ is a dimension-dependent percolation critical exponents. For an infinite system, the critical threshold corresponds to the first point (as p increases) where the size of the clusters become infinite.

In the systems described so far, it has been assumed that the occupation of a site or bond is completely random—this is the so-called Bernoulli percolation. For a continuum system, random occupancy corresponds to the points being placed by a Poisson process. Further variations involve correlated percolation, such as percolation clusters related to Ising and Potts models of ferromagnets, in which the bonds are put down by the Fortuin–Kasteleyn method.[2] In bootstrap or k-sat percolation, sites and/or bonds are first occupied and then successively culled from a system if a site does not have at least k neighbors. Another important model of percolation, in a different universality class altogether, is directed percolation, where connectivity along a bond depends upon the direction of the flow. Another variation of recent interest is Explosive Percolation, whose thresholds are listed on that page.

Over the last several decades, a tremendous amount of work has gone into finding exact and approximate values of the percolation thresholds for a variety of these systems. Exact thresholds are only known for certain two-dimensional lattices that can be broken up into a self-dual array, such that under a triangle-triangle transformation, the system remains the same. Studies using numerical methods have led to numerous improvements in algorithms and several theoretical discoveries.

Simple duality in two dimensions implies that all fully triangulated lattices (e.g., the triangular, union jack, cross dual, martini dual and asanoha or 3-12 dual, and the Delaunay triangulation) all have site thresholds of 12, and self-dual lattices (square, martini-B) have bond thresholds of 12.

The notation such as (4,82) comes from Grünbaum and Shephard,[3] and indicates that around a given vertex, going in the clockwise direction, one encounters first a square and then two octagons. Besides the eleven Archimedean lattices composed of regular polygons with every site equivalent, many other more complicated lattices with sites of different classes have been studied.

Error bars in the last digit or digits are shown by numbers in parentheses. Thus, 0.729724(3) signifies 0.729724 ± 0.000003, and 0.74042195(80) signifies 0.74042195 ± 0.00000080. The error bars variously represent one or two standard deviations in net error (including statistical and expected systematic error), or an empirical confidence interval, depending upon the source.

Percolation on networks

[edit]

For a random tree-like network (i.e., a connected network with no cycle) without degree-degree correlation, it can be shown that such network can have a giant component, and the percolation threshold (transmission probability) is given by

.

Where is the generating function corresponding to the excess degree distribution, is the average degree of the network and is the second moment of the degree distribution. So, for example, for an ER network, since the degree distribution is a Poisson distribution, where the threshold is at .

In networks with low clustering, , the critical point gets scaled by such that:[4]

This indicates that for a given degree distribution, the clustering leads to a larger percolation threshold, mainly because for a fixed number of links, the clustering structure reinforces the core of the network with the price of diluting the global connections. For networks with high clustering, strong clustering could induce the core–periphery structure, in which the core and periphery might percolate at different critical points, and the above approximate treatment is not applicable.[5]

Percolation in 2D

[edit]

Thresholds on Archimedean lattices

[edit]
This is a picture[6] of the 11 Archimedean Lattices or Uniform tilings, in which all polygons are regular and each vertex is surrounded by the same sequence of polygons. The notation "(34, 6)", for example, means that every vertex is surrounded by four triangles and one hexagon. Some common names that have been given to these lattices are listed in the table below.
Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
3-12 or super-kagome, (3, 122 ) 3 3 0.807900764... = (1 − 2 sin (π/18))12[7] 0.74042195(80),[8] 0.74042077(2),[9] 0.740420800(2),[10] 0.7404207988509(8),[11][12] 0.740420798850811610(2),[13]
cross, truncated trihexagonal (4, 6, 12) 3 3 0.746,[14] 0.750,[15] 0.747806(4),[7] 0.7478008(2)[11] 0.6937314(1),[11] 0.69373383(72),[8] 0.693733124922(2)[13]
square octagon, bathroom tile, 4-8, truncated square

(4, 82)

3 - 0.729,[14] 0.729724(3),[7] 0.7297232(5)[11] 0.6768,[16] 0.67680232(63),[8] 0.6768031269(6),[11] 0.6768031243900113(3),[13]
honeycomb (63) 3 3 0.6962(6),[17] 0.697040230(5),[11] 0.6970402(1),[18] 0.6970413(10),[19] 0.697043(3),[7] 0.652703645... = 1-2 sin (π/18), 1+ p3-3p2=0[20]
kagome (3, 6, 3, 6) 4 4 0.652703645... = 1 − 2 sin(π/18)[20] 0.5244053(3),[21] 0.52440516(10),[19] 0.52440499(2),[18] 0.524404978(5),[9] 0.52440572...,[22] 0.52440500(1),[10] 0.524404999173(3),[11][12] 0.524404999167439(4)[23] 0.52440499916744820(1)[13]
ruby,[24] rhombitrihexagonal (3, 4, 6, 4) 4 4 0.620,[14] 0.621819(3),[7] 0.62181207(7)[11] 0.52483258(53),[8] 0.5248311(1),[11] 0.524831461573(1)[13]
square (44) 4 4 0.59274(10),[25] 0.59274605079210(2),[23] 0.59274601(2),[11] 0.59274605095(15),[26] 0.59274621(13),[27] 0.592746050786(3),[28] 0.5927460507896(1),[29] 0.59274621(33),[30] 0.59274598(4),[31][32] 0.59274605(3),[18] 0.593(1),[33] 0.591(1),[34] 0.569(13),[35] 0.59274(5)[36] 12
snub hexagonal, maple leaf[37] (34,6) 5 5 0.579[15] 0.579498(3)[7] 0.43430621(50),[8] 0.43432764(3),[11] 0.4343283172240(6),[13]
snub square, puzzle (32, 4, 3, 4 ) 5 5 0.550,[14][38] 0.550806(3)[7] 0.41413743(46),[8] 0.4141378476(7),[11] 0.4141378565917(1),[13]
frieze, elongated triangular(33, 42) 5 5 0.549,[14] 0.550213(3),[7] 0.5502(8)[39] 0.4196(6),[39] 0.41964191(43),[8] 0.41964044(1),[11] 0.41964035886369(2)[13]
triangular (36) 6 6 12 0.347296355... = 2 sin (π/18), 1 + p3 − 3p = 0[20]

Note: sometimes "hexagonal" is used in place of honeycomb, although in some contexts a triangular lattice is also called a hexagonal lattice. z = bulk coordination number.

2D lattices with extended and complex neighborhoods

[edit]

In this section, sq-1,2,3 corresponds to square (NN+2NN+3NN),[40] etc. Equivalent to square-2N+3N+4N,[41] sq(1,2,3).[42] tri = triangular, hc = honeycomb.

Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
sq-1, sq-2, sq-3, sq-5 4 0.5927...[40][41] (square site)
sq-1,2, sq-2,3, sq-3,5... 3x3 square 8 0.407...[40][41][43] (square matching) 0.25036834(6),[18] 0.2503685,[44] 0.25036840(4)[45]
sq-1,3 8 0.337[40][41] 0.2214995[44]
sq-2,5: 2NN+5NN 8 0.337[41]
hc-1,2,3: honeycomb-NN+2NN+3NN 12 0.300,[42] 0.300,[15] 0.302960... = 1-pc(site, hc)[46]
tri-1,2: triangular-NN+2NN 12 0.295,[42] 0.289,[15] 0.290258(19)[47]
tri-2,3: triangular-2NN+3NN 12 0.232020(36),[48] 0.232020(20)[47]
sq-4: square-4NN 8 0.270...[41]
sq-1,5: square-NN+5NN (r ≤ 2) 8 0.277[41]
sq-1,2,3: square-NN+2NN+3NN 12 0.292,[49] 0.290(5)[50] 0.289,[15] 0.288,[40][41] 0.2891226(14)[51] 0.1522203[44]
sq-2,3,5: square-2NN+3NN+5NN 12 0.288[41]
sq-1,4: square-NN+4NN 12 0.236[41]
sq-2,4: square-2NN+4NN 12 0.225[41]
tri-4: triangular-4NN 12 0.192450(36),[48] 0.1924428(50)[47]
hc-2,4: honeycomb-2NN+4NN 12 0.2374[52]
tri-1,3: triangular-NN+3NN 12 0.264539(21)[47]
tri-1,2,3: triangular-NN+2NN+3NN 18 0.225,[49] 0.215,[15] 0.215459(36)[48] 0.2154657(17)[47]
sq-3,4: 3NN+4NN 12 0.221[41]
sq-1,2,5: NN+2NN+5NN 12 0.240[41] 0.13805374[44]
sq-1,3,5: NN+3NN+5NN 12 0.233[41]
sq-4,5: 4NN+5NN 12 0.199[41]
sq-1,2,4: NN+2NN+4NN 16 0.219[41]
sq-1,3,4: NN+3NN+4NN 16 0.208[41]
sq-2,3,4: 2NN+3NN+4NN 16 0.202[41]
sq-1,4,5: NN+4NN+5NN 16 0.187[41]
sq-2,4,5: 2NN+4NN+5NN 16 0.182[41]
sq-3,4,5: 3NN+4NN+5NN 16 0.179[41]
sq-1,2,3,5 asterisk pattern 16 0.208[41] 0.1032177[44]
tri-4,5: 4NN+5NN 18 0.140250(36),[48]
sq-1,2,3,4: NN+2NN+3NN+4NN () 20 0.19671(9),[53] 0.196,[41] 0.196724(10),[54] 0.1967293(7)[51] 0.0841509[44]
sq-1,2,4,5: NN+2NN+4NN+5NN 20 0.177[41]
sq-1,3,4,5: NN+3NN+4NN+5NN 20 0.172[41]
sq-2,3,4,5: 2NN+3NN+4NN+5NN 20 0.167[41]
sq-1,2,3,5,6 asterisk pattern 20 0.0783110[44]
sq-1,2,3,4,5: NN+2NN+3NN+4NN+5NN (, also within a 5 x 5 square) 24 0.164,[15] 0.164,[41] 0.1647124(6)[51]
sq-1,2,3,4,6: NN+2NN+3NN+4NN+6NN (diamond ) 24 0.16134,[55]
tri-1,4,5: NN+4NN+5NN 24 0.131660(36)[48]
sq-1,...,6: NN+...+6NN (r≤3) 28 0.142,[15] 0.1432551(9)[51] 0.0558493[44]
tri-2,3,4,5: 2NN+3NN+4NN+5NN 30 0.117460(36)[48] 0.135823(27)[47]
tri-1,2,3,4,5: NN+2NN+3NN+4NN+5NN
36 0.115,[15] 0.115740(36),[48] 0.1157399(58)[47]
sq-1,...,7: NN+...+7NN () 36 0.113,[15] 0.1153481(9)[51] 0.04169608[44]
sq lat, diamond boundary: dist. ≤ 4 40 0.105(5)[50]
sq-1,...,8: NN+..+8NN () 44 0.095,[38] 0.095765(5),[54] 0.09580(2),[53] 0.0957661(9)[51]
sq-1,...,9: NN+..+9NN (r≤4) 48 0.086[15] 0.02974268[44]
sq-1,...,11: NN+...+11NN () 60 0.02301190(3)[44]
sq-1,...,23 (r ≤ 7) 148 0.008342595[45]
sq-1,...,32: NN+...+32NN () 224 0.0053050415(33)[44]
sq-1,...,86: NN+...+86NN (r≤15) 708 0.001557644(4)[56]
sq-1,...,141: NN+...+141NN () 1224 0.000880188(90)[44]
sq-1,...,185: NN+...+185NN (r≤23) 1652 0.000645458(4)[56]
sq-1,...,317: NN+...+317NN (r≤31) 3000 0.000349601(3)[56]
sq-1,...,413: NN+...+413NN () 4016 0.0002594722(11)[44]
sq lat, diamond boundary: dist. ≤ 6 84 0.049(5)[50]
sq lat, diamond boundary: dist. ≤ 8 144 0.028(5)[50]
sq lat, diamond boundary: dist. ≤ 10 220 0.019(5)[50]
2x2 touching lattice squares* (same as sq-1,2,3,4) 20 φc = 0.58365(2),[54] pc = 0.196724(10),[54] 0.19671(9),[53]
3x3 touching lattice squares* (same as sq-1,...,8)) 44 φc = 0.59586(2),[54] pc = 0.095765(5),[54] 0.09580(2)[53]
4x4 touching lattice squares* 76 φc = 0.60648(1),[54] pc = 0.0566227(15),[54] 0.05665(3),[53]
5x5 touching lattice squares* 116 φc = 0.61467(2),[54] pc = 0.037428(2),[54] 0.03745(2),[53]
6x6 touching lattice squares* 220 pc = 0.02663(1),[53]
10x10 touching lattice squares* 436 φc = 0.63609(2),[54] pc = 0.0100576(5)[54]
within 11 x 11 square (r=5) 120 0.01048079(6)[56]
within 15 x 15 square (r=7) 224 0.005287692(22)[56]
20x20 touching lattice squares* 1676 φc = 0.65006(2),[54] pc = 0.0026215(3)[54]
within 31 x 31 square (r=15) 960 0.001131082(5)[56]
100x100 touching lattice squares* 40396 φc = 0.66318(2),[54] pc = 0.000108815(12)[54]
1000x1000 touching lattice squares* 4003996 φc = 0.66639(1),[54] pc = 1.09778(6)E-06 [54]

Here NN = nearest neighbor, 2NN = second nearest neighbor (or next nearest neighbor), 3NN = third nearest neighbor (or next-next nearest neighbor), etc. These are also called 2N, 3N, 4N respectively in some papers.[40]

  • For overlapping or touching squares, (site) given here is the net fraction of sites occupied similar to the in continuum percolation. The case of a 2×2 square is equivalent to percolation of a square lattice NN+2NN+3NN+4NN or sq-1,2,3,4 with threshold with .[54] The 3×3 square corresponds to sq-1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 with z=44 and . The value of z for a k x k square is (2k+1)2-5.

2D distorted lattices

[edit]

Here, one distorts a regular lattice of unit spacing by moving vertices uniformly within the box , and considers percolation when sites are within Euclidean distance of each other.

Lattice Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
square 0.2 1.1 0.8025(2)[57]
0.2 1.2 0.6667(5)[57]
0.1 1.1 0.6619(1)[57]

Overlapping shapes on 2D lattices

[edit]

Site threshold is number of overlapping objects per lattice site. k is the length (net area). Overlapping squares are shown in the complex neighborhood section. Here z is the coordination number to k-mers of either orientation, with for sticks.

System k z Site coverage φc Site percolation threshold pc
1 x 2 dimer, square lattice 2 22 0.54691[53]

0.5483(2)[58]

0.17956(3)[53]

0.18019(9)[58]

1 x 2 aligned dimer, square lattice 2 14(?) 0.5715(18)[58] 0.3454(13)[58]
1 x 3 trimer, square lattice 3 37 0.49898[53]

0.50004(64)[58]

0.10880(2)[53]

0.1093(2)[58]

1 x 4 stick, square lattice 4 54 0.45761[53] 0.07362(2)[53]
1 x 5 stick, square lattice 5 73 0.42241[53] 0.05341(1)[53]
1 x 6 stick, square lattice 6 94 0.39219[53] 0.04063(2)[53]

The coverage is calculated from by for sticks, because there are sites where a stick will cause an overlap with a given site.

For aligned sticks:

Approximate formulas for thresholds of Archimedean lattices

[edit]
Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
(3, 122 ) 3
(4, 6, 12) 3
(4, 82) 3 0.676835..., 4p3 + 3p4 − 6 p5 − 2 p6 = 1[59]
honeycomb (63) 3
kagome (3, 6, 3, 6) 4 0.524430..., 3p2 + 6p3 − 12 p4+ 6 p5p6 = 1[60]
(3, 4, 6, 4) 4
square (44) 4 12 (exact)
(34,6 ) 5 0.434371..., 12p3 + 36p4 − 21p5 − 327 p6 + 69p7 + 2532p8 − 6533 p9 + 8256 p10 − 6255p11 + 2951p12 − 837 p13 + 126 p14 − 7p15 = 1 [citation needed]
snub square, puzzle (32, 4, 3, 4 ) 5
(33, 42) 5
triangular (36) 6 12 (exact)

AB percolation and colored percolation in 2D

[edit]

In AB percolation, a is the proportion of A sites among B sites, and bonds are drawn between sites of opposite species.[61] It is also called antipercolation.

In colored percolation, occupied sites are assigned one of colors with equal probability, and connection is made along bonds between neighbors of different colors.[62]

Lattice z Site percolation threshold
triangular AB 6 6 0.2145,[61] 0.21524(34),[63] 0.21564(3)[64]
AB on square-covering lattice 6 6 [65]
square three-color 4 4 0.80745(5)[62]
square four-color 4 4 0.73415(4)[62]
square five-color 4 4 0.69864(7)[62]
square six-color 4 4 0.67751(5)[62]
triangular two-color 6 6 0.72890(4)[62]
triangular three-color 6 6 0.63005(4)[62]
triangular four-color 6 6 0.59092(3)[62]
triangular five-color 6 6 0.56991(5)[62]
triangular six-color 6 6 0.55679(5)[62]

Site-bond percolation in 2D

[edit]

Site bond percolation. Here is the site occupation probability and is the bond occupation probability, and connectivity is made only if both the sites and bonds along a path are occupied. The criticality condition becomes a curve = 0, and some specific critical pairs are listed below.

Square lattice:

Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
square 4 4 0.615185(15)[66] 0.95
0.667280(15)[66] 0.85
0.732100(15)[66] 0.75
0.75 0.726195(15)[66]
0.815560(15)[66] 0.65
0.85 0.615810(30)[66]
0.95 0.533620(15)[66]

Honeycomb (hexagonal) lattice:

Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
honeycomb 3 3 0.7275(5)[67] 0.95
0. 0.7610(5)[67] 0.90
0.7986(5)[67] 0.85
0.80 0.8481(5)[67]
0.8401(5)[67] 0.80
0.85 0.7890(5)[67]
0.90 0.7377(5)[67]
0.95 0.6926(5)[67]

Kagome lattice:

Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
kagome 4 4 0.6711(4),[67] 0.67097(3)[68] 0.95
0.6914(5),[67] 0.69210(2)[68] 0.90
0.7162(5),[67] 0.71626(3)[68] 0.85
0.7428(5),[67] 0.74339(3)[68] 0.80
0.75 0.7894(9)[67]
0.7757(8),[67] 0.77556(3)[68] 0.75
0.80 0.7152(7)[67]
0.81206(3)[68] 0.70
0.85 0.6556(6)[67]
0.85519(3)[68] 0.65
0.90 0.6046(5)[67]
0.90546(3)[68] 0.60
0.95 0.5615(4)[67]
0.96604(4)[68] 0.55
0.9854(3)[68] 0.53

* For values on different lattices, see "An investigation of site-bond percolation on many lattices".[67]

Approximate formula for site-bond percolation on a honeycomb lattice

Lattice z Threshold Notes
(63) honeycomb 3 3 , When equal: ps = pb = 0.82199 approximate formula, ps = site prob., pb = bond prob., pbc = 1 − 2 sin (π/18),[19] exact at ps=1, pb=pbc.

Archimedean duals (Laves lattices)

[edit]
Example image caption
Example image caption

Laves lattices are the duals to the Archimedean lattices. Drawings from.[6] See also Uniform tilings.

Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
Cairo pentagonal

D(32,4,3,4)=(23)(53)+(13)(54)

3,4 3 13 0.6501834(2),[11] 0.650184(5)[6] 0.585863... = 1 − pcbond(32,4,3,4)
Pentagonal D(33,42)=(13)(54)+(23)(53) 3,4 3 13 0.6470471(2),[11] 0.647084(5),[6] 0.6471(6)[39] 0.580358... = 1 − pcbond(33,42), 0.5800(6)[39]
D(34,6)=(15)(46)+(45)(43) 3,6 3 35 0.639447[6] 0.565694... = 1 − pcbond(34,6 )
dice, rhombille tiling

D(3,6,3,6) = (13)(46) + (23)(43)

3,6 4 0.5851(4),[69] 0.585040(5)[6] 0.475595... = 1 − pcbond(3,6,3,6 )
ruby dual

D(3,4,6,4) = (16)(46) + (26)(43) + (36)(44)

3,4,6 4 0.582410(5)[6] 0.475167... = 1 − pcbond(3,4,6,4 )
union jack, tetrakis square tiling

D(4,82) = (12)(34) + (12)(38)

4,8 6 12 0.323197... = 1 − pcbond(4,82 )
bisected hexagon,[70] cross dual

D(4,6,12)= (16)(312)+(26)(36)+(12)(34)

4,6,12 6 12 0.306266... = 1 − pcbond(4,6,12)
asanoha (hemp leaf)[71]

D(3, 122)=(23)(33)+(13)(312)

3,12 6 12 0.259579... = 1 − pcbond(3, 122)

2-uniform lattices

[edit]

Top 3 lattices: #13 #12 #36
Bottom 3 lattices: #34 #37 #11

20 2 uniform lattices
20 2 uniform lattices

[3]

Top 2 lattices: #35 #30
Bottom 2 lattices: #41 #42

20 2 uniform lattices
20 2 uniform lattices

[3]

Top 4 lattices: #22 #23 #21 #20
Bottom 3 lattices: #16 #17 #15

20 2 uniform lattices
20 2 uniform lattices

[3]

Top 2 lattices: #31 #32
Bottom lattice: #33

20 2 uniform lattices
20 2 uniform lattices

[3]

# Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
41 (12)(3,4,3,12) + (12)(3, 122) 4,3 3.5 0.7680(2)[72] 0.67493252(36)[citation needed]
42 (13)(3,4,6,4) + (23)(4,6,12) 4,3 313 0.7157(2)[72] 0.64536587(40)[citation needed]
36 (17)(36) + (67)(32,4,12) 6,4 4 27 0.6808(2)[72] 0.55778329(40)[citation needed]
15 (23)(32,62) + (13)(3,6,3,6) 4,4 4 0.6499(2)[72] 0.53632487(40)[citation needed]
34 (17)(36) + (67)(32,62) 6,4 4 27 0.6329(2)[72] 0.51707873(70)[citation needed]
16 (45)(3,42,6) + (15)(3,6,3,6) 4,4 4 0.6286(2)[72] 0.51891529(35)[citation needed]
17 (45)(3,42,6) + (15)(3,6,3,6)* 4,4 4 0.6279(2)[72] 0.51769462(35)[citation needed]
35 (23)(3,42,6) + (13)(3,4,6,4) 4,4 4 0.6221(2)[72] 0.51973831(40)[citation needed]
11 (12)(34,6) + (12)(32,62) 5,4 4.5 0.6171(2)[72] 0.48921280(37)[citation needed]
37 (12)(33,42) + (12)(3,4,6,4) 5,4 4.5 0.5885(2)[72] 0.47229486(38)[citation needed]
30 (12)(32,4,3,4) + (12)(3,4,6,4) 5,4 4.5 0.5883(2)[72] 0.46573078(72)[citation needed]
23 (12)(33,42) + (12)(44) 5,4 4.5 0.5720(2)[72] 0.45844622(40)[citation needed]
22 (23)(33,42) + (13)(44) 5,4 4 23 0.5648(2)[72] 0.44528611(40)[citation needed]
12 (14)(36) + (34)(34,6) 6,5 5 14 0.5607(2)[72] 0.41109890(37)[citation needed]
33 (12)(33,42) + (12)(32,4,3,4) 5,5 5 0.5505(2)[72] 0.41628021(35)[citation needed]
32 (13)(33,42) + (23)(32,4,3,4) 5,5 5 0.5504(2)[72] 0.41549285(36)[citation needed]
31 (17)(36) + (67)(32,4,3,4) 6,5 5 17 0.5440(2)[72] 0.40379585(40)[citation needed]
13 (12)(36) + (12)(34,6) 6,5 5.5 0.5407(2)[72] 0.38914898(35)[citation needed]
21 (13)(36) + (23)(33,42) 6,5 5 13 0.5342(2)[72] 0.39491996(40)[citation needed]
20 (12)(36) + (12)(33,42) 6,5 5.5 0.5258(2)[72] 0.38285085(38)[citation needed]

Inhomogeneous 2-uniform lattice

[edit]
2-uniform lattice #37

This figure shows something similar to the 2-uniform lattice #37, except the polygons are not all regular—there is a rectangle in the place of the two squares—and the size of the polygons is changed. This lattice is in the isoradial representation in which each polygon is inscribed in a circle of unit radius. The two squares in the 2-uniform lattice must now be represented as a single rectangle in order to satisfy the isoradial condition. The lattice is shown by black edges, and the dual lattice by red dashed lines. The green circles show the isoradial constraint on both the original and dual lattices. The yellow polygons highlight the three types of polygons on the lattice, and the pink polygons highlight the two types of polygons on the dual lattice. The lattice has vertex types (12)(33,42) + (12)(3,4,6,4), while the dual lattice has vertex types (115)(46)+(615)(42,52)+(215)(53)+(615)(52,4). The critical point is where the longer bonds (on both the lattice and dual lattice) have occupation probability p = 2 sin (π/18) = 0.347296... which is the bond percolation threshold on a triangular lattice, and the shorter bonds have occupation probability 1 − 2 sin(π/18) = 0.652703..., which is the bond percolation on a hexagonal lattice. These results follow from the isoradial condition[73] but also follow from applying the star-triangle transformation to certain stars on the honeycomb lattice. Finally, it can be generalized to having three different probabilities in the three different directions, p1, p2 and p3 for the long bonds, and 1 − p1, 1 − p2, and 1 − p3 for the short bonds, where p1, p2 and p3 satisfy the critical surface for the inhomogeneous triangular lattice.

Thresholds on 2D bow-tie and martini lattices

[edit]

To the left, center, and right are: the martini lattice, the martini-A lattice, the martini-B lattice. Below: the martini covering/medial lattice, same as the 2×2, 1×1 subnet for kagome-type lattices (removed).

Example image caption
Example image caption

Some other examples of generalized bow-tie lattices (a-d) and the duals of the lattices (e-h):

Example image caption
Example image caption
Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
martini (34)(3,92)+(14)(93) 3 3 0.764826..., 1 + p4 − 3p3 = 0[74] 0.707107... = 1/2[75]
bow-tie (c) 3,4 3 17 0.672929..., 1 − 2p3 − 2p4 − 2p5 − 7p6 + 18p7 + 11p8 − 35p9 + 21p10 − 4p11 = 0[76]
bow-tie (d) 3,4 3 13 0.625457..., 1 − 2p2 − 3p3 + 4p4p5 = 0[76]
martini-A (23)(3,72)+(13)(3,73) 3,4 3 13 1/2[76] 0.625457..., 1 − 2p2 − 3p3 + 4p4p5 = 0[76]
bow-tie dual (e) 3,4 3 23 0.595482..., 1-pcbond (bow-tie (a))[76]
bow-tie (b) 3,4,6 3 23 0.533213..., 1 − p − 2p3 -4p4-4p5+156+ 13p7-36p8+19p9+ p10 + p11=0[76]
martini covering/medial (12)(33,9) + (12)(3,9,3,9) 4 4 0.707107... = 1/2[75] 0.57086651(33)[citation needed]
martini-B (12)(3,5,3,52) + (12)(3,52) 3, 5 4 0.618034... = 2/(1 + 5), 1- p2p = 0[74][76] 12[75][76]
bow-tie dual (f) 3,4,8 4 25 0.466787..., 1 − pcbond (bow-tie (b))[76]
bow-tie (a) (12)(32,4,32,4) + (12)(3,4,3) 4,6 5 0.5472(2),[39] 0.5479148(7)[77] 0.404518..., 1 − p − 6p2 + 6p3p5 = 0[76][78]
bow-tie dual (h) 3,6,8 5 0.374543..., 1 − pcbond(bow-tie (d))[76]
bow-tie dual (g) 3,6,10 5 12 0.547... = pcsite(bow-tie(a)) 0.327071..., 1 − pcbond(bow-tie (c))[76]
martini dual (12)(33) + (12)(39) 3,9 6 12 0.292893... = 1 − 1/2[75]

Thresholds on 2D covering, medial, and matching lattices

[edit]
Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
(4, 6, 12) covering/medial 4 4 pcbond(4, 6, 12) = 0.693731... 0.5593140(2),[11] 0.559315(1)[citation needed]
(4, 82) covering/medial, square kagome 4 4 pcbond(4,82) = 0.676803... 0.544798017(4),[11] 0.54479793(34)[citation needed]
(34, 6) medial 4 4 0.5247495(5)[11]
(3,4,6,4) medial 4 4 0.51276[11]
(32, 4, 3, 4) medial 4 4 0.512682929(8)[11]
(33, 42) medial 4 4 0.5125245984(9)[11]
square covering (non-planar) 6 6 12 0.3371(1)[59]
square matching lattice (non-planar) 8 8 1 − pcsite(square) = 0.407253... 0.25036834(6)[18]
(4, 6, 12) covering/medial lattice
(4, 82) covering/medial lattice
(3,122) covering/medial lattice (in light grey), equivalent to the kagome (2 × 2) subnet, and in black, the dual of these lattices.
(3,4,6,4) covering/medial lattice, equivalent to the 2-uniform lattice #30, but with facing triangles made into a diamond. This pattern appears in Iranian tilework.[79] such as Western tomb tower, Kharraqan.[80]
(3,4,6,4) medial dual, shown in red, with medial lattice in light gray behind it

Thresholds on 2D chimera non-planar lattices

[edit]
Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
K(2,2) 4 4 0.51253(14)[81] 0.44778(15)[81]
K(3,3) 6 6 0.43760(15)[81] 0.35502(15)[81]
K(4,4) 8 8 0.38675(7)[81] 0.29427(12)[81]
K(5,5) 10 10 0.35115(13)[81] 0.25159(13)[81]
K(6,6) 12 12 0.32232(13)[81] 0.21942(11)[81]
K(7,7) 14 14 0.30052(14)[81] 0.19475(9)[81]
K(8,8) 16 16 0.28103(11)[81] 0.17496(10)[81]

Thresholds on subnet lattices

[edit]
Example image caption
Example image caption

The 2 x 2, 3 x 3, and 4 x 4 subnet kagome lattices. The 2 × 2 subnet is also known as the "triangular kagome" lattice.[82]

Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
checkerboard – 2 × 2 subnet 4,3 0.596303(1)[83]
checkerboard – 4 × 4 subnet 4,3 0.633685(9)[83]
checkerboard – 8 × 8 subnet 4,3 0.642318(5)[83]
checkerboard – 16 × 16 subnet 4,3 0.64237(1)[83]
checkerboard – 32 × 32 subnet 4,3 0.64219(2)[83]
checkerboard – subnet 4,3 0.642216(10)[83]
kagome – 2 × 2 subnet = (3, 122) covering/medial 4 pcbond (3, 122) = 0.74042077... 0.600861966960(2),[11] 0.6008624(10),[19] 0.60086193(3)[9]
kagome – 3 × 3 subnet 4 0.6193296(10),[19] 0.61933176(5),[9] 0.61933044(32)[citation needed]
kagome – 4 × 4 subnet 4 0.625365(3),[19] 0.62536424(7)[9]
kagome – subnet 4 0.628961(2)[19]
kagome – (1 × 1):(2 × 2) subnet = martini covering/medial 4 pcbond(martini) = 1/2 = 0.707107... 0.57086648(36)[citation needed]
kagome – (1 × 1):(3 × 3) subnet 4,3 0.728355596425196...[9] 0.58609776(37)[citation needed]
kagome – (1 × 1):(4 × 4) subnet 0.738348473943256...[9]
kagome – (1 × 1):(5 × 5) subnet 0.743548682503071...[9]
kagome – (1 × 1):(6 × 6) subnet 0.746418147634282...[9]
kagome – (2 × 2):(3 × 3) subnet 0.61091770(30)[citation needed]
triangular – 2 × 2 subnet 6,4 0.471628788[83]
triangular – 3 × 3 subnet 6,4 0.509077793[83]
triangular – 4 × 4 subnet 6,4 0.524364822[83]
triangular – 5 × 5 subnet 6,4 0.5315976(10)[83]
triangular – subnet 6,4 0.53993(1)[83]

Thresholds of random sequentially adsorbed objects

[edit]

(For more results and comparison to the jamming density, see Random sequential adsorption)

system z Site threshold
dimers on a honeycomb lattice 3 0.69,[84] 0.6653 [85]
dimers on a triangular lattice 6 0.4872(8),[84] 0.4873,[85]
aligned linear dimers on a triangular lattice 6 0.5157(2)[86]
aligned linear 4-mers on a triangular lattice 6 0.5220(2)[86]
aligned linear 8-mers on a triangular lattice 6 0.5281(5)[86]
aligned linear 12-mers on a triangular lattice 6 0.5298(8)[86]
linear 16-mers on a triangular lattice 6 aligned 0.5328(7)[86]
linear 32-mers on a triangular lattice 6 aligned 0.5407(6)[86]
linear 64-mers on a triangular lattice 6 aligned 0.5455(4)[86]
aligned linear 80-mers on a triangular lattice 6 0.5500(6)[86]
aligned linear k on a triangular lattice 6 0.582(9)[86]
dimers and 5% impurities, triangular lattice 6 0.4832(7)[87]
parallel dimers on a square lattice 4 0.5863[88]
dimers on a square lattice 4 0.5617,[88] 0.5618(1),[89] 0.562,[90] 0.5713[85]
linear 3-mers on a square lattice 4 0.528[90]
3-site 120° angle, 5% impurities, triangular lattice 6 0.4574(9)[87]
3-site triangles, 5% impurities, triangular lattice 6 0.5222(9)[87]
linear trimers and 5% impurities, triangular lattice 6 0.4603(8)[87]
linear 4-mers on a square lattice 4 0.504[90]
linear 5-mers on a square lattice 4 0.490[90]
linear 6-mers on a square lattice 4 0.479[90]
linear 8-mers on a square lattice 4 0.474,[90] 0.4697(1)[89]
linear 10-mers on a square lattice 4 0.469[90]
linear 16-mers on a square lattice 4 0.4639(1)[89]
linear 32-mers on a square lattice 4 0.4747(2)[89]

The threshold gives the fraction of sites occupied by the objects when site percolation first takes place (not at full jamming). For longer k-mers see Ref.[91]

Thresholds of full dimer coverings of two dimensional lattices

[edit]

Here, we are dealing with networks that are obtained by covering a lattice with dimers, and then consider bond percolation on the remaining bonds. In discrete mathematics, this problem is known as the 'perfect matching' or the 'dimer covering' problem.

system z Bond threshold
Parallel covering, square lattice 6 0.381966...[92]
Shifted covering, square lattice 6 0.347296...[92]
Staggered covering, square lattice 6 0.376825(2)[92]
Random covering, square lattice 6 0.367713(2)[92]
Parallel covering, triangular lattice 10 0.237418...[92]
Staggered covering, triangular lattice 10 0.237497(2)[92]
Random covering, triangular lattice 10 0.235340(1)[92]

Thresholds of polymers (random walks) on a square lattice

[edit]

System is composed of ordinary (non-avoiding) random walks of length l on the square lattice.[93]

l (polymer length) z Bond percolation
1 4 0.5(exact)[94]
2 4 0.47697(4)[94]
4 4 0.44892(6)[94]
8 4 0.41880(4)[94]

Thresholds of self-avoiding walks of length k added by random sequential adsorption

[edit]
k z Site thresholds Bond thresholds
1 4 0.593(2)[95] 0.5009(2)[95]
2 4 0.564(2)[95] 0.4859(2)[95]
3 4 0.552(2)[95] 0.4732(2)[95]
4 4 0.542(2)[95] 0.4630(2)[95]
5 4 0.531(2)[95] 0.4565(2)[95]
6 4 0.522(2)[95] 0.4497(2)[95]
7 4 0.511(2)[95] 0.4423(2)[95]
8 4 0.502(2)[95] 0.4348(2)[95]
9 4 0.493(2)[95] 0.4291(2)[95]
10 4 0.488(2)[95] 0.4232(2)[95]
11 4 0.482(2)[95] 0.4159(2)[95]
12 4 0.476(2)[95] 0.4114(2)[95]
13 4 0.471(2)[95] 0.4061(2)[95]
14 4 0.467(2)[95] 0.4011(2)[95]
15 4 0.4011(2)[95] 0.3979(2)[95]

Thresholds on 2D inhomogeneous lattices

[edit]
Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
bow-tie with p = 12 on one non-diagonal bond 3 0.3819654(5),[96] [59]

Thresholds for 2D continuum models

[edit]
System Φc ηc nc
Disks of radius r 0.67634831(2),[97] 0.6763475(6),[98] 0.676339(4),[99] 0.6764(4),[100] 0.6766(5),[101] 0.676(2),[102] 0.679,[103] 0.674[104] 0.676,[105] 0.680[106] 1.1280867(5),[107] 1.1276(9),[108] 1.12808737(6),[97] 1.128085(2),[98] 1.128059(12),[99] 1.13,[citation needed] 0.8[109] 1.43632505(10),[110] 1.43632545(8),[97] 1.436322(2),[98] 1.436289(16),[99] 1.436320(4),[111] 1.436323(3),[112] 1.438(2),[113] 1.216 (48)[114]
Disks of uniform radius (0,r) 0.686610(7),[115] 0.6860(12),[100] 0.680[104] = 1.108010(7)[115]
Ellipses, ε = 1.5 0.0043[103] 0.00431 2.059081(7)[112]
Ellipses, ε = 53 0.65[116] 1.05[116] 2.28[116]
Ellipses, ε = 2 0.6287945(12),[112] 0.63[116] 0.991000(3),[112] 0.99[116] 2.523560(8),[112] 2.5[116]
Ellipses, ε = 3 0.56[116] 0.82[116] 3.157339(8),[112] 3.14[116]
Ellipses, ε = 4 0.5[116] 0.69[116] 3.569706(8),[112] 3.5[116]
Ellipses, ε = 5 0.455,[103] 0.455,[105] 0.46[116] 0.607[103] 3.861262(12),[112] 3.86[103]
Ellipses, ε = 6 4.079365(17)[112]
Ellipses, ε = 7 4.249132(16)[112]
Ellipses, ε = 8 4.385302(15)[112]
Ellipses, ε = 9 4.497000(8)[112]
Ellipses, ε = 10 0.301,[103] 0.303,[105] 0.30[116] 0.358[103] 0.36[116] 4.590416(23)[112] 4.56,[103] 4.5[116]
Ellipses, ε = 15 4.894752(30)[112]
Ellipses, ε = 20 0.178,[103] 0.17[116] 0.196[103] 5.062313(39),[112] 4.99[103]
Ellipses, ε = 50 0.081[103] 0.084[103] 5.393863(28),[112] 5.38[103]
Ellipses, ε = 100 0.0417[103] 0.0426[103] 5.513464(40),[112] 5.42[103]
Ellipses, ε = 200 0.021[116] 0.0212[116] 5.40[116]
Ellipses, ε = 1000 0.0043[103] 0.00431 5.624756(22),[112] 5.5
Superellipses, ε = 1, m = 1.5 0.671[105]
Superellipses, ε = 2.5, m = 1.5 0.599[105]
Superellipses, ε = 5, m = 1.5 0.469[105]
Superellipses, ε = 10, m = 1.5 0.322[105]
disco-rectangles, ε = 1.5 1.894 [111]
disco-rectangles, ε = 2 2.245 [111]
Aligned squares of side 0.66675(2),[54] 0.66674349(3),[97] 0.66653(1),[117] 0.6666(4),[118] 0.668[104] 1.09884280(9),[97] 1.0982(3),[117] 1.098(1)[118] 1.09884280(9),[97] 1.0982(3),[117] 1.098(1)[118]
Randomly oriented squares 0.62554075(4),[97] 0.6254(2)[118] 0.625,[105] 0.9822723(1),[97] 0.9819(6)[118] 0.982278(14)[119] 0.9822723(1),[97] 0.9819(6)[118] 0.982278(14)[119]
Randomly oriented squares within angle 0.6255(1)[118] 0.98216(15)[118]
Rectangles, ε = 1.1 0.624870(7) 0.980484(19) 1.078532(21)[119]
Rectangles, ε = 2 0.590635(5) 0.893147(13) 1.786294(26)[119]
Rectangles, ε = 3 0.5405983(34) 0.777830(7) 2.333491(22)[119]
Rectangles, ε = 4 0.4948145(38) 0.682830(8) 2.731318(30)[119]
Rectangles, ε = 5 0.4551398(31), 0.451[105] 0.607226(6) 3.036130(28)[119]
Rectangles, ε = 10 0.3233507(25), 0.319[105] 0.3906022(37) 3.906022(37)[119]
Rectangles, ε = 20 0.2048518(22) 0.2292268(27) 4.584535(54)[119]
Rectangles, ε = 50 0.09785513(36) 0.1029802(4) 5.149008(20)[119]
Rectangles, ε = 100 0.0523676(6) 0.0537886(6) 5.378856(60)[119]
Rectangles, ε = 200 0.02714526(34) 0.02752050(35) 5.504099(69)[119]
Rectangles, ε = 1000 0.00559424(6) 0.00560995(6) 5.609947(60)[119]
Sticks (needles) of length 5.63726(2),[120] 5.6372858(6),[97] 5.637263(11),[119] 5.63724(18)[121]
sticks with log-normal length dist. STD=0.5 4.756(3)[121]
sticks with correlated angle dist. s=0.5 6.6076(4)[121]
Power-law disks, x = 2.05 0.993(1)[122] 4.90(1) 0.0380(6)
Power-law disks, x = 2.25 0.8591(5)[122] 1.959(5) 0.06930(12)
Power-law disks, x = 2.5 0.7836(4)[122] 1.5307(17) 0.09745(11)
Power-law disks, x = 4 0.69543(6)[122] 1.18853(19) 0.18916(3)
Power-law disks, x = 5 0.68643(13)[122] 1.1597(3) 0.22149(8)
Power-law disks, x = 6 0.68241(8)[122] 1.1470(1) 0.24340(5)
Power-law disks, x = 7 0.6803(8)[122] 1.140(6) 0.25933(16)
Power-law disks, x = 8 0.67917(9)[122] 1.1368(5) 0.27140(7)
Power-law disks, x = 9 0.67856(12)[122] 1.1349(4) 0.28098(9)
Voids around disks of radius r 1 − Φc(disk) = 0.32355169(2),[97] 0.318(2),[123] 0.3261(6)[124]
2D continuum percolation with disks
2D continuum percolation with ellipses of aspect ratio 2

For disks, equals the critical number of disks per unit area, measured in units of the diameter , where is the number of objects and is the system size

For disks, equals critical total disk area.

gives the number of disk centers within the circle of influence (radius 2 r).

is the critical disk radius.

for ellipses of semi-major and semi-minor axes of a and b, respectively. Aspect ratio with .

for rectangles of dimensions and . Aspect ratio with .

for power-law distributed disks with , .

equals critical area fraction.

For disks, Ref.[102] use where is the density of disks of radius .

equals number of objects of maximum length per unit area.

For ellipses,

For void percolation, is the critical void fraction.

For more ellipse values, see [112][116]

For more rectangle values, see [119]

Both ellipses and rectangles belong to the superellipses, with . For more percolation values of superellipses, see.[105]

For the monodisperse particle systems, the percolation thresholds of concave-shaped superdisks are obtained as seen in [125]

For binary dispersions of disks, see [98][126][115]

Thresholds on 2D random and quasi-lattices

[edit]
Voronoi diagram (solid lines) and its dual, the Delaunay triangulation (dotted lines), for a Poisson distribution of points
Delaunay triangulation
The Voronoi covering or line graph (dotted red lines) and the Voronoi diagram (black lines)
The Relative Neighborhood Graph (black lines)[127] superimposed on the Delaunay triangulation (black plus grey lines).
The Gabriel Graph, a subgraph of the Delaunay triangulation in which the circle surrounding each edge does not enclose any other points of the graph
Uniform Infinite Planar Triangulation, showing bond clusters. From[128]
Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
Relative neighborhood graph 2.5576 0.796(2)[127] 0.771(2)[127]
Voronoi tessellation 3 0.71410(2),[129] 0.7151*[72] 0.68,[130] 0.6670(1),[131] 0.6680(5),[132] 0.666931(5)[129]
Voronoi covering/medial 4 0.666931(2)[129][131] 0.53618(2)[129]
Randomized kagome/square-octagon, fraction r=12 4 0.6599[16]
Penrose rhomb dual 4 0.6381(3)[69] 0.5233(2)[69]
Gabriel graph 4 0.6348(8),[133] 0.62[134] 0.5167(6),[133] 0.52[134]
Random-line tessellation, dual 4 0.586(2)[135]
Penrose rhomb 4 0.5837(3),[69] 0.0.5610(6) (weighted bonds)[136] 0.58391(1)[137] 0.483(5),[138] 0.4770(2)[69]
Octagonal lattice, "chemical" links (Ammann–Beenker tiling) 4 0.585[139] 0.48[139]
Octagonal lattice, "ferromagnetic" links 5.17 0.543[139] 0.40[139]
Dodecagonal lattice, "chemical" links 3.63 0.628[139] 0.54[139]
Dodecagonal lattice, "ferromagnetic" links 4.27 0.617[139] 0.495[139]
Delaunay triangulation 6 12[140] 0.3333(1)[131] 0.3326(5),[132] 0.333069(2)[129]
Uniform Infinite Planar Triangulation[141] 6 12 (23 – 1)/11 ≈ 0.2240[128][142]

*Theoretical estimate

Thresholds on 2D correlated systems

[edit]

Assuming power-law correlations

lattice α Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
square 3 0.561406(4)[143]
square 2 0.550143(5)[143]
square 0.1 0.508(4)[143]

Thresholds on slabs

[edit]

h is the thickness of the slab, h × ∞ × ∞. Boundary conditions (b.c.) refer to the top and bottom planes of the slab.

Lattice h z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
simple cubic (open b.c.) 2 5 5 0.47424,[144] 0.4756[145]
bcc (open b.c.) 2 0.4155[145]
hcp (open b.c.) 2 0.2828[145]
diamond (open b.c.) 2 0.5451[145]
simple cubic (open b.c.) 3 0.4264[145]
bcc (open b.c.) 3 0.3531[145]
bcc (periodic b.c.) 3 0.21113018(38)[146]
hcp (open b.c.) 3 0.2548[145]
diamond (open b.c.) 3 0.5044[145]
simple cubic (open b.c.) 4 0.3997,[144] 0.3998[145]
bcc (open b.c.) 4 0.3232[145]
bcc (periodic b.c.) 4 0.20235168(59)[146]
hcp (open b.c.) 4 0.2405[145]
diamond (open b.c.) 4 0.4842[145]
simple cubic (periodic b.c.) 5 6 6 0.278102(5)[146]
simple cubic (open b.c.) 6 0.3708[145]
simple cubic (periodic b.c.) 6 6 6 0.272380(2)[146]
bcc (open b.c.) 6 0.2948[145]
hcp (open b.c.) 6 0.2261[145]
diamond (open b.c.) 6 0.4642[145]
simple cubic (periodic b.c.) 7 6 6 0.3459514(12)[146] 0.268459(1)[146]
simple cubic (open b.c.) 8 0.3557,[144] 0.3565[145]
simple cubic (periodic b.c.) 8 6 6 0.265615(5)[146]
bcc (open b.c.) 8 0.2811[145]
hcp (open b.c.) 8 0.2190[145]
diamond (open b.c.) 8 0.4549[145]
simple cubic (open b.c.) 12 0.3411[145]
bcc (open b.c.) 12 0.2688[145]
hcp (open b.c.) 12 0.2117[145]
diamond (open b.c.) 12 0.4456[145]
simple cubic (open b.c.) 16 0.3219,[144] 0.3339[145]
bcc (open b.c.) 16 0.2622[145]
hcp (open b.c.) 16 0.2086[145]
diamond (open b.c.) 16 0.4415[145]
simple cubic (open b.c.) 32 0.3219,[144]
simple cubic (open b.c.) 64 0.3165,[144]
simple cubic (open b.c.) 128 0.31398,[144]

Percolation in 3D

[edit]
Lattice z filling factor* filling fraction* Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
(10,3)-a oxide (or site-bond)[147] 23 32 2.4 0.748713(22)[147] = (pc,bond(10,3) – a)12 = 0.742334(25)[148]
(10,3)-b oxide (or site-bond)[147] 23 32 2.4 0.233[149] 0.174 0.745317(25)[147] = (pc,bond(10,3) – b)12 = 0.739388(22)[148]
silicon dioxide (diamond site-bond)[147] 4,22 2 23 0.638683(35)[147]
Modified (10,3)-b[150] 32,2 2 23 0.627[150]
(8,3)-a[148] 3 3 0.577962(33)[148] 0.555700(22)[148]
(10,3)-a[148] gyroid[151] 3 3 0.571404(40)[148] 0.551060(37)[148]
(10,3)-b[148] 3 3 0.565442(40)[148] 0.546694(33)[148]
cubic oxide (cubic site-bond)[147] 6,23 3.5 0.524652(50)[147]
bcc dual 4 0.4560(6)[152] 0.4031(6)[152]
ice Ih 4 4 π 3 / 16 = 0.340087 0.147 0.433(11)[153] 0.388(10)[154]
diamond (Ice Ic) 4 4 π 3 / 16 = 0.340087 0.1462332 0.4299(8),[155] 0.4299870(4),[156] 0.426+0.08
−0.02
,[157] 0.4297(4)[158] 0.4301(4),[159] 0.428(4),[160] 0.425(15),[161] 0.425,[42][49] 0.436(12)[153]
0.3895892(5),[156] 0.3893(2),[159] 0.3893(3),[158] 0.388(5),[161] 0.3886(5),[155] 0.388(5)[160] 0.390(11)[154]
diamond dual 6 23 0.3904(5)[152] 0.2350(5)[152]
3D kagome (covering graph of the diamond lattice) 6 π 2 / 12 = 0.37024 0.1442 0.3895(2)[162] =pc(site) for diamond dual and pc(bond) for diamond lattice[152] 0.2709(6)[152]
Bow-tie stack dual 5 13 0.3480(4)[39] 0.2853(4)[39]
honeycomb stack 5 5 0.3701(2)[39] 0.3093(2)[39]
octagonal stack dual 5 5 0.3840(4)[39] 0.3168(4)[39]
pentagonal stack 5 13 0.3394(4)[39] 0.2793(4)[39]
kagome stack 6 6 0.453450 0.1517 0.3346(4)[39] 0.2563(2)[39]
fcc dual 42,8 5 13 0.3341(5)[152] 0.2703(3)[152]
simple cubic 6 6 π / 6 = 0.5235988 0.1631574 0.307(10),[161] 0.307,[42] 0.3115(5),[163] 0.3116077(2),[164] 0.311604(6),[165] 0.311605(5),[166] 0.311600(5),[167] 0.3116077(4),[168] 0.3116081(13),[169] 0.3116080(4),[170] 0.3116060(48),[171] 0.3116004(35),[172] 0.31160768(15)[156] 0.247(5),[161] 0.2479(4),[155] 0.2488(2),[173] 0.24881182(10),[164] 0.2488125(25),[174] 0.2488126(5),[175]
hcp dual 44,82 5 13 0.3101(5)[152] 0.2573(3)[152]
dice stack 5,8 6 π 3 / 9 = 0.604600 0.1813 0.2998(4)[39] 0.2378(4)[39]
bow-tie stack 7 7 0.2822(6)[39] 0.2092(4)[39]
Stacked triangular / simple hexagonal 8 8 0.26240(5),[176] 0.2625(2),[177] 0.2623(2)[39] 0.18602(2),[176] 0.1859(2)[39]
octagonal (union-jack) stack 6,10 8 0.2524(6)[39] 0.1752(2)[39]
bcc 8 8 0.243(10),[161] 0.243,[42] 0.2459615(10),[170] 0.2460(3),[178] 0.2464(7),[155] 0.2458(2)[159] 0.178(5),[161] 0.1795(3),[155] 0.18025(15),[173] 0.1802875(10)[175]
simple cubic with 3NN (same as bcc) 8 8 0.2455(1),[179] 0.2457(7)[180]
fcc, D3 12 12 π / (3 2) = 0.740480 0.147530 0.195,[42] 0.198(3),[181] 0.1998(6),[155] 0.1992365(10),[170] 0.19923517(20),[156] 0.1994(2),[159] 0.199236(4)[182] 0.1198(3),[155] 0.1201635(10)[175] 0.120169(2)[182]
hcp 12 12 π / (3 2) = 0.740480 0.147545 0.195(5),[161] 0.1992555(10)[183] 0.1201640(10),[183] 0.119(2)[161]
La2−x Srx Cu O4 12 12 0.19927(2)[184]
simple cubic with 2NN (same as fcc) 12 12 0.1991(1)[179]
simple cubic with NN+4NN 12 12 0.15040(12),[185] 0.1503793(7)[51] 0.1068263(7)[186]
simple cubic with 3NN+4NN 14 14 0.20490(12)[185] 0.1012133(7)[186]
bcc NN+2NN (= sc(3,4) sc-3NN+4NN) 14 14 0.175,[42] 0.1686,(20)[187] 0.1759432(8) 0.0991(5),[187] 0.1012133(7),[46] 0.1759432(8)[46]
Nanotube fibers on FCC 14 14 0.1533(13)[188]
simple cubic with NN+3NN 14 14 0.1420(1)[179] 0.0920213(7)[186]
simple cubic with 2NN+4NN 18 18 0.15950(12)[185] 0.0751589(9)[186]
simple cubic with NN+2NN 18 18 0.137,[49] 0.136,[189] 0.1372(1),[179] 0.13735(5),[citation needed] 0.1373045(5)[51] 0.0752326(6)[186]
fcc with NN+2NN (=sc-2NN+4NN) 18 18 0.136,[42] 0.1361408(8)[51] 0.0751589(9)[46]
simple cubic with short-length correlation 6+ 6+ 0.126(1)[190]
simple cubic with NN+3NN+4NN 20 20 0.11920(12)[185] 0.0624379(9)[186]
simple cubic with 2NN+3NN 20 20 0.1036(1)[179] 0.0629283(7)[186]
simple cubic with NN+2NN+4NN 24 24 0.11440(12)[185] 0.0533056(6)[186]
simple cubic with 2NN+3NN+4NN 26 26 0.11330(12)[185] 0.0474609(9)
simple cubic with NN+2NN+3NN 26 26 0.097,[42] 0.0976(1),[179] 0.0976445(10), 0.0976444(6)[51] 0.0497080(10)[186]
bcc with NN+2NN+3NN 26 26 0.095,[49] 0.0959084(6)[51] 0.0492760(10)[46]
simple cubic with NN+2NN+3NN+4NN 32 32 0.10000(12),[185] 0.0801171(9)[51] 0.0392312(8)[186]
fcc with NN+2NN+3NN 42 42 0.061,[49] 0.0610(5),[189] 0.0618842(8)[46] 0.0290193(7)[46]
fcc with NN+2NN+3NN+4NN 54 54 0.0500(5)[189]
sc-1,2,3,4,5 simple cubic with NN+2NN+3NN+4NN+5NN 56 56 0.0461815(5)[51] 0.0210977(7)[46]
sc-1,...,6 (2x2x2 cube [53]) 80 80 0.0337049(9),[51] 0.03373(13)[53] 0.0143950(10)[46]
sc-1,...,7 92 92 0.0290800(10)[51] 0.0123632(8)[46]
sc-1,...,8 122 122 0.0218686(6)[51] 0.0091337(7)[46]
sc-1,...,9 146 146 0.0184060(10)[51] 0.0075532(8)[46]
sc-1,...,10 170 170 0.0064352(8)[46]
sc-1,...,11 178 178 0.0061312(8)[46]
sc-1,...,12 202 202 0.0053670(10)[46]
sc-1,...,13 250 250 0.0042962(8)[46]
3x3x3 cube 274 274 φc= 0.76564(1),[54] pc = 0.0098417(7),[54] 0.009854(6)[53]
4x4x4 cube 636 636 φc=0.76362(1),[54] pc = 0.0042050(2),[54] 0.004217(3)[53]
5x5x5 cube 1214 1250 φc=0.76044(2),[54] pc = 0.0021885(2),[54] 0.002185(4)[53]
6x6x6 cube 2056 2056 0.001289(2)[53]

Filling factor = fraction of space filled by touching spheres at every lattice site (for systems with uniform bond length only). Also called Atomic Packing Factor.

Filling fraction (or Critical Filling Fraction) = filling factor * pc(site).

NN = nearest neighbor, 2NN = next-nearest neighbor, 3NN = next-next-nearest neighbor, etc.

kxkxk cubes are cubes of occupied sites on a lattice, and are equivalent to extended-range percolation of a cube of length (2k+1), with edges and corners removed, with z = (2k+1)3-12(2k-1)-9 (center site not counted in z).

Question: the bond thresholds for the hcp and fcc lattice agree within the small statistical error. Are they identical, and if not, how far apart are they? Which threshold is expected to be bigger? Similarly for the ice and diamond lattices. See [191]

System polymer Φc
percolating excluded volume of athermal polymer matrix (bond-fluctuation model on cubic lattice) 0.4304(3)[192]

3D distorted lattices

[edit]

Here, one distorts a regular lattice of unit spacing by moving vertices uniformly within the cube , and considers percolation when sites are within Euclidean distance of each other.

Lattice Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
cubic 0.05 1.0 0.60254(3)[193]
0.1 1.00625 0.58688(4)[193]
0.15 1.025 0.55075(2)[193]
0.175 1.05 0.50645(5)[193]
0.2 1.1 0.44342(3)[193]

Overlapping shapes on 3D lattices

[edit]

Site threshold is the number of overlapping objects per lattice site. The coverage φc is the net fraction of sites covered, and v is the volume (number of cubes). Overlapping cubes are given in the section on thresholds of 3D lattices. Here z is the coordination number to k-mers of either orientation, with

System k z Site coverage φc Site percolation threshold pc
1 x 2 dimer, cubic lattice 2 56 0.24542[53] 0.045847(2)[53]
1 x 3 trimer, cubic lattice 3 104 0.19578[53] 0.023919(9)[53]
1 x 4 stick, cubic lattice 4 164 0.16055[53] 0.014478(7)[53]
1 x 5 stick, cubic lattice 5 236 0.13488[53] 0.009613(8)[53]
1 x 6 stick, cubic lattice 6 320 0.11569[53] 0.006807(2)[53]
2 x 2 plaquette, cubic lattice 2 0.22710[53] 0.021238(2)[53]
3 x 3 plaquette, cubic lattice 3 0.18686[53] 0.007632(5)[53]
4 x 4 plaquette, cubic lattice 4 0.16159[53] 0.003665(3)[53]
5 x 5 plaquette, cubic lattice 5 0.14316[53] 0.002058(5)[53]
6 x 6 plaquette, cubic lattice 6 0.12900[53] 0.001278(5)[53]

The coverage is calculated from by for sticks, and for plaquettes.

Dimer percolation in 3D

[edit]
System Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
Simple cubic 0.2555(1)[194]

Thresholds for 3D continuum models

[edit]

All overlapping except for jammed spheres and polymer matrix.

System Φc ηc
Spheres of radius r 0.289,[195] 0.293,[196] 0.286,[197] 0.295.[104] 0.2895(5),[198] 0.28955(7),[199] 0.2896(7),[200] 0.289573(2),[201] 0.2896,[202] 0.2854,[203] 0.290,[204] 0.290,[205] 0.2895693(26)[206] 0.3418(7),[198] 0.3438(13),[207] 0.341889(3),[201] 0.3360,[203] 0.34189(2)[117] [corrected], 0.341935(8),[208] 0.335,[209]
Oblate ellipsoids with major radius r and aspect ratio 43 0.2831[203] 0.3328[203]
Prolate ellipsoids with minor radius r and aspect ratio 32 0.2757,[202] 0.2795,[203] 0.2763[204] 0.3278[203]
Oblate ellipsoids with major radius r and aspect ratio 2 0.2537,[202] 0.2629,[203] 0.254[204] 0.3050[203]
Prolate ellipsoids with minor radius r and aspect ratio 2 0.2537,[202] 0.2618,[203] 0.25(2),[210] 0.2507[204] 0.3035,[203] 0.29(3)[210]
Oblate ellipsoids with major radius r and aspect ratio 3 0.2289[203] 0.2599[203]
Prolate ellipsoids with minor radius r and aspect ratio 3 0.2033,[202] 0.2244,[203] 0.20(2)[210] 0.2541,[203] 0.22(3)[210]
Oblate ellipsoids with major radius r and aspect ratio 4 0.2003[203] 0.2235[203]
Prolate ellipsoids with minor radius r and aspect ratio 4 0.1901,[203] 0.16(2)[210] 0.2108,[203] 0.17(3)[210]
Oblate ellipsoids with major radius r and aspect ratio 5 0.1757[203] 0.1932[203]
Prolate ellipsoids with minor radius r and aspect ratio 5 0.1627,[203] 0.13(2)[210] 0.1776,[203] 0.15(2)[210]
Oblate ellipsoids with major radius r and aspect ratio 10 0.0895,[202] 0.1058[203] 0.1118[203]
Prolate ellipsoids with minor radius r and aspect ratio 10 0.0724,[202] 0.08703,[203] 0.07(2)[210] 0.09105,[203] 0.07(2)[210]
Oblate ellipsoids with major radius r and aspect ratio 100 0.01248[203] 0.01256[203]
Prolate ellipsoids with minor radius r and aspect ratio 100 0.006949[203] 0.006973[203]
Oblate ellipsoids with major radius r and aspect ratio 1000 0.001275[203] 0.001276[203]
Oblate ellipsoids with major radius r and aspect ratio 2000 0.000637[203] 0.000637[203]
Spherocylinders with H/D = 1 0.2439(2)[200]
Spherocylinders with H/D = 4 0.1345(1)[200]
Spherocylinders with H/D = 10 0.06418(20)[200]
Spherocylinders with H/D = 50 0.01440(8)[200]
Spherocylinders with H/D = 100 0.007156(50)[200]
Spherocylinders with H/D = 200 0.003724(90)[200]
Aligned cylinders 0.2819(2)[211] 0.3312(1)[211]
Aligned cubes of side 0.2773(2)[118] 0.27727(2),[54] 0.27730261(79)[171] 0.3247(3),[117] 0.3248(3),[118] 0.32476(4)[211] 0.324766(1)[171]
Randomly oriented icosahedra 0.3030(5)[212]
Randomly oriented dodecahedra 0.2949(5)[212]
Randomly oriented octahedra 0.2514(6)[212]
Randomly oriented cubes of side 0.2168(2)[118] 0.2174,[202] 0.2444(3),[118] 0.2443(5)[212]
Randomly oriented tetrahedra 0.1701(7)[212]
Randomly oriented disks of radius r (in 3D) 0.9614(5)[213]
Randomly oriented square plates of side 0.8647(6)[213]
Randomly oriented triangular plates of side 0.7295(6)[213]
Jammed spheres (average z = 6) 0.183(3),[214] 0.1990,[215] see also contact network of jammed spheres below. 0.59(1)[214] (volume fraction of all spheres)

is the total volume (for spheres), where N is the number of objects and L is the system size.

is the critical volume fraction, valid for overlapping randomly placed objects.

For disks and plates, these are effective volumes and volume fractions.

For void ("Swiss-Cheese" model), is the critical void fraction.

For more results on void percolation around ellipsoids and elliptical plates, see.[216]

For more ellipsoid percolation values see.[203]

For spherocylinders, H/D is the ratio of the height to the diameter of the cylinder, which is then capped by hemispheres. Additional values are given in.[200]

For superballs, m is the deformation parameter, the percolation values are given in.,[217][218] In addition, the thresholds of concave-shaped superballs are also determined in [125]

For cuboid-like particles (superellipsoids), m is the deformation parameter, more percolation values are given in.[202]

Void percolation in 3D

[edit]

Void percolation refers to percolation in the space around overlapping objects. Here refers to the fraction of the space occupied by the voids (not of the particles) at the critical point, and is related to by . is defined as in the continuum percolation section above.

System Φc ηc
Voids around disks of radius r 22.86(2)[216]
Voids around randomly oriented tetrahedra 0.0605(6)[219]
Voids around oblate ellipsoids of major radius r and aspect ratio 32 0.5308(7)[220] 0.6333[220]
Voids around oblate ellipsoids of major radius r and aspect ratio 16 0.3248(5)[220] 1.125[220]
Voids around oblate ellipsoids of major radius r and aspect ratio 10 1.542(1)[216]
Voids around oblate ellipsoids of major radius r and aspect ratio 8 0.1615(4)[220] 1.823[220]
Voids around oblate ellipsoids of major radius r and aspect ratio 4 0.0711(2)[220] 2.643,[220] 2.618(5)[216]
Voids around oblate ellipsoids of major radius r and aspect ratio 2 3.239(4) [216]
Voids around prolate ellipsoids of aspect ratio 8 0.0415(7)[221]
Voids around prolate ellipsoids of aspect ratio 6 0.0397(7)[221]
Voids around prolate ellipsoids of aspect ratio 4 0.0376(7)[221]
Voids around prolate ellipsoids of aspect ratio 3 0.03503(50)[221]
Voids around prolate ellipsoids of aspect ratio 2 0.0323(5)[221]
Voids around aligned square prisms of aspect ratio 2 0.0379(5)[222]
Voids around randomly oriented square prisms of aspect ratio 20 0.0534(4)[222]
Voids around randomly oriented square prisms of aspect ratio 15 0.0535(4)[222]
Voids around randomly oriented square prisms of aspect ratio 10 0.0524(5)[222]
Voids around randomly oriented square prisms of aspect ratio 8 0.0523(6)[222]
Voids around randomly oriented square prisms of aspect ratio 7 0.0519(3)[222]
Voids around randomly oriented square prisms of aspect ratio 6 0.0519(5)[222]
Voids around randomly oriented square prisms of aspect ratio 5 0.0515(7)[222]
Voids around randomly oriented square prisms of aspect ratio 4 0.0505(7)[222]
Voids around randomly oriented square prisms of aspect ratio 3 0.0485(11)[222]
Voids around randomly oriented square prisms of aspect ratio 5/2 0.0483(8)[222]
Voids around randomly oriented square prisms of aspect ratio 2 0.0465(7)[222]
Voids around randomly oriented square prisms of aspect ratio 3/2 0.0461(14)[222]
Voids around hemispheres 0.0455(6)[223]
Voids around aligned tetrahedra 0.0605(6)[219]
Voids around randomly oriented tetrahedra 0.0605(6)[219]
Voids around aligned cubes 0.036(1),[54] 0.0381(3)[219]
Voids around randomly oriented cubes 0.0452(6),[219] 0.0449(5)[222]
Voids around aligned octahedra 0.0407(3)[219]
Voids around randomly oriented octahedra 0.0398(5)[219]
Voids around aligned dodecahedra 0.0356(3)[219]
Voids around randomly oriented dodecahedra 0.0360(3)[219]
Voids around aligned icosahedra 0.0346(3)[219]
Voids around randomly oriented icosahedra 0.0336(7)[219]
Voids around spheres 0.034(7),[224] 0.032(4),[225] 0.030(2),[123] 0.0301(3),[226] 0.0294,[221] 0.0300(3),[227] 0.0317(4),[228] 0.0308(5)[223] 0.0301(1),[220] 0.0301(1)[219] 3.506(8),[227] 3.515(6),[216] 3.510(2)[108]

Thresholds on 3D random and quasi-lattices

[edit]
Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
Contact network of packed spheres 6 0.310(5),[214] 0.287(50),[229] 0.3116(3),[215]
Random-plane tessellation, dual 6 0.290(7)[230]
Icosahedral Penrose 6 0.285[231] 0.225[231]
Penrose w/2 diagonals 6.764 0.271[231] 0.207[231]
Penrose w/8 diagonals 12.764 0.188[231] 0.111[231]
Voronoi network 15.54 0.1453(20)[187] 0.0822(50)[187]

Thresholds for other 3D models

[edit]
Lattice z Site percolation threshold Critical coverage fraction Bond percolation threshold
Drilling percolation, simple cubic lattice* 6 6 0.6345(3),[232] 0.6339(5),[233] 0.633965(15)[234] 0.25480
Drill in z direction on cubic lattice, remove single sites 6 6 0.592746 (columns), 0.4695(10) (sites)[235] 0.2784
Random tube model, simple cubic lattice 0.231456(6)[236]
Pac-Man percolation, simple cubic lattice 0.139(6)[237]

In drilling percolation, the site threshold represents the fraction of columns in each direction that have not been removed, and . For the 1d drilling, we have (columns) (sites).

In tube percolation, the bond threshold represents the value of the parameter such that the probability of putting a bond between neighboring vertical tube segments is , where is the overlap height of two adjacent tube segments.[236]

Thresholds in different dimensional spaces

[edit]

Continuum models in higher dimensions

[edit]
d System Φc ηc
4 Overlapping hyperspheres 0.1223(4)[117] 0.1300(13),[207] 0.1304(5),[117] 0.1210268(19)[206]
4 Aligned hypercubes 0.1132(5),[117] 0.1132348(17)[171] 0.1201(6)[117]
4 Voids around hyperspheres 0.00211(2)[124] 6.161(10)[124] 6.248(2),[108]
5 Overlapping hyperspheres 0.0544(6),[207] 0.05443(7),[117] 0.0522524(69)[206]
5 Aligned hypercubes 0.04900(7),[117] 0.0481621(13)[171] 0.05024(7)[117]
5 Voids around hyperspheres 1.26(6)x10−4[124] 8.98(4),[124] 9.170(8)[108]
6 Overlapping hyperspheres 0.02391(31),[207] 0.02339(5)[117]
6 Aligned hypercubes 0.02082(8),[117] 0.0213479(10)[171] 0.02104(8)[117]
6 Voids around hyperspheres 8.0(6)x10−6[124] 11.74(8),[124] 12.24(2),[108]
7 Overlapping hyperspheres 0.01102(16),[207] 0.01051(3)[117]
7 Aligned hypercubes 0.00999(5),[117] 0.0097754(31)[171] 0.01004(5)[117]
7 Voids around hyperspheres 15.46(5)[108]
8 Overlapping hyperspheres 0.00516(8),[207] 0.004904(6)[117]
8 Aligned hypercubes 0.004498(5)[117]
8 Voids around hyperspheres 18.64(8)[108]
9 Overlapping hyperspheres 0.002353(4)[117]
9 Aligned hypercubes 0.002166(4)[117]
9 Voids around hyperspheres 22.1(4)[108]
10 Overlapping hyperspheres 0.001138(3)[117]
10 Aligned hypercubes 0.001058(4)[117]
11 Overlapping hyperspheres 0.0005530(3)[117]
11 Aligned hypercubes 0.0005160(3)[117]

In 4d, .

In 5d, .

In 6d, .

is the critical volume fraction, valid for overlapping objects.

For void models, is the critical void fraction, and is the total volume of the overlapping objects

Thresholds on hypercubic lattices

[edit]
d z Site thresholds Bond thresholds
4 8 0.198(1)[238] 0.197(6),[239] 0.1968861(14),[240] 0.196889(3),[241] 0.196901(5),[242] 0.19680(23),[243] 0.1968904(65),[171] 0.19688561(3)[244] 0.1600(1),[245] 0.16005(15),[173] 0.1601314(13),[240] 0.160130(3),[241] 0.1601310(10),[174] 0.1601312(2),[246] 0.16013122(6)[244]
5 10 0.141(1),0.198(1)[238] 0.141(3),[239] 0.1407966(15),[240] 0.1407966(26),[171] 0.14079633(4)[244] 0.1181(1),[245] 0.118(1),[247] 0.11819(4),[173] 0.118172(1),[240] 0.1181718(3)[174] 0.11817145(3)[244]
6 12 0.106(1),[238] 0.108(3),[239] 0.109017(2),[240] 0.1090117(30),[171] 0.109016661(8)[244] 0.0943(1),[245] 0.0942(1),[248] 0.0942019(6),[240] 0.09420165(2)[244]
7 14 0.05950(5),[248] 0.088939(20),[249] 0.0889511(9),[240] 0.0889511(90),[171] 0.088951121(1),[244] 0.0787(1),[245] 0.078685(30),[248] 0.0786752(3),[240] 0.078675230(2)[244]
8 16 0.0752101(5),[240] 0.075210128(1)[244] 0.06770(5),[248] 0.06770839(7),[240] 0.0677084181(3)[244]
9 18 0.0652095(3),[240] 0.0652095348(6)[244] 0.05950(5),[248] 0.05949601(5),[240] 0.0594960034(1)[244]
10 20 0.0575930(1),[240] 0.0575929488(4)[244] 0.05309258(4),[240] 0.0530925842(2)[244]
11 22 0.05158971(8),[240] 0.0515896843(2)[244] 0.04794969(1),[240] 0.04794968373(8)[244]
12 24 0.04673099(6),[240] 0.0467309755(1)[244] 0.04372386(1),[240] 0.04372385825(10)[244]
13 26 0.04271508(8),[240] 0.04271507960(10)[244] 0.04018762(1),[240] 0.04018761703(6)[244]

For thresholds on high dimensional hypercubic lattices, we have the asymptotic series expansions [239] [247] [250]

where . For 13-dimensional bond percolation, for example, the error with the measured value is less than 10−6, and these formulas can be useful for higher-dimensional systems.

Thresholds in other higher-dimensional lattices

[edit]
d lattice z Site thresholds Bond thresholds
4 diamond 5 0.2978(2)[159] 0.2715(3)[159]
4 kagome 8 0.2715(3)[162] 0.177(1)[159]
4 bcc 16 0.1037(3)[159] 0.074(1),[159] 0.074212(1)[246]
4 fcc, D4, hypercubic 2NN 24 0.0842(3),[159] 0.08410(23),[243] 0.0842001(11)[182] 0.049(1),[159] 0.049517(1),[246] 0.0495193(8)[182]
4 hypercubic NN+2NN 32 0.06190(23),[243] 0.0617731(19)[251] 0.035827(1),[246] 0.0338047(27)[251]
4 hypercubic 3NN 32 0.04540(23)[243]
4 hypercubic NN+3NN 40 0.04000(23)[243] 0.0271892(22)[251]
4 hypercubic 2NN+3NN 56 0.03310(23)[243] 0.0194075(15)[251]
4 hypercubic NN+2NN+3NN 64 0.03190(23),[243] 0.0319407(13)[251] 0.0171036(11)[251]
4 hypercubic NN+2NN+3NN+4NN 88 0.0231538(12)[251] 0.0122088(8)[251]
4 hypercubic NN+...+5NN 136 0.0147918(12)[251] 0.0077389(9)[251]
4 hypercubic NN+...+6NN 232 0.0088400(10)[251] 0.0044656(11)[251]
4 hypercubic NN+...+7NN 296 0.0070006(6)[251] 0.0034812(7)[251]
4 hypercubic NN+...+8NN 320 0.0064681(9)[251] 0.0032143(8)[251]
4 hypercubic NN+...+9NN 424 0.0048301(9)[251] 0.0024117(7)[251]
5 diamond 6 0.2252(3)[159] 0.2084(4)[162]
5 kagome 10 0.2084(4)[162] 0.130(2)[159]
5 bcc 32 0.0446(4)[159] 0.033(1)[159]
5 fcc, D5, hypercubic 2NN 40 0.0431(3),[159] 0.0435913(6)[182] 0.026(2),[159] 0.0271813(2)[182]
5 hypercubic NN+2NN 50 0.0334(2)[252] 0.0213(1)[252]
6 diamond 7 0.1799(5)[159] 0.1677(7)[162]
6 kagome 12 0.1677(7)[162]
6 fcc, D6 60 0.0252(5),[159] 0.02602674(12)[182] 0.01741556(5)[182]
6 bcc 64 0.0199(5)[159]
6 E6[182] 72 0.02194021(14)[182] 0.01443205(8)[182]
7 fcc, D7 84 0.01716730(5)[182] 0.012217868(13)[182]
7 E7[182] 126 0.01162306(4)[182] 0.00808368(2)[182]
8 fcc, D8 112 0.01215392(4)[182] 0.009081804(6)[182]
8 E8[182] 240 0.00576991(2)[182] 0.004202070(2)[182]
9 fcc, D9 144 0.00905870(2)[182] 0.007028457(3)[182]
9 [182] 272 0.00480839(2)[182] 0.0037006865(11)[182]
10 fcc, D10 180 0.007016353(9)[182] 0.005605579(6)[182]
11 fcc, D11 220 0.005597592(4)[182] 0.004577155(3)[182]
12 fcc, D12 264 0.004571339(4)[182] 0.003808960(2)[182]
13 fcc, D13 312 0.003804565(3)[182] 0.0032197013(14)[182]

Thresholds in one-dimensional long-range percolation

[edit]
Long-range bond percolation model. The lines represent the possible bonds with width decreasing as the connection probability decreases (left panel). An instance of the model together with the clusters generated (right panel).

In a one-dimensional chain we establish bonds between distinct sites and with probability decaying as a power-law with an exponent . Percolation occurs[253][254] at a critical value for . The numerically determined percolation thresholds are given by:[255]

Critical thresholds as a function of .[255]
The dotted line is the rigorous lower bound.[253]
0.1 0.047685(8)
0.2 0.093211(16)
0.3 0.140546(17)
0.4 0.193471(15)
0.5 0.25482(5)
0.6 0.327098(6)
0.7 0.413752(14)
0.8 0.521001(14)
0.9 0.66408(7)

Thresholds on hyperbolic, hierarchical, and tree lattices

[edit]

In these lattices there may be two percolation thresholds: the lower threshold is the probability above which infinite clusters appear, and the upper is the probability above which there is a unique infinite cluster.

Visualization of a triangular hyperbolic lattice {3,7} projected on the Poincaré disk (red bonds). Green bonds show dual-clusters on the {7,3} lattice[256]
Depiction of the non-planar Hanoi network HN-NP[257]
Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
Lower Upper Lower Upper
{3,7} hyperbolic 7 7 0.26931171(7),[258] 0.20[259] 0.73068829(7),[258] 0.73(2)[259] 0.20,[260] 0.1993505(5)[258] 0.37,[260] 0.4694754(8)[258]
{3,8} hyperbolic 8 8 0.20878618(9)[258] 0.79121382(9)[258] 0.1601555(2)[258] 0.4863559(6)[258]
{3,9} hyperbolic 9 9 0.1715770(1)[258] 0.8284230(1)[258] 0.1355661(4)[258] 0.4932908(1)[258]
{4,5} hyperbolic 5 5 0.29890539(6)[258] 0.8266384(5)[258] 0.27,[260] 0.2689195(3)[258] 0.52,[260] 0.6487772(3)[258]
{4,6} hyperbolic 6 6 0.22330172(3)[258] 0.87290362(7)[258] 0.20714787(9)[258] 0.6610951(2)[258]
{4,7} hyperbolic 7 7 0.17979594(1)[258] 0.89897645(3)[258] 0.17004767(3)[258] 0.66473420(4)[258]
{4,8} hyperbolic 8 8 0.151035321(9)[258] 0.91607962(7)[258] 0.14467876(3)[258] 0.66597370(3)[258]
{4,9} hyperbolic 8 8 0.13045681(3)[258] 0.92820305(3)[258] 0.1260724(1)[258] 0.66641596(2)[258]
{5,5} hyperbolic 5 5 0.26186660(5)[258] 0.89883342(7)[258] 0.263(10),[261] 0.25416087(3)[258] 0.749(10)[261] 0.74583913(3)[258]
{7,3} hyperbolic 3 3 0.54710885(10)[258] 0.8550371(5),[258] 0.86(2)[259] 0.53,[260] 0.551(10),[261] 0.5305246(8)[258] 0.72,[260] 0.810(10),[261] 0.8006495(5)[258]
{∞,3} Cayley tree 3 3 12 12[260] 1[260]
Enhanced binary tree (EBT) 0.304(1),[262] 0.306(10),[261] (13 − 3)/2 = 0.302776[263] 0.48,[260] 0.564(1),[262] 0.564(10),[261] 12[263]
Enhanced binary tree dual 0.436(1),[262] 0.452(10)[261] 0.696(1),[262] 0.699(10)[261]
Non-Planar Hanoi Network (HN-NP) 0.319445[257] 0.381996[257]
Cayley tree with grandparents 8 0.158656326[264]

Note: {m,n} is the Schläfli symbol, signifying a hyperbolic lattice in which n regular m-gons meet at every vertex

For bond percolation on {P,Q}, we have by duality . For site percolation, because of the self-matching of triangulated lattices.

Cayley tree (Bethe lattice) with coordination number

Thresholds for directed percolation

[edit]
(1+1)d Kagome Lattice
(1+1)d Square Lattice
(1+1)d Triangular Lattice
(2+1)d SC Lattice
(2+1)d BCC Lattice
Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
(1+1)-d honeycomb 1.5 0.8399316(2),[265] 0.839933(5),[266] of (1+1)-d sq. 0.8228569(2),[265] 0.82285680(6)[265]
(1+1)-d kagome 2 0.7369317(2),[265] 0.73693182(4)[267] 0.6589689(2),[265] 0.65896910(8)[265]
(1+1)-d square, diagonal 2 0.705489(4),[268] 0.705489(4),[269] 0.70548522(4),[270] 0.70548515(20),[267] 0.7054852(3),[265] 0.644701(2),[271] 0.644701(1),[272] 0.644701(1),[268] 0.6447006(10),[266] 0.64470015(5),[273] 0.644700185(5),[270] 0.6447001(2),[265] 0.643(2)[274]
(1+1)-d triangular 3 0.595646(3),[268] 0.5956468(5),[273] 0.5956470(3)[265] 0.478018(2),[268] 0.478025(1),[273] 0.4780250(4)[265] 0.479(3)[274]
(2+1)-d simple cubic, diagonal planes 3 0.43531(1),[275] 0.43531411(10)[265] 0.382223(7),[275] 0.38222462(6)[265] 0.383(3)[274]
(2+1)-d square nn (= bcc) 4 0.3445736(3),[276] 0.344575(15)[277] 0.3445740(2)[265] 0.2873383(1),[278] 0.287338(3)[275] 0.28733838(4)[265] 0.287(3)[274]
(2+1)-d fcc 0.199(2))[274]
(3+1)-d hypercubic, diagonal 4 0.3025(10),[279] 0.30339538(5)[265] 0.26835628(5),[265] 0.2682(2)[274]
(3+1)-d cubic, nn 6 0.2081040(4)[276] 0.1774970(5)[174]
(3+1)-d bcc 8 0.160950(30),[277] 0.16096128(3)[265] 0.13237417(2)[265]
(4+1)-d hypercubic, diagonal 5 0.23104686(3)[265] 0.20791816(2),[265] 0.2085(2)[274]
(4+1)-d hypercubic, nn 8 0.1461593(2),[276] 0.1461582(3)[280] 0.1288557(5)[174]
(4+1)-d bcc 16 0.075582(17),[277] 0.0755850(3),[280] 0.07558515(1)[265] 0.063763395(5)[265]
(5+1)-d hypercubic, diagonal 6 0.18651358(2)[265] 0.170615155(5),[265] 0.1714(1)[274]
(5+1)-d hypercubic, nn 10 0.1123373(2)[276] 0.1016796(5)[174]
(5+1)-d hypercubic bcc 32 0.035967(23),[277] 0.035972540(3)[265] 0.0314566318(5)[265]
(6+1)-d hypercubic, diagonal 7 0.15654718(1)[265] 0.145089946(3),[265] 0.1458[274]
(6+1)-d hypercubic, nn 12 0.0913087(2)[276] 0.0841997(14)[174]
(6+1)-d hypercubic bcc 64 0.017333051(2)[265] 0.01565938296(10)[265]
(7+1)-d hypercubic, diagonal 8 0.135004176(10)[265] 0.126387509(3),[265] 0.1270(1)[274]
(7+1)-d hypercubic,nn 14 0.07699336(7)[276] 0.07195(5)[174]
(7+1)-d bcc 128 0.008 432 989(2)[265] 0.007 818 371 82(6)[265]

nn = nearest neighbors. For a (d + 1)-dimensional hypercubic system, the hypercube is in d dimensions and the time direction points to the 2D nearest neighbors.

Directed percolation with multiple neighbors

[edit]
Directed Percolation neighborhoods for extended range. Upper: z = 2, 4, 6; lower: z = 3, 5

(1+1)-d square with z NN, square lattice for z odd, tilted square lattice for z even

Lattice z Site percolation threshold Bond percolation threshold
(1+1)-d square 3 0.4395(3),[281]
(1+1)-d square 5 0.2249(3)[281]
(1+1)-d square 7 0.1470(2)[281]
(1+1)-d square 9 0.1081(2)[281]
(1+1)-d square 11 0.0851(2)[281]
(1+1)-d square 13 0.0701(2)[281]
(1+1)-d tilted sq 2 0.6447(2)[281]
(1+1)-d tilted sq 4 0.3272(2)[281]
(1+1)-d tilted sq 6 0.2121(3)[281]
(1+1)-d tilted sq 8 0.1553(3)[281]
(1+1)-d tilted sq 10 0.1220(2)[281]
(1+1)-d tilted sq 12 0.0999(2)[281]

For large z, pc ~ 1/z [281]

Site-Bond Directed Percolation

[edit]

pb = bond threshold

ps = site threshold

Site-bond percolation is equivalent to having different probabilities of connections:

P0 = probability that no sites are connected = (1-ps) + ps(1-pb)2

P2 = probability that exactly one descendant is connected to the upper vertex (two connected together) = ps pb (1-pb)

P3 = probability that both descendants are connected to the original vertex (all three connected together)= ps pb2

Normalization: P0 + 2P2 + P3 = 1

Lattice z ps pb P0 P2 P3
(1+1)-d square [282] 3 0.644701 1 0.126237 0.229062 0.415639
0.7 0.93585 0.148376 0.196529 0.458567
0.75 0.88565 0.169703 0.166059 0.498178
0.8 0.84135 0.192304 0.134616 0.538464
0.85 0.80190 0.216143 0.102242 0.579373
0.9 0.76645 0.241215 0.068981 0.620825
0.95 0.73450 0.267336 0.034889 0.662886
1 0.705489 0.294511 0 0.705489


Isotropic/Directed Percolation

[edit]

Here we have a cross between ordinary bond percolation (OP) and directed percolation (DP)[283]. On an oriented system such as shown in the figure "(1+1)d Square Lattice" above, we consider the down probability p↓ = p pd and the up probability p↑ = p(1 − pd ), with p representing the average bond occupation probability and pd controlling the anisotropy. When pd = 0 or 1, we have pure DP, while when pd = 1/2 we have the random diode model or essentially OP, with the threshold twice the OP value. For other values of pd, we have a mixture of the two types of percolation. For a given pd, the critical values of p = pc are given below:


Lattice d z pd pc p↓ p↑
(1+1)-d DP 2 2 1 0.644700185(5)[270] 0.644700185(5) 0
diagonal square [283] 2 4 0.8 0.768708(1) 0.614966 0.153742
diagonal square [283] 2 4 0.6 0.929668(3) 0.557801s 0.371867
2d ordinary perc. 2 4 0.5 1.0 0.5 0.5
(2+1)-d diagonal DP 3 3 1 0.38222462(6)[265] 0.38222462 0
diagonal cubic 3 6 0.8 0.430941(2)[283] 0.34475282 0.086188
diagonal cubic 3 6 0.6 0.481310(2)[283] 0.288786 0.192524
3d Ordinary perc. 3 6 0.5 0.49762364(20)[164] 0.24881182 0.24881182



Exact critical manifolds of inhomogeneous systems

[edit]

Inhomogeneous triangular lattice bond percolation[20]

Inhomogeneous honeycomb lattice bond percolation = kagome lattice site percolation[20]

Inhomogeneous (3,12^2) lattice, site percolation[7][284]

or

Inhomogeneous union-jack lattice, site percolation with probabilities [285]

Inhomogeneous martini lattice, bond percolation[76][286]

Inhomogeneous martini lattice, site percolation. r = site in the star

Inhomogeneous martini-A (3–7) lattice, bond percolation. Left side (top of "A" to bottom): . Right side: . Cross bond: .

Inhomogeneous martini-B (3–5) lattice, bond percolation

Inhomogeneous martini lattice with outside enclosing triangle of bonds, probabilities from inside to outside, bond percolation[286]

Inhomogeneous checkerboard lattice, bond percolation[60][96]

Inhomogeneous bow-tie lattice, bond percolation[59][96]

where are the four bonds around the square and is the diagonal bond connecting the vertex between bonds and .


Rigidity percolation

[edit]

Assuming a finite graph with unbending bonds, rigidity percolation refers to a situation where the entire graph is rigid everywhere with respect to shear forces being put on it.[287][288][289][290] Another way to say this is that constraints are sufficient to eliminate all zero-frequency vibrational modes, transforming a mechanically floppy network into one capable of supporting stress[291].

The Geiringer–Laman theorem gives a combinatorial characterization of generically rigid graphs in 2-dimensional Euclidean space

Generic lattices have bonds of different lengths, and can be made by randomly displacing the sites of a regular lattice.

Results:

2d

Bond threshold, triangular lattice: pc = 0.6602(3)[292] 0.6602778(10)[291]

Site percolation, triangular lattice pc = 0.69755(3),[292] 0.6975(3)[293]

Correlation-length exponent: ν = 1.16(3), 1.19(1),[294] 1.21(6)[292], 1/ν = 0.850(3)[291]

Moukarzel and Duxbury (1995): 𝛼 = -0.48(5)[293] β = 0.175(2)[293]

Fractal dimension df = 1.86(2)[292]. 1.853(5)[295], 1.850(2)[291]

Backbone fractal dimension db = 1.80(3),[292] 1.78(2)[293]

Arbibi Sahimi (1993)[296]: 2d bond tri: pc = 0.641(1), site: pc = 0.713(2).

Chubynsky and Thorpe 07[297]. 3d: bond fcc, pc = 0.495. bcc: pc = 0.7485

Javerzam[298] 2d hull fractal dimension: df = 1.355(10).

Roux, Hansen (1988): central force elastic network: p* = 0.642(2), flv = 3.0(4) , glv = 0.97(2)[299]

Arababi, Sahimi (1988): [300]. 3d bond cubic elastic network pc = 0.2492,

Sahimi, Goddard (1985) bond triangular pc=0.65[301]

Lemieux, Breton, Tremblay (1985)[302] pc= 0.649, f = 1.4

Feng, Sen (1984)[303] pc = 0.58, f = 2.4 ± 0.4.

A fast algorithm for 2D Rigidity Percolation, Nina Javerzat and Daniele Notarmuzi.[304]

Duxbury, Jacobs, Thorpe, Moukarzel (1999)[305] Bethe lattice z = 6, pc = 0.656

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
In , a branch of and physics that models the formation of connected clusters in random media, the percolation threshold is the critical occupation probability pcp_c at which an infinite spanning cluster emerges, enabling long-range connectivity or "percolation" across the system. This threshold marks a from disconnected finite clusters to a connected phase, analogous to critical points in , and was first formalized in the context of fluid flow through porous materials with randomly blocked paths. Introduced by Broadbent and Hammersley in 1957 as a model for random processes in media like soils or networks, the concept applies to site percolation (random occupation of lattice sites) and bond percolation (random occupation of edges between sites). The value of pcp_c depends on the lattice dimensionality and geometry; for example, in , pc=1p_c = 1, meaning full occupation is required for connectivity, while in two-dimensional square lattices, bond percolation has an pc=1/2p_c = 1/2 and site percolation pc0.5927p_c \approx 0.5927. In three dimensions, such as the simple cubic lattice, bond pc0.2488p_c \approx 0.2488 and site pc0.3116p_c \approx 0.3116. Above pcp_c, a giant connected component dominates, exhibiting properties and scaling behaviors described by that vary with . Percolation thresholds have broad applications beyond pure theory, including modeling electrical conductivity in composite materials, where the threshold predicts the onset of bulk conductivity as conductive particles reach sufficient ; in porous rocks for recovery; and network resilience, such as the fraction of nodes that must fail before a communication network fragments. In , it informs spreading thresholds in random contact networks, and in , it guides the design of disordered systems like polymers or gels. Exact solutions remain rare, limited to specific low-dimensional cases, with higher-dimensional values often obtained via numerical simulations or series expansions.

Fundamentals of Percolation Theory

Definition and Core Concepts

The percolation threshold represents a fundamental concept in , introduced by Broadbent and Hammersley in to model the random spread of a through a , such as the flow of liquid in a lattice-like structure where permeability arises from stochastic processes. This framework captures the transition from localized to extended connectivity in disordered systems, analogous to phase transitions in statistical mechanics. In site percolation, the threshold pcsitep_c^{\text{site}} is the critical occupation probability at which an infinite cluster of occupied sites emerges in an infinite lattice, where each site is independently occupied with probability pp, and clusters form via nearest-neighbor connections among occupied sites. Similarly, in bond percolation, the threshold pcbondp_c^{\text{bond}} is the critical probability for bonds (edges between sites) to be present, enabling a spanning path or infinite cluster through connected bonds. These thresholds mark the point where the system undergoes a connectivity from disconnected components to a macroscopic connected structure. The percolation probability P(p)P(p), also denoted θ(p)\theta(p), quantifies the likelihood that a given site belongs to the infinite cluster, serving as the order parameter for the transition; it satisfies P(p)=0P(p) = 0 for p<pcp < p_c and P(p)>0P(p) > 0 for p>pcp > p_c. In finite systems of size NN, this is approximated by the relative size of the largest cluster, with the order parameter formally defined as limNSmaxN=P(p),\lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{S_{\max}}{N} = P(p), where SmaxS_{\max} is the size of the largest cluster. The subcritical regime (p<pcp < p_c) features only finite clusters with exponentially decaying tail probabilities for large cluster sizes, ensuring no spanning connectivity. In contrast, the supercritical regime (p>pcp > p_c) exhibits a unique infinite cluster with positive density P(p)P(p), enabling long-range connectivity across the . These regimes highlight the sharp nature of the transition, akin to in other physical .

Critical Phenomena and Universality

At the percolation threshold p=pcp = p_c, the system exhibits critical characterized by the divergence of the correlation length ξ\xi, which quantifies the spatial extent of connected clusters and scales as ξppcν\xi \sim |p - p_c|^{-\nu}, where ν\nu is the correlation length . Near this critical point, key observables display power-law behaviors governed by . For p>pcp > p_c, the percolation strength P(p)P(p), defined as the probability that a site belongs to the infinite cluster, scales as P(p)(ppc)βP(p) \sim (p - p_c)^\beta, with β\beta the order exponent. The susceptibility, typically the cluster size, diverges as S(p)ppcγS(p) \sim |p - p_c|^{-\gamma} on both sides of pcp_c, where γ\gamma is the susceptibility exponent. These exponents capture the singular at the transition, analogous to phase transitions in other statistical systems. The universality hypothesis posits that critical exponents depend only on the dimensionality dd and the range of interactions, not on microscopic details, placing systems into universality classes. In two dimensions, exact values for percolation exponents have been derived using mapping to the Potts model and conformal field theory techniques, yielding β=5/36\beta = 5/36 and ν=4/3\nu = 4/3. Percolation corresponds to the q1q \to 1 limit of the q-state Potts model via the Fortuin-Kasteleyn representation, which unifies Ising-like models with geometric cluster descriptions. In this framework, exact solutions in two dimensions leverage conformal invariance to compute exponents and scaling functions precisely. In finite systems of linear size LL, finite-size scaling bridges simulations to infinite-volume criticality, where quantities like P(L,p)P(L, p) scale as P(L,p)Lβ/νf((ppc)L1/ν)P(L, p) \sim L^{-\beta/\nu} f((p - p_c) L^{1/\nu}), with ff a universal scaling function. The threshold pcp_c is estimated by identifying where scaling-invariant ratios, such as crossing probabilities in rectangular geometries or the Binder cumulant U=1S43S22U = 1 - \frac{\langle S^4 \rangle}{3 \langle S^2 \rangle^2} (measuring cluster size distribution moments), become independent of LL. Hyperscaling relations connect exponents to dimensionality, such as dν=2αd \nu = 2 - \alpha, where α\alpha is the exponent for the singular part of the "specific heat" analog (mean-squared cluster size fluctuations). This relation holds below the upper critical dimension dc=6d_c = 6 for , validating scaling assumptions in low dimensions while failing above dcd_c due to mean-field dominance.

Types of Percolation Models

Lattice-Based Models

Lattice-based models in consider discrete, regular grids where sites or bonds are randomly occupied to study connectivity transitions. These models, foundational to the field, abstract physical systems like porous media or lattices into graphs where occurs through nearest-neighbor connections. Introduced by Broadbent and Hammersley in their seminal work on stochastic processes modeling fluid flow through random media, lattice models emphasize the role of structural homogeneity in determining percolation behavior. In site percolation, each vertex (site) of the lattice is independently occupied with probability pp, and unoccupied otherwise. Connectivity forms between occupied sites that are nearest neighbors, creating clusters of linked sites; the percolation threshold marks the point where an infinite cluster emerges, spanning the lattice. This model captures scenarios where blockages occur at particle positions rather than connections between them. Bond percolation, in contrast, involves the edges (bonds) between nearest-neighbor sites on the lattice, each independently open with probability pp to allow passage, or closed otherwise. Paths connect sites through sequences of open bonds, with the threshold indicating the emergence of an infinite connected component via these bond-linked routes. This variant is particularly suited to modeling flow through channels or pipes in a network. A is the mixed site-bond percolation model, where sites are occupied independently with probability psp_s and bonds are open independently with probability pbp_b. Here, connectivity requires both an occupied site and an open bond, leading to correlated occupations that influence the effective threshold; the model interpolates between pure site and bond cases, enabling analysis of crossover behaviors through the joint parameter space. The zz, defined as the number of nearest neighbors per site in the lattice, plays a central role in approximations for thresholds. In the , applicable to high-dimensional lattices or tree-like Bethe lattices where loops are negligible, the critical probability approximates pc1/(z1)p_c \approx 1/(z-1) for bond , reflecting the needed for infinite connectivity. This approximation captures the scaling behavior as dimensionality increases, providing an upper bound for finite-dimensional systems. Simple lattices illustrate these concepts: the has coordination number z=4z = 4, with each site connected to four orthogonal neighbors, forming a planar grid suitable for studying two-dimensional transitions. The triangular lattice, with z=6z = 6, connects sites to six equidistant neighbors in a hexagonal arrangement, offering denser connectivity and often serving as a dual to the in studies. Dimer coverings represent special cases of , where the lattice is tiled with dimers (pairs of adjacent sites or bonds) either fully or partially. In full coverings, every site is paired via a , restricting subsequent percolation to the remaining bonds and effectively raising the frustration for connectivity; thresholds for such perfect matchings emerge as limiting behaviors in bond or site models on bipartite lattices like the square grid. Partial coverings, achieved through random sequential addition, similarly constrain cluster formation, linking dimer statistics to percolation universality.

Continuum and Overlapping Models

Continuum percolation extends the concepts of to continuous space, where geometric objects such as disks or spheres are placed randomly according to a , allowing for overlaps. The coverage fraction η, defined as the expected number of objects covering any given point, is given by η = ρ v, with ρ the of object centers and v the volume (or area in 2D) of a single object. The percolation threshold η_c is the critical value of η at which a spanning connected component emerges from the union of overlapping objects, marking the transition from isolated clusters to long-range connectivity. A canonical example is the Boolean model of overlapping disks in two dimensions, where disks of fixed radius are centered at Poisson points. For unit radius disks, high-precision simulations yield η_c ≈ 1.12808737(6), corresponding to a critical covered area fraction φ_c = 1 - e^{-η_c} ≈ 0.6763. This threshold has been determined through efficient Monte Carlo methods that track cluster formation near criticality. In general, for continuum systems, the percolation threshold relates to the excluded volume or area between objects. For spheres in three dimensions, η_c = \frac{4}{3} \pi r^3 \rho_c, where ρ_c is the critical density at which overlaps form a percolating network; numerical estimates place η_c ≈ 0.2895 for unit radius spheres, though focus remains on the structural analogy across dimensions. Void describes the connectivity of empty space amid packed objects, such as in hard-core packings where overlaps are forbidden, contrasting with the occupied percolation in overlapping models. This process is dual to the overlapping case, where the threshold for void spanning corresponds to a critical occupied of 1 - φ_c ≈ 0.3237 in 2D, beyond which isolated void pockets form without long-range connectivity; this duality arises because the blocking structures in packed systems mirror the percolating clusters in the overlapping model. Random sequential adsorption (RSA) provides another continuum framework, involving the irreversible deposition of non-overlapping objects onto a substrate until jamming occurs, with assessed for the adsorbed phase prior to saturation. In 2D for disks, spanning clusters form at a reduced coverage φ_p ≈ 0.36, well below the jamming limit φ_j ≈ 0.547, as determined by simulations tracking cluster growth during sequential addition. Polymers in continuum space can be modeled as percolating paths, such as self-avoiding walks or random walks that connect via overlaps or proximity, reaching when the of chain segments enables a spanning network. For random walks in 2D, the threshold occurs at a critical segment where the effective connectivity mimics overlapping objects, with η_c scaling similarly to disk models but adjusted for path dimensionality and self-avoidance.

Network and Graph Models

In network and graph models of , the focus shifts from regular lattices to arbitrary or structures, where connectivity emerges through edges linking nodes without imposed geometric regularity. These models capture the behavior of complex systems like social networks, communication infrastructures, and biological webs, where the is often irregular and heterogeneous. here typically involves randomly occupying or removing edges (bond percolation) or nodes (site percolation), with the threshold defined as the probability pcp_c at which a giant connected component spanning a finite fraction of the system appears. Unlike lattice models, the absence of spatial allows for exact analytical treatments in many cases, particularly for infinite systems or large s. Bond percolation on graphs proceeds by retaining each edge independently with probability pp, effectively removing edges with probability 1p1-p, until a emerges at the threshold pcp_c. This process models scenarios such as random link failures in communication networks, where the graph's structure determines the onset of global connectivity. In random graphs, the threshold marks the transition from fragmented small components to a macroscopic connected cluster, analogous to the of long-range order in physical systems. Seminal analyses show that for sparse random graphs, this threshold aligns with the point where the expected number of connections supports unbounded cluster growth. Site percolation on networks, in contrast, involves removing nodes (and their incident edges) with probability 1p1-p, leading to the threshold pcp_c where the surviving subgraph develops a giant component. For the Erdős–Rényi random graph G(n,p)G(n,p') with nn nodes and edge probability pp', the mean degree is k=(n1)pnp\langle k \rangle = (n-1)p' \approx np', and the site percolation threshold is pc=1/kp_c = 1/\langle k \rangle, meaning the giant component forms when the average surviving degree exceeds 1. This result arises from the branching process approximation, where clusters grow like a Galton-Watson process with offspring distribution Poisson(kp\langle k \rangle p). For tree-like graphs, such as infinite regular trees with no cycles, the site percolation threshold is exactly pc=1p_c = 1, as any p<1p < 1 disconnects the structure into finite branches. A general criterion for the emergence of the giant component in random graphs with arbitrary degree distributions is provided by the Molloy-Reed condition, which states that a giant component exists if k2/k>2\langle k^2 \rangle / \langle k \rangle > 2, or equivalently, the site percolation threshold is pc=k/(k2k)p_c = \langle k \rangle / (\langle k^2 \rangle - \langle k \rangle), where k\langle k \rangle and k2\langle k^2 \rangle are the first and second moments of the degree distribution. This criterion, derived from analysis of the , applies to graphs and highlights how heterogeneity in degrees influences robustness. For Erdős–Rényi graphs, where degrees are Poisson-distributed, it recovers pc=1/kp_c = 1/\langle k \rangle, but for broader distributions, higher variance in degrees lowers pcp_c by facilitating easier cluster coalescence. Scale-free networks, characterized by degree distributions P(k)kγP(k) \sim k^{-\gamma} with 2<γ<32 < \gamma < 3, exhibit exceptional robustness to random node or edge failures, with pc=0p_c = 0 due to the diverging second moment k2\langle k^2 \rangle, ensuring a giant component persists even for infinitesimal pp. This implies that random percolation nearly always yields global connectivity, as rare high-degree hubs anchor the structure. However, targeted attacks removing high-degree nodes first raise pcp_c to a finite value, exposing fragility; for γ>3\gamma > 3, pcp_c becomes positive even under random failure, resembling mean-field behavior. These insights underscore the dual nature of scale-free topologies in real-world systems like the . Percolation on interdependent networks, where nodes in one network depend on specific nodes in another (e.g., power grids relying on communication lines), introduces coupling that amplifies failures through cascades, drastically lowering the overall threshold compared to isolated networks. In mutually connected pairs of Erdős–Rényi networks, random failure of a fraction 1p1-p of nodes triggers iterative collapses: a node fails if disconnected in its primary network or if its interdependent partner fails, leading to a first-order percolation transition at pc0.58p_c \approx 0.58 for equal-sized networks with k=3\langle k \rangle = 3, far above the single-network value of 0.33\approx 0.33. This cascading mechanism explains vulnerabilities in coupled infrastructures, where even minor initial damage propagates system-wide. Explosive percolation refers to modified growth processes, such as the Achlioptas process, where edges are added selectively to suppress large clusters—e.g., by choosing the edge connecting the smallest pair of clusters from randomly sampled options—resulting in an apparently abrupt transition to the . Initially observed in random graphs, this yields a sharper-than-usual crossover, mimicking a discontinuous , though rigorous analysis confirms it remains continuous but with suppressed critical window and anomalous scaling exponents. Such processes highlight how non-random rules can alter the of percolation, with applications to controlled network design.

Percolation Thresholds in Low Dimensions

One-Dimensional Systems

In one-dimensional systems, the percolation threshold for bond percolation on a linear chain is exactly pcbond=1p_c^{\text{bond}} = 1, meaning an infinite spanning cluster forms only if every bond is occupied, as any unoccupied bond creates a disconnection that prevents long-range connectivity. Similarly, for site percolation, the threshold is pcsite=1p_c^{\text{site}} = 1, since even a single unoccupied site acts as a gap that isolates clusters and blocks spanning across the chain. Below the threshold (p<1p < 1), clusters in one-dimensional percolation exhibit an exponential size distribution, with the probability of a cluster of size SS following a geometric form wS=(1p)2pS1w_S = (1 - p)^2 p^{S-1}, leading to finite clusters and no infinite component due to the absence of alternative paths around gaps. This trivial threshold and rapid decay contrast with higher dimensions, where mean-field approximations begin to apply for large dd. In long-range one-dimensional percolation, bonds connect sites with probability P(r)rσP(r) \sim r^{-\sigma}, where rr is the distance; for σ>2\sigma > 2, the threshold remains pc=1p_c = 1 with no percolation possible, but for σ<2\sigma < 2, long-range links enable at pc<1p_c < 1, allowing infinite clusters through power-law connections that bypass local gaps. Numerical studies confirm this regime shift, showing pc=0p_c = 0 for small σ\sigma and finite pc<1p_c < 1 approaching 1 as σ\sigma nears 2. For directed one-dimensional percolation, the threshold stays at pc=1p_c = 1 in equilibrium models, as directed bonds along the chain require full occupancy for spanning paths, though nonequilibrium variants introduce temporal dynamics where activity can propagate below unity probability in processes like the contact model. One-dimensional percolation models serve as simple baselines for applications in linear polymers, where chain connectivity mimics site or bond occupation to predict gelation or mechanical reinforcement thresholds, and in one-dimensional transport, such as electron conduction in nanowires, where gaps model scattering events limiting current flow.

Two-Dimensional Lattices and Variants

In two-dimensional percolation models, the square lattice serves as a fundamental example for both site and bond percolation. For bond percolation on the square lattice, the critical threshold is exactly pc=0.5p_c = 0.5, derived from the self-duality of the lattice under the star-triangle transformation. For site percolation, high-precision numerical simulations yield pc0.592746p_c \approx 0.592746, obtained through hull-gradient methods that refine estimates by analyzing cluster boundaries near criticality. The triangular lattice exhibits exact thresholds due to its symmetry and duality relations. Site percolation has pc=0.5p_c = 0.5, reflecting the lattice's equivalence to its dual under occupation duality. Bond percolation achieves criticality at pc=2sin(π/18)0.3473p_c = 2 \sin(\pi/18) \approx 0.3473, also exact via the star-triangle approximation, which maps the problem to solvable polynomial equations. The honeycomb lattice, dual to the triangular lattice, shows complementary behavior. Its site percolation threshold is approximately pc0.6970p_c \approx 0.6970, determined by gradient-percolation simulations that track spanning clusters across occupation gradients. Bond percolation occurs at pc=12sin(π/18)0.6527p_c = 1 - 2 \sin(\pi/18) \approx 0.6527, exactly following from the duality with the triangular lattice's bond threshold. Archimedean lattices, the 11 uniform tilings of the plane by regular polygons, extend these results to more complex coordination numbers zz. Site percolation thresholds vary systematically with lattice geometry, as quantified by hull-walk simulations on finite systems extrapolated to infinity. For example, the kagome lattice (3.6.3.6) has pc0.6527p_c \approx 0.6527, while the snub square (3^4.4^2) reaches higher values around 0.586. Bond thresholds follow an approximate relation pc1/(z1+2(z2))p_c \approx 1/(z - 1 + \sqrt{2(z-2)})
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.