format: text

text:
# A two-species 𝑑-dimensional diffusive model and its mapping onto a growth model

## I Introduction

Stochastic reaction-diffusion models have attracted recently much interest in (see e.g.  and references therein). In the last decade, the latter appeared (directly or via mapping) as models for traffic flow , kinetic biopolymerization, reptation of DNA in gels , interface growth , etc.

In this context, simple symmetric (SEP)  and asymmetric exclusion processes, in one dimension, (ASEP)  play a particular role because of their relationships with integrable quantum spin systems (Heisenberg chains) and because of their connection with the KPZ equation , directed polymers in random media , and shock formation (see e.g.  and references therein). These models have been extensively studied and the ASEP with open boundary conditions, as a simple driven diffusion model, exhibits a rich dynamical behaviour involving different nonequilibrium phase transitions in the steady states. They can be studied exactly on the basis of the so called Matrix Approach (MA), an algebraic approach based on an ansatz for the probability distribution which is related to the integrability of some quantum spin chains. This approach provides the full solution of the ASEP (and also the SEP) model, including the full phase diagram, density profile and, in principle, any equal time correlation functions. Though, only few explicit results are known  about the dynamical correlation functions, much work has been done on the static properties.

The MA has been generalized to solve the stationary states of one-dimensional models with several species  and, recently, a first-order phase-transition in some models has been found  (see also  where different results were obtained, independently, for the same model).

The lack of exact results for the dynamics of multispecies models  (in particular in dimension $`d>1`$ see also  and references therein), has motivated us to study in some details the dynamics of a two-species model, which is related to the models introduced by Arndt et al. in . We compute explicitly, in arbitrary dimensions, the density, and the two-point instantaneous/non-instantaneous correlation functions. We then exploit the exact results for the two-point correlation function to study a RSOS-type  growth model.

The paper is organized as follows: In section II, we present the general stochastic formalism within which we will work. In section III, for the model under consideration, we compute in arbitrary dimensions the density for various initial states and in presence/absence of initial correlations. In section IV, for a translationally invariant version of our model, we evaluate the instantaneous two-point correlation functions in arbitrary dimensions. In particular, in one-spatial dimension, we assume both cases where initial correlations are absent/present. In section V, we introduce and solve a growth model of RSOS-type “with three states”. This analysis is carried out for different initial states (correlated and uncorrelated). Finally, in section VI, we calculate for systems with uncorrelated (but random) as well as correlated initial states the non-instantaneous two-point correlation functions.

## II The Formalism and the Model

Consider an hypercubic lattice of dimension $`d`$ with $`N`$ sites ($`N=L^d`$), where $`L`$ represents the linear dimension of the hypercube, and periodic boundary conditions are imposed. Further assume that local bimolecular reactions between species $`A`$ and $`B`$ take place. Each site is either empty (denoted by the symbol $`0`$) or occupied at most by one particle of type $`A`$ (respectively $`B`$) denoted in the following by the index $`1`$ (respectively $`2`$). The dynamics is parametrized by the transition rates $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }^{\gamma \delta }`$, where $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ,\delta =0,1,2`$: $`(\alpha ,\beta )(\gamma ,\delta ),\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }^{\gamma \delta }:\alpha +\beta \gamma +\delta `$.

Probability conservation implies $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }^{\alpha \beta }=_{(\alpha ,\beta )(\alpha ^{},\beta ^{})}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }^{\alpha ^{}\beta ^{}},`$

with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }^{\gamma \delta }0,(\alpha ,\beta )(\gamma ,\delta )`$.

For example the rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{22}^{12}`$ corresponds to the process $`BBAB`$, while conservation of probability leads to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{11}=(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{10}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{01}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{00}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{02}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{20}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{21}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{12}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^{22})`$

The state of the system is determined by specifying the probability for the occurence of configuration $`\{n\}`$ at time $`t`$. It is represented by the ket $`|P(t)=_{\{n\}}P(\{n\},t)|n`$, where the sum runs over the $`3^N`$ configurations ($`N=L^d`$). At site $`i`$ the local state is denoted by the ket $`|n_i=(\mathrm{1\hspace{0.33em}0\hspace{0.33em}0})^T`$ if the site $`i`$ is empty, $`|n_i=(\mathrm{0\hspace{0.33em}1\hspace{0.33em}0})^T`$ if the site $`i`$ is occupied by a particle of type $`A`$ ($`1`$) and $`|n_i=(\mathrm{0\hspace{0.33em}0\hspace{0.33em}1})^T`$ otherwise. It is by now well established that the Master equation governing the dynamics of the systems can be rewritten as an imaginary-time Schrödinger equation:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}|P(t)=H|P(t),`$ (1)
where $`H`$ denotes the Markov generator, also called stochastic Hamiltonian, and is in general neither hermitian nor normal. Its explicit form is given below. We also introduce the left vacuum $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }|`$ which is defined by

$`\stackrel{~}{\chi }|{\displaystyle \underset{\{n\}}{}}\{n\}|`$ (2)
Probability conservation yields the local equation (stochasticity of $`H`$): $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }|H=_{e^\alpha }_𝐦\stackrel{~}{\chi }|H_{𝐦,𝐦+e^\alpha }=0\stackrel{~}{\chi }|H_{𝐦,𝐦+e^\alpha }=0,`$

where $`e^\alpha `$ denotes the unit vector in the direction $`\alpha `$ ($`1\alpha d`$) and $`𝐦`$ designates a point of the hyperlattice labelled with help of its $`d`$ components: $`𝐦=(m_1,\mathrm{},m_d)`$ .

In this work, we assume that there are only symmetric nearest-neighbour jump-processes. A particle $`A`$ (respectively $`B`$) can jump, with rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}>0`$ (respectively $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{02}^{20}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{20}^{02}>0`$) to an adjacent site (in the $`d`$ directions) if the latter was previously empty. Such processes are symbolized by the “reaction” $`A\mathrm{}\mathrm{}A`$ (respectively, $`B\mathrm{}\mathrm{}B`$ ). In addition we assume that when two different particles $`A`$ and $`B`$ are adjacent, they can cross each other with rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}^{21}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{21}^{12}>0`$. This processes are schematized by the reaction $`ABBA`$.

The local Markov generator corresponding to this system and which acts on two adjacent sites $`𝐦`$ and $`𝐦+e^\alpha `$ reads

$`H_{𝐦,𝐦+e^\alpha }=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{01}& 0& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{02}^{02}& 0& 0& 0& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{20}^{02}& 0& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}& 0& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{10}& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}^{12}& 0& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{21}^{12}& 0\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{02}^{20}& 0& 0& 0& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{20}^{20}& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}^{21}& 0& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{21}^{21}& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)`$ (12)
where the same notations as in reference  have been used. Probability conservation implies that each column in the above representation sums up to zero.

Locally, the left vacuum $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }|`$ has the representation $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }|=(\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}1\hspace{0.17em}1})(\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}1\hspace{0.17em}1})`$

The action of any operator on the left-vacuum has a simple summation interpretation. This observation will be crucial in the following. Below we shall assume an initial state $`|P(0)`$ and investigate the expectation value of an operator $`O`$ (observables such as density etc.) : $`O(t)\stackrel{~}{\chi }|Oe^{Ht}|P(0)`$

From (12), we can compute the equations of motion of the density and of the two-point correlation functions . For the density, we have:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}n_𝐦^{A,B}(t){\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\stackrel{~}{\chi }|n_𝐦^{A,B}e^{Ht}|P(0)={\displaystyle \underset{e^\alpha }{}}n_𝐦^{A,B}(H_{𝐦,𝐦+e^\alpha }+H_{𝐦e^\alpha ,𝐦})(t)`$ (13)
For the derivation of the equation of motion of two-point correlation functions we would proceed similarly, as in . One should however pay attention to distinguish the case of the correlation function of adjacent sites from the general case.

In general, when $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{20}^{02}`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{02}^{20}`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}^{21}`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{21}^{12}`$ are independent parameters the equations of motions of the multi-point correlation functions constitute an open hierarchy and the dynamics is not soluble. The stationary states of such systems have been studied in  by Arndt et al. Recently it has been shown  with help of quadratic algebra techniques  and numerical means that an asymmetric version of this model exhibits a first-order phase transition, in its stationary state, when $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{20}^{02}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{02}^{20}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}^{21}=1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}^{21}=q`$. The steady-state of the density of the same model has also been studied independently by Rajewsky et al.  who obtained different results: in , the authors, argued that there is no phase transition from the “mixed phase” to a “disordered phase”.

Here we assume

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}^{01}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{01}^{10}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{20}^{02}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{02}^{20}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}^{21}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{21}^{12}=\mathrm{\Gamma },`$ (14)
which guarantees that the equations of motion of the correlation functions close in arbitrary dimensions.

From now on we focus on the soluble model described by (12) with equal rates, according to the solubility constraints (14).

Before studying statistical and dynamical properties of this model, let us comment on its solvability. In the single species reaction-diffusion models, the solvability inherent to the closure of the hierarchy was explained in the framework of the duality transformations. In fact, it has been shown that the spectrum of the single-species stochastic Hamiltonian (with the solubility constraints) is identical to the spectrum of an anisotropic spin-$`1/2`$ Heisenberg quantum Hamiltonian $`H_{XXZ}`$ in a magnetic field . As shown in , the situation is quite different for the multispecies problem and a general, comprehensive and unified understanding of the formal solubility is still lacking. However, for the model under consideration here, it has been shown  that the stochastic Hamiltonian (12), can be mapped, via a similarity transformation, to an exactly integrable quantum spin-1 model introduced by Sutherland .

## III Exact study of the density

In this section, we study the density of the system, in particular, when translation invariance is broken (the initial density is non-uniform) and when correlations in the initial state are present.

It follows from (13) that the density of species $`j(A,B)`$ at site $`𝐦`$, labelled with its $`d`$ components ($`𝐦=(m_1,\mathrm{},m_d)`$), obeys to the following linear differential-difference equation :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}n_𝐦^j(t)=2\mathrm{\Gamma }dn_𝐦^j(t)+\mathrm{\Gamma }{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}\left(n_{𝐦+e^\alpha }^j+n_{𝐦e^\alpha }^j\right)`$ (15)
We first consider the situation where particles are initially non-uniformally distributed. Namely, we assume that particles of type $`B`$ are located in the region of space $`L/2<x_1L,\mathrm{},L/2<x_dL`$ while particles of type $`A`$ are initially confined in the region $`0x_1L/2,\mathrm{},0x_dL/2`$ (we assume that $`L`$ is even). Within each of the two regions, particles of each type are distributed uniformally with respective densities $`\rho _B(0)`$ and $`\rho _A(0)`$. Solving (15) for this initial condition, we find:

$`n_𝐦^A(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _A(0)e^{2d\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐦^{}}{}}n_𝐦^{}^A(0){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}I_{m_\alpha m_\alpha ^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)=\rho _A(0)e^{2d\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐦^{}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}[\mathrm{\Theta }\left({\displaystyle \frac{L}{2}}m_\alpha \right)I_{m_\alpha m_\alpha ^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)]`$ (16)
$`=`$ $`\rho _A(0){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{0m_\alpha ^{}\frac{L}{2}}{}}e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{m_\alpha m_\alpha ^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)\right),`$ (17)
where $`I_n(z)`$ denotes the usual modified Bessel function. We have also introduced the Heaviside function $`\mathrm{\Theta }(x)=0`$ if $`x<0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }(x)=1`$ if $`x>1`$.

With help of the asymptotic expansion of the Bessel functions and approximating $`_{n_\alpha }e^{\frac{n_\alpha ^2}{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}}𝑑n_\alpha e^{\frac{n_\alpha ^2}{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}}`$, we obtain from (18) the long-time behavior of the density at site $`𝐦`$:

$`n_𝐦^A(t)\rho _A(0){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{erf\left(\frac{L/2m_\alpha }{\sqrt{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}}\right)erf\left(\frac{m_\alpha }{\sqrt{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}}\right)}{2}}\right],`$ (18)
where $`erf(z)`$ denotes the usual error function.

Similarly, we have for the density of particles $`B`$:

$`n_𝐦^B(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _B(0){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{\frac{L}{2}<m_\alpha ^{}L}{}}e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{m_\alpha m_\alpha ^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)\right)\rho _B(0){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{erf\left(\frac{Lm_\alpha }{\sqrt{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}}\right)erf\left(\frac{L/2m_\alpha }{\sqrt{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}}\right)}{2}}\right]`$ (19)
We now pass to the case where the distribution of particles for each species $`j(A,B)`$ is given by ($`\kappa _j`$ denotes a real dimensionless constant) an initially correlated distribution:

$`n_𝐦^j(0)=\rho _j(0)\left({\displaystyle \underset{i=1\mathrm{}d}{}}\delta _{m_i,0}+\kappa _j{\displaystyle \underset{i=1\mathrm{}d}{}}|m_i|^{\gamma _i}\left(1\delta _{m_i,0}\right)\right),`$ (20)
The exact densities then read

$`n_𝐦^j(t)=\rho _j(0)\left[{\displaystyle \underset{i=1\mathrm{}d}{}}\left(e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{m_i}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)\right)+\kappa _j{\displaystyle \underset{i=1\mathrm{}d}{}}\left(e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\displaystyle \underset{m_i^{}0}{}}|m_i^{}|^{\gamma _i}I_{m_im_i^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)\right)\right]`$ (21)
For $`\kappa _j0`$, in the limit $`mL1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }t1`$, with $`\sigma m/L`$ and $`u\frac{L^2}{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}`$. When $`\sigma =𝒪(1)`$, then $`u\frac{\sigma ^2L^2}{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}=\frac{m^2}{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}`$, we obtain

$`n_𝐦^j(t)\{\begin{array}{ccc}_{i=1}^d\frac{2e^{\sigma ^2u\sqrt{u\sigma ^2/\pi }}}{(1\gamma _i)(4u\sigma ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{\gamma _i/2}}\hfill & \text{if }0\gamma _i<1\hfill & \\ _{i=1}^d\frac{(1+e^{\sigma ^2u})\zeta (\gamma _i)}{(\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{1/2}}\hfill & \text{if }\gamma _i>1\hfill & \\ \frac{(e^{\sigma ^2u}\mathrm{ln}(4u\sigma \mathrm{\Gamma }t))^d}{(\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{d/2}}\hfill & \text{if}\gamma _i=1,\hfill & \end{array}`$ (25)
where $`\zeta (\nu )=_{k1}k^\nu ,\nu >1`$ is the Riemann zeta function.

It follows from these results that for $`\gamma _i1`$, the density decays as a power-law of time. However, notice that when initial correlations are strong (i.e. $`0<\gamma _i<1`$), the algebraic decay of the density is non-universal (it depends of $`\gamma _i`$). When initial correlations are weak (i.e. $`\gamma _i>1`$), the algebraic decay of the density is universal. Hence the case where $`\gamma _i=1`$ is marginal and there are logarithmic corrections to the universal behaviour.

For initial states decribed by (20), with $`\gamma _i=0`$ and $`\kappa _j0`$, then we have

$`n_𝐦^j(t)\rho _j(0)\left({\displaystyle \frac{e^{d\sigma ^2u}}{(4\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{d/2}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2)\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2,u)}{\sqrt{4\pi }}}(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\mathrm{\Gamma }t}})\right)`$ (26)
Therefore the dimensionality has a non-trivial effect: when $`d<2`$, the densities decays as $`t^{d/2}`$. Otherwise, when $`d>2`$, $`n_𝐦^j(t)t^1`$.

On the other hand, when $`\kappa _j=0`$, the initial density of species $`j`$ vanishes on the hypercube except at the origin, where its value is $`\rho _j(0)`$. In this case, the limit considered above, yields

$`n_𝐦^j(0){\displaystyle \frac{e^{d\sigma ^2u}}{(4\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{d/2}}}`$ (27)
Notice that because of conservation of the number of particles, in the translationally invariant situation, we simply have

$`\rho _A(t)=\rho _A(t=0)\rho _A;\rho _B(t)=\rho _B(t=0)\rho _B`$ (28)
## IV Instantaneous Two-point Correlation functions for translationally invariant systems

In this section we compute exactly the two-point correlation function for translationally invariant systems, in arbitrary dimensions for different initial states.

The equations of motion for the connected correlation functions $`𝒞_𝐫^{ij}(t)𝒞_𝐫^{ij}(t)n_𝐥^in_𝐦^j(t)\rho _i\rho _j=n_0^in_{𝐦𝐥}^j(t)\rho _i\rho _j,(i,j)(A,B)`$, read, with the notation: $`𝐫=(r_1,\mathrm{},r_\alpha ,\mathrm{}r_d)𝐦𝐥`$, where $`\alpha =1,\mathrm{},d`$.

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}𝒞_𝐫^{ij}(t)=4\mathrm{\Gamma }d𝒞_𝐫^{ij}(t)+2\mathrm{\Gamma }{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}\left(𝒞_{𝐫+e^\alpha }^{ij}(t)+𝒞_{𝐫e^\alpha }^{ij}(t)\right),𝐫2,`$ (29)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}𝒞_{e^\alpha }^{ij}(t)=2\mathrm{\Gamma }\left[𝒞_{2e^\alpha }^{ij}(t)+{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha ^{}\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}\left\{𝒞_{e^\alpha e^\alpha ^{}}^{ij}(t)+𝒞_{e^\alpha +e^\alpha ^{}}^{ij}(t)\right\}(2d1)𝒞_{e^\alpha }^{ij}(t)\right],`$ (30)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}𝒞_0^{ij}(t)=0`$ (31)
Solving the latter, we have, using known properties of modified Bessel functions (see appendix,(91)):

$`𝒞_𝐫^{ij}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝐫^{}0}{}}𝒞_𝐫^{}^{ij}(0)e^{4d\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}I_{r_\alpha r_\alpha ^{}}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)+𝒞_0^{ij}(0)e^{4d\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}I_{r_\alpha }(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)`$ (32)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle _0^t}𝑑\tau e^{4d\mathrm{\Gamma }\tau }𝒞_{e^\alpha }^{ij}(t\tau )\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{\tau }}4d\mathrm{\Gamma }\right){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}I_{r_\alpha }(4\mathrm{\Gamma }\tau )4d\mathrm{\Gamma }{\displaystyle _0^t}𝑑\tau e^{4d\mathrm{\Gamma }\tau }𝒞_{e^\alpha }^{ij}(t\tau ){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}I_{r_\alpha }(4\mathrm{\Gamma }\tau )`$ (33)
$`+`$ $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }{\displaystyle _0^t}𝑑\tau e^{4d\mathrm{\Gamma }\tau }{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}𝒞_{e^\alpha }(t\tau )\left[I_{r_\alpha +1}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }\tau )+I_{r_\alpha 1}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }\tau )\right]{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha ^{}\alpha }{}}I_{r_\alpha ^{}}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }\tau )`$ (34)
Restricting the solution to one-spatial dimension, with $`r|ml|0`$, the Laplace transform yields ($`i,j(A,B)`$)

$`𝒞_1^{ij}(t)=e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\displaystyle \underset{r^{}1}{}}𝒞_r^{}^{ij}(0)\left\{I_r^{}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)+I_{r^{}1}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)\right\}`$ (35)
and more generally,

$`𝒞_{r1}^{ij}(t)=e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\displaystyle \underset{r^{}1}{}}𝒞_r^{}^{ij}(0)\left\{I_{r^{}+r1}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)+I_{r^{}r}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)\right\}`$ (36)
Let us now consider one-spatial dimension and assume that the initial correlations are given by

$`𝒞_r^l(0)=\kappa _lr^{\nu _l},\nu _l0,l(AA,BB,AB)`$ (37)
We discuss the case $`|\kappa _l|>0`$ while the case $`\kappa _l=0`$ corresponds either to the situation where no particle is present on the lattice initially, or, when all sites of the lattice are occupied by particles of species $`i`$ (or $`j`$). An alternative is that the system would be initially in its steady-state. When a single species is present initially, say species $`A`$, we recover the known problem of symmetric diffusion of hard particles $`A+\mathrm{}\mathrm{}+A`$. When the lattice is full (or empty) initially, no dynamics takes place. A single-species one-dimensional process $`A+A\mathrm{}+\mathrm{}`$ with a correlated initial state as in (37) has been studied in .

Again we can infer the asymptotic behavior of the two-point connected correlation functions in the limit $`\mathrm{\Gamma }t1`$ with $`v\frac{L^2}{8\mathrm{\Gamma }t}<\mathrm{}`$ .

It is useful for the sequel to introduce the definitions of the auxiliary functions :

$`_1(v,\sigma ,\nu _l){\displaystyle \frac{\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1\nu _l}{2})+\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1\nu _l}{2},\sigma ^2v)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1\nu _l}{2},v(1\sigma )^2)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1\nu _l}{2},v(1+\sigma )^2)\right)}{\sqrt{4\pi }}}`$ (38)
$`_2(v,\sigma ,\nu _l){\displaystyle \frac{e^{\sigma ^2v}}{1\nu _l}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{v\sigma ^2}{\pi }}}`$ (39)
We distinguish two regimes

i) For $`rL`$, with $`r_\alpha ^2/8\mathrm{\Gamma }t1`$ and $`\sigma \frac{r}{L}`$,

$`𝒞_r^l(t)\{\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{\kappa _l_1(v,\sigma ,\nu _l)}{\sqrt{4\pi }(8\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{\nu _l/2}}\hfill & \text{if }0\nu _l<1\hfill & \\ \frac{\kappa _l\left(2\zeta (\nu _l)+(8v\mathrm{\Gamma }\sigma _\alpha ^2t)^{\frac{1\nu _l}{2}}\right)}{(8\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{1/2}}\hfill & \text{if }\nu _l>1\hfill & \\ \frac{\kappa _l\mathrm{ln}(8\mathrm{\Gamma }v(1\sigma _\alpha )t)}{(8\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{1/2}}\hfill & \text{if }\nu _l=1,\hfill & \end{array}`$ (43)
ii) For $`r1,r\sigma LL`$, we have

$`𝒞_r^l(t)\{\begin{array}{ccc}\kappa _l\left(\frac{_2(v,\sigma ,\nu _l)}{\sqrt{4\pi }(8\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{\nu _l/2}}\right)\hfill & \text{if }0\nu _l<1\hfill & \\ \frac{\kappa _l\left[(1+e^{\sigma ^2v})\zeta (\nu _l)+((1\sigma )/\sigma )(8v\mathrm{\Gamma }\sigma ^2t)^{\frac{1\nu _l}{2}}\right]}{(8\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{1/2}}\hfill & \text{if }\nu _l>1\hfill & \\ \frac{\kappa _le^{\sigma ^2v}\mathrm{ln}(8\mathrm{\Gamma }v\sigma t)}{(8\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{1/2}}\hfill & \text{if }\nu _l=1,\hfill & \end{array}`$ (47)
As for the density, it follows from these results that for $`\nu _l1`$, the (connected-)correlation functions decay as a power-law of time. When initial correlations are strong (i.e. $`0<\nu _l<1`$) the power-law decay of the correlation functions is non-universal . In contrast, when initial correlations are weak (i.e. $`\nu _l>1`$), the algebraic decay of the correlation functions is universal. The case where $`\nu _l=1`$ is marginal and logarithmic corrections to the universal behaviour arise.

In arbitrary dimension ($`d1`$), we consider a translationally invariant random but uncorrelated intial state, described by:

$`𝒞_𝐫^l(0)=\kappa _l,l(AA,BB,AB),`$ (48)
where, as above, $`\kappa _l0`$.

The asymptotic behaviour ($`L,\mathrm{\Gamma }t1`$ with $`vL^2/8\mathrm{\Gamma }t<\mathrm{}`$ and $`\sigma _\alpha r_\alpha /L`$) of the connected correlation functions is then :

$`𝒞_𝐫^l(t)\{\begin{array}{cc}\kappa _l\left(1+\frac{1}{16\mathrm{\Gamma }t}\right)^d_{\alpha =1}^d_{1,\alpha }(v,\sigma _\alpha ,\nu _l=0)\hfill & \text{si }r_\alpha L\hfill \\ \kappa _l\left(1+\frac{1}{16\mathrm{\Gamma }t}\right)^d_{\alpha =1}^d_{2,\alpha }(v,\sigma _\alpha ,\nu _l=0)\hfill & \text{si }r_\alpha L1,\hfill \end{array}`$ (51)
where the quantities $`_{1,\alpha }`$ and $`_{2,\alpha }`$ are obtained, respectively, from (38) and (39) on substitution of $`\sigma `$ by $`\sigma _\alpha r_\alpha /L`$.

## V The Mapping onto a RSOS growth model with “three states”

In this section, we introduce a growth model of RSOS type (Random Solid on Solid ) with “three states”, by exploiting a mapping of the one dimensional model studied in the previous sections.

Let us briefly recall that the RSOS growth models are e.g. useful to describe the spatial fluctuations of the (one-dimensional, of length $`L`$) interface location in the magnetization profile between coexistent phases in two-dimensional models of ferromagnets, such as in the zero field planar Ising model . In such models, at zero temperature, every path minimizing the energy of the systen is a sequence of $`L`$ binary numbers $`n_j=0,1`$ with $`j=1,\mathrm{},L`$. The stochastic variable $`n_j`$ has the value $`n_j=0`$ if the $`j^{th}`$ segment of the interface steps upwards (in an angle of $`\pi /4`$). The value $`n_j=1`$ corresponds to the case where the segments steps downwards with an angle of $`\pi /4`$. The quantities $`n_j=0,1`$ can be interpreted as occupation numbers relating the interface height $`h_j`$ according to $`h_jh_{j1}=12n_j`$. In this case the displacement $`\delta h_r(t)`$, at time $`t`$, of the segment of the interface from the sites $`j_1`$ to $`j_2>j_1`$, with $`rj_2j_1>0`$ is given by $`\delta h_r(t)=_{k=1}^r(12n_k(t))`$ and thus $`|\delta h_{r+1}\delta h_r|=1`$.

Here we consider an extension of the above model. We consider that the configurations minimizing the energy (at zero temperature) are of the form $`\{x_An_1^A+x_Bn_1^B,x_An_2^A+x_Bn_2^B,\mathrm{},x_An_L^A+x_Bn_L^B\}`$, where the discrete stochastic variable $`x_An_j^A+x_Bn_j^B`$ can take three values. The case $`x_An_j^A+x_Bn_j^B=0`$ again corresponds to the situation where the $`j^{th}`$ segment steps upwards with an angle of $`\pi /4`$. The case $`x_An_j^A+x_Bn_j^B=x_A`$ (respectively, $`x_An_j^A+x_Bn_j^B=x_B`$) describe the situation where the $`j^{th}`$ segment forms an angle $`Arctan(1x_A)`$ (respectively, $`Arctan(1x_B)`$) with the horizontal. When $`x_B=0`$ (respectively $`x_A=0`$) and $`x_A=2`$ (respectively $`x_B=2`$), we recover the above-mentioned two-state RSOS growth model. In this sense the growth model which we study hereafter is a “three-states” extension of the usual RSOS model . In addition the mapping with the diffusive model is clear: the presence of particle of species $`A`$ (resp. $`B`$) at site $`j`$ translates in the language of the growth model with the fact that the related segment of the interface forms an angle $`Arctan(1x_A)`$ (respectively, $`Arctan(1x_B)`$) with the horizontal. In this picture, the jumping of the diffusive particles correponds to the fluctuation of the orientation of the related segments of the interface.

We consider a translationally invariant system; the displacement of the (one-dimensional) interface, at time $`t`$, from the sites $`k_1`$ to $`k_2>k_1`$, with $`r=k_2k_1>0`$ is given by $`h_{k_2}(t)h_{k_1}(t)\delta h_r(t)`$, where

$`\delta h_r(t){\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{r}{}}}\left(1x_An_m^Ax_Bn_m^B\right)`$ (52)
Therefore, in the model considered here, we have $`max|\delta h_{r+1}(t)\delta h_r(t)|=max(|x_A1|,|x_B1|,|x_A+x_B1|)`$, instead of the usual constraint $`|\delta h_{r+1}(t)\delta h_r(t)|=1`$ of the conventional RSOS models. The mean-displacement of the interface reads $`\delta h_r(t)=r(1x_A\rho _Ax_B\rho _B)`$ thus , if one wants to impose a zero mean-displacement of the interface , we have to require that $`x_A\rho _A+x_B\rho _B=1`$.

In this section we are interested in the computation of the fluctuations of $`\delta h_j(t)`$:

$`(\delta h_r(t))^2w^2(r,t)=\left((x_A+x_B)^21\right)r^2+{\displaystyle \underset{r^{}=1}{\overset{r}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{rr^{}+1}{}}}\left[x_A^2n_l^An_{l+r^{}}^A(t)+x_B^2n_l^Bn_{l+r^{}}^B(t)+2x_Ax_Bn_l^An_{l+r^{}}^B(t)\right],`$ (53)
where $`w(r,t)`$ is the physical width of the interface .

Using the fact that $`\frac{}{t}_{l=1}^rn_m^in_{m+l}^j(t)=2\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(n_m^in_{m+r+1}^j(t)n_m^in_{m+r}^j(t)\right)`$ and $`_{s=1}^r_{l=1}^{rs}\frac{}{t}n_m^in_{m+l}^j(t)=2\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(n_m^in_{m+r+1}^j(t)n_m^in_{m+1}^j(t)\right)`$, we obtain the following equation of motion for the width:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{w^2(r,t)}{t}}=4\mathrm{\Gamma }\left[x_A^2\left\{𝒞_r^{AA}(t)𝒞_1^{AA}(t)\right\}+x_B^2\left\{𝒞_r^{BB}(t)𝒞_1^{BB}(t)\right\}+2x_Ax_B\left\{𝒞_r^{AB}(t)𝒞_1^{AB}(t)\right\}\right],r>1,`$ (54)
with $`w^2(1,t)=w^2(1,t=0)=(x_A+x_B)^2+12(\rho _Ax_A+\rho _Bx_B)`$.

For $`r>1`$, we thus have:

$`w^2(r,t)`$ $`=`$ $`w^2(r,0)`$ (55)
$`+`$ $`4\mathrm{\Gamma }{\displaystyle _0^t}𝑑t^{}\left[x_A^2\left\{𝒞_r^{AA}(t^{})𝒞_1^{AA}(t^{})\right\}+x_B^2\left\{𝒞_r^{BB}(t^{})𝒞_1^{BB}(t^{})\right\}+2x_Ax_B\left\{𝒞_r^{AB}(t^{})𝒞_1^{AB}(t^{})\right\}\right],,`$ (56)
where

$`w^2(r,0)`$ $`=`$ $`[(x_A+x_B)^2+12(\rho _Ax_A+\rho _Bx_B)]r^2`$ (57)
$`+`$ $`2{\displaystyle \underset{r^{}=1}{\overset{r}{}}}(rr^{})\left[x_A^2n_m^An_{m+r^{}}^A(0)+x_B^2n_m^Bn_{m+r^{}}^B(0)+2x_Ax_Bn_m^An_{m+r^{}}^B(0)\right]`$ (58)
With help of the formula $`:4\mathrm{\Gamma }_0^t𝑑t^{}e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t^{}}I_n(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t^{})=4\mathrm{\Gamma }te^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}\left(I_0(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)+I_1(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)\right)+n\left(e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_0(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)1\right)+2e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}_{k=1}^{n1}(nk)I_k(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)`$, and with the explicit expression of the correlation functions (35) and (36), we obtain the following exact expression for $`w(r,t)`$:

$`w^2(r,t)w^2(r,0)`$ $`=`$ $`2e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\displaystyle \underset{r^{}1}{}}\left(x_A^2𝒞_r^{}^{AA}(0)+x_B^2𝒞_r^{}^{BB}(0)+2x_Ax_B𝒞_r^{}^{AB}(0)\right)`$ (59)
$`\times `$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{r+r^{}2}{}}}(r+r^{}k1)I_k(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)+{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{r+r^{}1}{}}}(r^{}kr)I_k(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)2{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{r^{}2}{}}}(r^{}k)I_k(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)I_{r^{}1}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)\right]`$ (60)
We will now specifically focus on two kinds of initial states:

(i) We assume first that the system is initially characterized by an alternating periodic array of particles of type $`A`$ and $`B`$. We consider thus an initial state $`|P(0)=\frac{1}{2}\left(|ABAB\mathrm{}+|BABA\mathrm{}\right)`$, with $`x_A+x_B=2`$ (in this case $`\delta h_r(t)=0`$). This initial flat interface leads to $`\rho _A=\rho _B=1/2`$, and for the connected initial correlation functions, we have: $`𝒞_r^{AA}(0)=\frac{(1)^r}{4}=𝒞_r^{BB}(0)=𝒞_r^{AB}(0)`$.

It follows from (57) that the initial fluctuations read in this case: $`w^2(r,0)=r\left(4r+\frac{3}{4}(x_Ax_B)^21\right)`$, for $`r>1`$ and $`r`$ even. Therefore, we also have $`w^2(1,t)=3`$.

For this initial configuration, the expression (35) simplifies and we have $`𝒞_1^{AA}(t)=𝒞_1^{BB}(t)=𝒞_1^{AB}(t)=\frac{e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t}}{4}I_0(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)`$. The general expression (59) of the fluctations reads: $`w^2(r,t)w^2(r,0)=(x_Ax_B)^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_0^t𝑑t^{}e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }t^{}}\left[I_0(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t^{})+_{r^{}1}(1)^r^{}\left(I_{r+r^{}1}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t^{})+I_{rr^{}}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t^{})\right)\right]`$. From this expression, using the asymptotic behavior of the Bessel functions, it is possible to obtain the long-time behavior (for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }t1`$ $`r1`$) of the fluctuations

$`w(r,t)^2w(r,0)^2`$ $`=`$ $`(x_Ax_B)^2\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{2\pi }}}(1+𝒪((\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^1))`$ (61)
$`+`$ $`(x_Ax_B)^2{\displaystyle \underset{r^{}1}{}}(1)^r^{}{\displaystyle _0^t}{\displaystyle \frac{dt^{}}{\sqrt{8\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t^{}}}}\left\{e^{(r+r^{}1)^2/8\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t^{}}+e^{(rr^{})^2/8\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t^{}}\right\}\left(1+𝒪((rr^{})^2)\right)`$ (62)
Thus for the initial condition considered here, when $`x_Ax_B`$, it follows from (61) that the fluctuations growth as $`w(r,t)(\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{1/4}`$.

On the other hand, it is known that for the flat interface (or “sawtooth” initial state), which dynamics is coded in a two-state model $`\delta h_r=_{m=0}^n(12n_m^A)`$, the fluctuations growth as $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{1/4}`$ . In the situation considered here, the fluctuations still grow as $`w(r,t)(\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{1/4}`$ and thus the details of the model and its “three-state” character only appears through the amplitude $`(x_Ax_B)^2`$. When $`x_A=x_B=1`$, the initial configuration corresponds to a straight line and, according to (61), there are no fluctuations. Let us also note that when, e.g., $`x_A=2`$ and $`x_B=0`$, the $`B`$ particles play the role of the vacancies in the two-state model and the model (52) is exactly mapped onto the well studied two-state model .

(ii) We now investigate the fluctuations of $`\delta h_r(t)`$ in the presence of initial correlations.

We assume that particles of type $`A`$ and $`B`$ are distributed according to

$`𝒞_r^l(0)=\kappa _lr^{\nu _l},\nu _l0,l(AA,BB,AB)`$ (63)
which corresponds, via the mapping (52), in the language of the growth model, to an interface with initial fluctuations given by (57), where $`n_m^in_{m+r^{}}^j(0)=𝒞_r^{}^{ij}(0)+\rho _i\rho _j,(i,j)(A,B)`$

Let us define the following quantity:

$`\nu =min(\nu _{AA},\nu _{BB},\nu _{AB})`$ (64)
With help of (54) and (37), (43), we can compute th asymptotic expression of the fluctuations for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }t1`$ and $`r1`$, with $`v\frac{L^2}{8\mathrm{\Gamma }t}`$ and $`\sigma r/L=𝒪(1)`$ (we assume that $`x_Ax_B0`$), which reads

$`w(r,t)^2w(r,0)^2\{\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\sqrt{\pi }\nu (8\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{\nu /2}}\left(_1(v,\sigma ,\nu )_2(v,\sigma ,\nu )\right)\hfill & \text{, if }0<\nu _l<1\hfill & \\ \sqrt{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}\xi (\nu )(1e^{\sigma ^2v})\hfill & \text{, if }\nu _l>1\text{ }\hfill & \\ \sqrt{\frac{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\pi }}\left(\mathrm{ln}(8\mathrm{\Gamma }vt)e^{\sigma ^2v}\mathrm{ln}(8\mathrm{\Gamma }v\sigma t)\right)\hfill & \text{, if }\nu _l=1\text{ }\hfill & \end{array}`$ (68)
where the quantities $`_1`$ and $`_2`$ have been defined in (38),(39) and $`\xi (\nu )`$ is the usual Riemann zeta function.

We see that in the presence of initial correlations (63), the fluctuations are dominated by the smallest initial correlation exponent $`\nu `$. Therefore, if $`\nu =\nu _{AA}`$ (resp. $`\nu =\nu _{BB}`$ ), the dominant contribution (68) to the fluctuations are the same as for a correlated two-state model where $`x_A=2`$ and $`x_B=0`$ (resp. $`x_A=0`$ and $`x_B=2`$) where the $`B`$ (resp. the $`A`$) particles play the role of vacancies .

From (68) we see that initial correlations affect the long-time behavior of the fluctuations of the height displacement of the interface: when the correlations are “strong enough” (i.e. $`0<\nu <1`$), thus $`w(r,t)(\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{\frac{1}{2}\frac{\nu }{4}}`$. Conversely, for “weak” initial correlations ($`\nu >1`$) we recover the usual fluctuation exponent: $`w(r,t)(\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{1/4}`$. The intermediate case $`\nu =1`$, corresponds to the marginal behavior where $`w(r,t)(\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{\frac{1}{4}}\sqrt{\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Gamma }t}`$

## VI Non-instantaneous Two-point Correlation functions

In this section, we compute exactly the non-instantaneous two-point correlation functions for various initial states. Similar quantities have already been computed, for some specific single-species models (see e.g. ).

Let us first consider an uncorrelated initial distribution $`|P(0)=\left(\begin{array}{c}1\rho _A(0)\rho _B(0)\\ \rho _A(0)\\ \rho _B(0)\end{array}\right)^{L^d}`$, such that

$`n_𝐦^A(0)n_𝐥^A(0)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _A(0)\delta _{𝐦,𝐥}+\rho _A(0)^2(1\delta _{𝐦,𝐥});n_𝐦^B(0)n_𝐥^B(0)=\rho _B(0)\delta _{𝐦,𝐥}+\rho _B(0)^2(1\delta _{𝐦,𝐥});`$ (69)
$`n_𝐦^A(0)n_𝐥^B(0)`$ $`=`$ $`n_𝐦^B(0)n_𝐥^A(0)=\rho _A(0)\rho _B(0)(1\delta _{𝐦,𝐥})`$ (70)
We then have :

$`n_𝐦^A(t)n_𝐥^A(0)=\rho _A^2(0)+(\rho _A(0)\rho _A^2(0)){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{m_\alpha l\alpha }(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)`$ (71)
$`n_𝐦^A(t)n_𝐥^B(0)=\rho _A(0)\rho _B(0)\left[1{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{m_\alpha l_\alpha }(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)\right]=n_𝐦^B(t)n_𝐥^A(0)`$ (72)
$`n_𝐦^B(t)n_𝐥^B(0)=\rho _B^2(0)+(\rho _B(0)\rho _B^2(0)){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{m_\alpha l_\alpha }(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t),`$ (73)
We are interested in the asymptotic behavior ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }t1`$ and $`u=L^2/4\mathrm{\Gamma }t<\mathrm{}`$) of the above functions in the two regimes:
i) $`|m_\alpha l_\alpha |r_\alpha L1`$, in this case $`\sigma _\alpha =r_\alpha /L=𝒪(1)`$.
ii) $`|m_\alpha l_\alpha |r_\alpha 1`$, in this case $`\sigma _\alpha =r_\alpha /L=𝒪(1/L)`$.

It is worth noting that the autocorrelation functions are obtained in the second regimes (ii). We then have

$`n_𝐦^A(t)n_𝐥^A(0)=\rho _A^2(0)+{\displaystyle \frac{(\rho _A(0)\rho _A^2(0))e^{_{\alpha =1}^d\sigma _\alpha ^2u}}{(8\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{d/2}}}+𝒪(1/t^d)`$ (74)
$`n_𝐦^A(t)n_𝐥^B(0)=\rho _A(0)\rho _B(0)\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{e^{_{\alpha =1}^d\sigma _\alpha ^2u}}{(4\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{d/2}}}+𝒪(1/t^d)\right]=n_𝐦^B(t)n_𝐥^A(0)`$ (75)
$`n_𝐦^B(t)n_𝐥^B(0)`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _B^2(0)+{\displaystyle \frac{(\rho _B(0)\rho _B^2(0))e^{_{\alpha =1}^d\sigma _\alpha ^2u}}{(4\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{d/2}}}+𝒪(1/t^d)`$ (76)
In these regimes, we have a power-law decay of correlation functions $`(i,j)(A,B)`$), namely,

$`n_𝐦^i(t)n_𝐥^j(0)(\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{d/2}e^{_{\alpha =1}^d\sigma _\alpha ^2u}`$ (77)
Let us now pass to the case where the initial state is correlated according to

$`n_𝐦^i(0)n_𝐥^j(0)=𝒦_{ij}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1,\mathrm{},d}{}}(1\delta _{r_\alpha ,0})|r_\alpha |^{\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha },r_\alpha |m_\alpha l_\alpha |,\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha >0,(ij)(A,B),𝒦_{ij}>0,dist(l,m)>0.`$ (78)
and

$`n_𝐦^i(0)n_𝐦^j(0)=\rho _i(0)\rho _j(0)\delta _{ij}`$ (79)
Notice that in one dimension the initial state (78,79) is translationally invariant and reads:

$`n_m^i(0)n_l^j(0)=n_{r=|ml|}^i(0)n_0^j(0)=𝒦_{ij}(1\delta _{r,0})r^{\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}}+\rho _i(0)\delta _{i,j}\delta _{r,0};𝒦_{ij}=𝒦_{ji};\mathrm{}_{ij}=\mathrm{}_{ji}`$ (80)
This translational invariance which is broken (see (78)) in higher ($`d2`$) dimensions leads to two regimes:

i) We begin with the one-dimensional case ($`d=1`$), here $`r=r_\alpha |ml|`$. Because of the initial translational invariant state, we expect that the non-instantaneous correlation functions only depends on $`r=ml`$, and we obtain

$`n_m^A(t)n_l^A(0)=n_r^A(t)n_0^A(0)=\rho _A(0)e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_r(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)+𝒦_{AA}{\displaystyle \underset{r^{}0}{}}|r^{}|^{\mathrm{\Delta }_{AA}}e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{rr^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)`$ (81)
$`n_m^A(t)n_l^B(0)=𝒦_{AB}{\displaystyle \underset{r^{}0}{}}|r^{}|^{\mathrm{\Delta }_{AB}}e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{rr^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)=n_m^B(t)n_l^A(0)=n_m^B(t)n_l^A(0)`$ (82)
$`n_m^B(t)n_l^B(0)=n_r^B(t)n_0^B(0)=\rho _B(0)e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_r(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)+𝒦_{BB}{\displaystyle \underset{r^{}0}{}}|r^{}|^{\mathrm{\Delta }_{BB}}e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{rr^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)`$ (83)
Because all the processes in the evolution operator are symmetric (unbiased), there is no drift therefore $`n_r^{A,B}(t)n_0^{A,B}(0)=n_r^{A,B}(t)n_0^{A,B}(0)`$.

ii) In higher dimensions ($`d2`$),

$`n_𝐦^A(t)n_𝐥^A(0)=\rho _A(0)e^{2d\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}I_{m_\alpha m_\alpha ^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)+𝒦_{AA}{\displaystyle \underset{(m_1^{}l_1,\mathrm{},m_d^{}l_d)}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}|m_\alpha ^{}l_\alpha |^{\mathrm{\Delta }_{AA}^\alpha }e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{m_\alpha m_\alpha ^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)`$ (84)
$`n_𝐦^A(t)n_𝐥^B(0)=𝒦_{AB}{\displaystyle \underset{(m_1^{}l_1,\mathrm{},m_d^{}l_d)}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}|m_\alpha ^{}l_\alpha |^{\mathrm{\Delta }_{AB}^\alpha }e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{m_im_i^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)=n_𝐦^B(t)n_𝐥^A(0)`$ (85)
$`n_𝐦^B(t)n_𝐥^B(0)=\rho _B(0)e^{2d\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}I_{m_\alpha m_\alpha ^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)+𝒦_{BB}{\displaystyle \underset{(m_1^{}l_1,\mathrm{},m_d^{}l_d)}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}|m_\alpha ^{}l_\alpha |^{\mathrm{\Delta }_{BB}^\alpha }e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{m_\alpha m_\alpha ^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)`$ (86)
$`n_𝐦^B(t)n_𝐥^A(0)=𝒦_{BA}{\displaystyle \underset{(m_1^{}l_1,\mathrm{},m_d^{}l_d)}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}|m_\alpha ^{}l_\alpha |^{\mathrm{\Delta }_{BA}^\alpha }e^{2\mathrm{\Gamma }t}I_{m_im_i^{}}(2\mathrm{\Gamma }t)`$ (87)
We observe that in higher dimensions, because of the initial correlations, the non-instantaneous correlation functions no longer depend on $`|m_\alpha l_\alpha |`$.

We can express the asymptotic behavior of these non-instantaneous correlation functions in an unified way including both $`d=1`$ and $`d2`$ cases. Assuming that $`r_\alpha =|m_\alpha l_\alpha ||m_\alpha |1`$, with $`r_\alpha =\sigma _\alpha L`$ and $`u=L^2/4\mathrm{\Gamma }t<\mathrm{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }t,r1`$, the asymptotics reads ($`(i,j)(A,B)`$)

$`n_𝐦^i(t)n_𝐥^j(0)=\left({\displaystyle \frac{\rho _i(0)e^{_{\alpha =1}^d\sigma _\alpha ^2u}\delta _{i,j}}{(4\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{d/2}}}+𝒦_{ij}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{e^{\sigma _\alpha ^2u}}{1\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha }}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{u\sigma _\alpha ^2}{\pi }}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4u\mathrm{\Gamma }\sigma _\alpha ^2t^{\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha /2}}}\right]+𝒪(t^{2d})\right),\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}<\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha <1`$ (88)
Moreover

$`n_𝐦^i(t)n_𝐥^j(0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(4\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{d/2}}}\left(\rho _i(0)e^{_{\alpha =1}^d\sigma _\alpha ^2u}\delta _{i,j}+𝒦_{ij}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}\zeta (\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha )+𝒪(t^{2d})\right),\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha >1`$ (89)
When $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha =1`$, we have the marginal case with logarithmic corrections

$`n_𝐦^i(t)n_𝐥^j(0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(4\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{d/2}}}(\rho _i(0)e^{_{\alpha =1}^d\sigma _\alpha ^2u}\delta _{i,j}+𝒦_{ij}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1\mathrm{}d}{}}\mathrm{ln}(4u\sigma _\alpha \mathrm{\Gamma }t)+𝒪(t^{2d}))),\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha =1`$ (90)
Again, strong initial correlations lead to an algebraic decay of correlation functions ($`0<\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha <1`$), $`n_𝐦^i(t)n_𝐥^j(0)\frac{1}{(4\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{_\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha /2}},\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}<\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha <1`$, while for weak initial correlations, we have $`n_𝐦^i(t)n_𝐥^j(0)\frac{1}{(4\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{d/2}},\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha >1`$. The marginal case $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha =1`$ is characterized by $`n_𝐦^i(t)n_𝐥^j(0)\frac{(\mathrm{ln}4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^d}{(4\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{d/2}},\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^\alpha =1`$

## VII Summary and Conclusion

In this work we studied, by analytical methods, the dynamics of a symmetric two-species reaction-diffusion model in arbitrary dimensions. We mapped this model onto an one-dimensional RSOS-type growth model and obtained explicit results for the latter. In particular, we were able to compute the density profile for three various initial conditions (uniform and non-uniform) in arbitrary dimensions.

Furthermore, we evaluated, for a translationally invariant system, the instantaneous two-point correlation functions in arbitrary dimensions. In one-spatial dimension, we considered the case where initial correlations were present. We observed that when the initial correlations are strong enough, they affect the asymptotic dynamics. We also noticed a crossover in the dynamics between the case of strong and weak initial correlations.

We mapped the one-dimensional version of the reaction-diffusion model on a “three-states” RSOS-type growth model. Using the exact, instantaneous correlation functions, we computed the exact expression of fluctuations of the interface for the latter model. We specifically considered the case of a “flat interface” where the fluctuations growth as $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{1/4}`$ , as in the corresponding “two-state” growth model: the three-state nature of the model considered only appears in the amplitude. We also considered the case where the initial configuration is translationally-invariant, random and correlated. We saw that the initial correlations are “strong”, they affect the long-time behavior of the fluctuations of the displacement interface. Conversely, “weak” initial correlations, do not affect the dominant term and the fluctuations still grow as $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }t)^{1/4}`$. This is analog to what happens in the two-state RSOS systems where initial correlations affect the long-time behaviour of the width .

Finally we computed in arbitrary dimensions the exact non-instantaneous two-point correlation functions for initially uncorrelated states as well as for cases where correlations were present. Here we again observed the effect of strong initial correlations on the dynamics and a crossover between regimes with strong and weak initial correlations takes place.

We conclude this work by addressing an interesting question based on the similarity of the stochastic Hamiltonian  under consideration with the integrable Sutherland’s quantum spin system . It is known that for one-dimensional SEP-model, the relation with the Heisenberg chain has been fruitful to obtain a (dynamical) matrix formulation of the probability distribution, which allowed to solve the (dynamical) density profile for a SEP-model with open boundary conditions (particles were injected and ejected from both ends of the chain) . The relation of the present model to Sutherland’s one suggests that a dynamical matrix approach would be possible (in one-spatial dimension) to treat the injection and ejection of particles at the boundary (open boundary conditions).

## VIII Acknowledgments

The support of Swiss National Fonds is gratefully acknowledged.

## IX Appendix: Solution of the equations of motion of the instantaneous two-point correlation functions

Solving the equations of motions (29) for the instantaneous correlation functions in arbitrary dimensions, for the model under consideration in section $`VI`$, we obtain the following expression:

$`𝒞_{|r|}^{ij}(t)=𝒞_0^{ij}(0)e^{4d\mathrm{\Gamma }t}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}I_{r_\alpha }(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)+{\displaystyle \underset{r^{}0}{}}𝒞_r^{}^{ij}(0)e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }dt}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}I_{r_\alpha r_\alpha ^{}}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }t)`$ (91)
$`+`$ $`4d\mathrm{\Gamma }𝒞_0^{ij}(0){\displaystyle _0^t}𝑑t^{}e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }d(tt^{})}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}I_{r_\alpha }(4\mathrm{\Gamma }(tt^{}))`$ (92)
$``$ $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }𝒞_0^{ij}(0){\displaystyle _0^t}𝑑t^{}e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }d(tt^{})}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{\alpha \alpha ^{}=1\mathrm{}d}{}}I_{r_\alpha ^{}}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }(tt^{}))(I_{r_\alpha +1}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }(tt^{}))+I_{r_\alpha 1}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }(tt^{})))\right)`$ (93)
$`+`$ $`2\mathrm{\Gamma }{\displaystyle _0^t}𝑑t^{}e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }d(tt^{})}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}𝒞_{e^\alpha }^{ij}(t^{})\left({\displaystyle \underset{\alpha \alpha ^{}=1\mathrm{}d}{}}I_{r_\alpha ^{}}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }(tt^{}))(I_{r_\alpha +1}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }(tt^{}))+I_{r_\alpha 1}(4\mathrm{\Gamma }(tt^{})))\right)`$ (94)
$``$ $`4d\mathrm{\Gamma }{\displaystyle _0^t}𝑑t^{}e^{4\mathrm{\Gamma }d(tt^{})}𝒞_{e^\alpha }^{ij}(t^{}){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{d}{}}}I_{r_\alpha }(4\mathrm{\Gamma }(tt^{}))`$ (95)
Using the properties of the derivatives of Bessel functions and then integrating by parts, we obtain the more compact form (32)


text:
# Critical Coarsening without Surface Tension: the Voter Universality Class

## Abstract

We show that the two-dimensional voter model, usually considered to only be a marginal coarsening system, represents a broad class of models for which phase-ordering takes place without surface tension. We argue that voter-like growth is generically observed at order-disorder nonequilibrium transitions solely driven by interfacial noise between dynamically symmetric absorbing states.

Coarsening phenomena occur in a large variety of situations in and out of physics, ranging from the demixion of alloys  to population dynamics . At a fundamental level, phase-ordering challenges our capacity to deal with nonequilibrium systems and our understanding of the mechanisms determining different universality classes. In many cases, phase competition is driven by surface tension, leading to ‘curvature-driven’ growth. Coarsening patterns are then characterized by a single length scale $`L(t)t^{1/z}`$, where the exponent $`z`$ only depends on general symmetry and conservation properties of the system . For instance, $`z=2`$ for the common case of a non-conserved scalar order parameter (NCOP), a large class including the Ising model. In this context, the two-dimensional voter model (VM) , a caricatural process in which sites on a square lattice adopt the opinion of a randomly-chosen neighbor, stands out as an exception. Its coarsening process, which gives rise to patterns with clusters of all sizes between 1 and $`\sqrt{t}`$ (Fig. 1, is characterized by a slow, logarithmic decay of the density of interfaces $`\rho 1/\mathrm{ln}t`$ (as opposed to the algebraic decay $`\rho 1/L(t)t^{1/z}`$ of curvature-driven growth). The marginality of the VM is usually attributed to the exceptional character of its analytic properties .

In this Letter, we show that, in fact, large classes of models exhibit the same type of domain growth as the simple VM, without being endowed with any of its peculiar symmetry and integrability properties. We argue that voter-like coarsening is best defined by the absence of surface tension and that it is generically observed at the transitions between disordered and fully-ordered phases in the absence of bulk fluctuations, when these nonequilibrium transitions are driven by interfacial noise only. Finally, we discuss the universality of the scaling properties associated with voter-like critical points.

We first review the properties of the usual two-state VM, emphasizing those of importance for defining generalized models. A ‘voter’ (or spin) residing on site x of a hypercubic lattice can have two different opinions $`s_𝐱=\pm 1`$. In any space dimension $`d`$, an elementary move consists in randomly choosing one site and assigning to it the opinion of one of its randomly chosen nearest neighbors (n.n.). This ensures that the two homogeneous configurations (where all spins are either $`+`$ or $``$) are absorbing states, and that the model is $`Z_2`$-symmetric under global inversion ($`s_𝐱s_𝐱`$). Recasting the dynamic rule in terms of n.n. pair updating, a pair of opposite spins $`+`$ is randomly selected, and evolves to a $`++`$ or $``$ pair with equal ($`1/2`$) probabilities. The rates of creation of $`+`$ and $``$ spins being equal, any initial value of the global magnetization $`m`$ is conserved in the limit of large system sizes.

Another prominent feature of the VM is a ‘duality’  with a system of coalescing random walks: going backward in time, the successive ancestors of a given spin follow the trail of a simple random walk (RW); comparing the values of several spins shows that their associated RWs necessarily merge upon encounter. This correspondence allows to solve many aspects of the kinetics of the VM, because it implies that the correlation functions between an arbitrary number of spins form a closed hierarchy of diffusion equations . In particular, the calculation of the density of interfaces $`\rho _m(t)`$ (i.e. the fraction of $`+`$ n.n. pairs) starting from random initial conditions (r.i.c.) of magnetization $`m`$, is ultimately given by the probability that a RW initially at unit distance from the origin, has not yet reached it at time $`t`$. Therefore, owing to the recurrence properties of RWs, the VM shows coarsening for $`d2`$ (i.e. $`\rho _m(t)0`$ when $`t\mathrm{}`$). For the ‘marginal’ case $`d=2`$ —on which we mainly focus henceforth—, one finds the slow logarithmic decay :

$$\rho _m(t)=(1m^2)\left[\frac{2\pi D}{\mathrm{ln}t}+𝒪\left(\frac{1}{\mathrm{ln}^2t}\right)\right],$$
(1)
$`D`$ being the diffusion constant of the underlying RW ($`D=1/4`$ for the standard case of n.n., square lattice walks, when each spin is updated on average once per unit of time). This peculiar behavior, which contrasts with the algebraic decay encountered in NCOP growth, thus seems tantamount to the fact that $`d=2`$ is the critical dimension for the recurrence of RWs.

Beyond these analytic properties, the nature of the coarsening displayed by the VM in two dimensions is highlighted by studying the evolution of a ‘bubble’ of one phase embedded into another. For curvature-driven NCOP growth, the volume of a bubble decreases linearly with time under the effect of surface tension. In the VM, however, large bubbles do not shrink but slowly disintegrate as their boundary roughens diffusively to reach a typical width of the order of their initial radius $`r_0`$ (Fig. 1, top). As long as $`\sqrt{t}r_0`$, conservation of the magnetization is still effective, and implies that radially-averaged magnetization profiles $`m(r,t)`$ have a stationary middle point. This indicates that curvature plays no role, a fact further confirmed by the observation that the $`m(r,t)`$ curves are the same as the transverse profiles of an infinite, straight interface, whose derivatives can be shown to be given by a simple Gaussian of variance $`2Dt`$.

We interpret the above behavior as characteristic of the absence of surface tension, a ‘physical’ property which, together with the fact that coarsening does occur (i.e., $`lim_t\mathrm{}\rho =0`$), we conjecture to be constitutive of $`d=2`$ voter-like domain growth (as defined by the logarithmic decay of $`\rho _m(t)`$). To investigate which of the properties outlined above (existence of two absorbing states, $`Z_2`$-symmetry, duality with coalescing RWs, $`m`$-conservation) is necessary to produce voter-like growth, we now embed the simple VM studied above into large families of rules.

Consider first that a $`+`$ pair is now only updated with probability $`p`$ ($`\mathrm{Pr}(++)=1p`$), and that $`\mathrm{Pr}(+++)=pq`$ and $`\mathrm{Pr}(+)=p(1q)`$, so that for $`q\frac{1}{2}`$ the $`m`$-conservation is broken. Suppose next that $`p`$ and $`q`$ depend on the local configuration around the $`+`$ pair, for instance via $`n^+`$ and $`n^{}`$, the numbers of $`+`$ (resp. $``$) n.n. of the $``$ (resp. $`+`$) site in the central pair. (Note that as soon as the transition probabilities do vary with the local configuration, the duality with coalescing RWs breaks down.) Conservation of $`m`$ (Pr($`+++`$) = Pr($`+`$)) is then simply expressed by the conditions $`q_{n^+,n^{}}=\frac{1}{2}`$, to be obeyed $`n^+,n^{}\{1,2,3,4\}`$, whereas $`p_{n^{},n^+}=p_{n^+,n^{}}`$ and $`q_{n^{},n^+}=1q_{n^+,n^{}}`$ stand for $`Z_2`$-symmetry.

With the exception of the usual VM ($`p=1,q=1/2`$), the $`m`$-conserving and $`Z_2`$-symmetric rules, defined by $`q_{n^+,n^{}}=1/2`$ and $`p_{n^{},n^+}=p_{n^+,n^{}}`$, do not benefit from the duality property used above to derive, e.g., Eq. (1). Nevertheless, we have found (by coarsening, bubble and line experiments ) that they behave like the simple VM, but with a diffusion constant $`D\frac{1}{4}`$. Thus, integrability is not a necessary condition for voter-like growth.

The subset of $`m`$-conserving rules without $`Z_2`$-symmetry is of particular interest: no surface tension is expected, but one may wonder about the effects of the asymmetry on growth properties. Below, we use the case $`p_{n^+,n^{}}=1/n^+`$, which is nothing but the interface growth model introduced by Kaya, Kabakçıoğlu, and Erzan (KKE) at its ‘delocalization’ transition . The asymmetry of the rule manifests itself at the microscopic level (by looking at local 3-spins configurations ), but also at the macroscopic level, by the evolution of the magnetization profiles in ‘line’ or ‘bubble’ experiments. As for the usual VM, the profiles obtained in both cases are identical, their width scale as $`2D_{\mathrm{KKE}}\sqrt{t}`$ with $`D_{\mathrm{KKE}}=0.36(2)`$ , but they are asymmetric (Fig. 2a). Voter-like behavior is further confirmed by the study of phase ordering following r.i.c. of magnetization $`m`$. The density $`\rho _m(t)`$ displays the signature scaling spelled out by Eq. (1) (Fig. 2b), and the ensuing value $`D=0.34(1)`$ is in fair agreement with the value $`D_{\mathrm{KKE}}`$ determined above, which suggests that the KKE rule asymptotically behaves like the usual VM with an effective diffusion constant.

All the other $`m`$-conserving, asymmetric rules that we have studied reveal a similar voter-like behavior. We conjecture that they almost all do so, as long as the $`p_{n^+,n^{}}`$ are all strictly positive (to avoid possible ‘blocking’ in certain configurations). In other words, $`m`$-conservation appears as a sufficient condition for voter-type growth, even in the absence of $`Z_2`$-symmetry or integrability. We now show that $`m`$-conservation is not a necessary condition since some non-conserving $`Z_2`$-symmetric rules with two absorbing states exhibit voter-like features.

If pair-update rules are convenient to control $`m`$-conservation, single-site update models suffice to study rules which need not possess this property. We thus consider a family of ‘kinetic Ising models’, in which a spin is flipped with a probability $`r_{s,h}`$ depending on its value $`s=\pm 1`$ and on its local field $`h\{4,2,0,2,4\}`$, i.e. the sum of the values of its four n.n.. The $`Z_2`$-symmetric rules of this family, obeying $`r_{s,h}=r_{s,h}`$, can be parameterized by five transition probabilities $`r_hr_{1,h}`$. Such rules are usually not integrable. Again, the VM, given by $`r_h=\frac{1}{2}\frac{h}{8}`$, is an exception. Its marginal situation in this context has already been noted  in the particular case where the transition probabilities only depend on $`h`$, a condition expressed here by $`r_{s,h}=1r_{s,h}`$. One is then left with only two free parameters, $`p_\mathrm{b}r_4,p_\mathrm{i}r_2`$, which can be respectively interpreted  as a measure of the strength of ‘bulk’ and ‘interfacial’ noise. In the $`(p_\mathrm{i},p_\mathrm{b})`$ plane, the VM ($`p_\mathrm{i}=\frac{1}{4}`$, $`p_\mathrm{b}=0`$) turns out to be the endpoint of a line of Ising-like (second-order) phase transitions , at the border between the ordered and disordered phases in the absence of bulk noise ($`p_\mathrm{b}=0`$).

We claim that this situation is generic: the 4-parameter space of the general kinetic Ising model above without bulk noise (space defined by $`r_4=0`$) is divided into a disordered and an ordered region separated by a codimension-1 critical manifold of voter-like rules . In Fig. 3, we show a section of this manifold in a plane which contains the VM. Its location was determined by studying the evolution of $`\rho `$ following r.i.c. with zero magnetization at various parameter values. Crossing the critical manifold, the characteristic logarithmic decay $`\rho 1/\mathrm{ln}t`$ separates the region where $`\rho 1/\sqrt{t}`$ (curvature-driven growth typical of the ordered phase) from the disordered region where $`\rho `$ saturates to finite values (Fig. 3b). A peculiar feature of this voter-like critical manifold is that, using the language of the renormalization group (RG), $`m=0`$ is a ‘weakly attracting’ fixed point of the dynamics: starting from any $`m_00,\pm 1`$ ($`m_0=m(0)`$), one observes that $`m(t)1/\mathrm{ln}t`$ (Fig. 3c). Yet, the decay of the interface density behaves like in the usual VM (Fig. 3d), even for $`m_00`$, because the slow evolution of $`m(t)`$ introduces only $`𝒪(1/\mathrm{ln}^2t)`$ corrections to Eq. (1) and therefore does not alter the value of the effective diffusion constant. This also explains why our bubble and line experiments —which strictly speaking probe only a zero-measure set of random initial conditions— performed for rules on the voter-like manifold, do give the same results as for the usual VM , in spite of the absence of $`m`$-conservation.

Similar investigations have been undertaken in various planes of the 4-parameter space, always yielding the same results. This suggests to conjecture that all critical $`Z_2`$-symmetric rules without bulk noise form a codimension-1 ‘voter-like’ manifold separating order from disorder, characterized by the logarithmic decay of both $`\rho `$ and $`m`$.

Does the above picture extend to non-conserving, asymmetric rules without bulk noise? In this case, even though two absorbing states exist, their dynamical roles are not symmetric, and such order-disorder transitions are known  to belong generically to the universality class of directed percolation (DP). We have indeed observed  that for such rules both $`m`$ and $`\rho `$ scale at criticality with the same exponent $`\beta ^{\mathrm{DP}}/\nu _{}^{\mathrm{DP}}=0.450(1)`$ .

Having specified the required conditions to observe voter-like coarsening, we now turn to the investigation of the scaling laws associated to voter-like points and to an assessment of their universality. To our knowledge, there has been only one attempt to determining the scaling exponents governing the approach to the usual VM. Within the reduced $`(p_\mathrm{i},p_\mathrm{b})`$ parameter plane defined above, the authors of  noted first that increasing $`p_\mathrm{i}`$ along the zero-bulk-noise line $`p_\mathrm{b}=0`$, up to the VM point ($`p_\mathrm{i}=\frac{1}{4}`$), the (static) magnetization $`m_\mathrm{s}`$ jumps from 0 to $`\pm 1`$. Thus, the order parameter exponent $`\beta =0`$, and, for such a first-order $`d=2`$ nonequilibrium critical point, the susceptibility and the correlation length exponents should satisfy $`\gamma =2\nu `$. A finite-size scaling (FSS) analysis of the fluctuations of $`m_s`$ as $`\epsilon p_\mathrm{i}\frac{1}{4}0^{}`$ confirmed the latter relation, and gave $`\gamma 1.25`$. However, repeating these simulations with much better statistics, we evidenced  a systematic decrease of the local exponent $`\gamma `$ as $`\epsilon 0^{}`$. On general grounds, corrections to scaling in this problem are expected to be logarithmic  and, thus, the above $`\gamma `$ value must be taken cautiously. In fact, a more reliable approach of the VM is from the ordered side ($`\epsilon 0^+`$), along the zero-bulk noise line. The curvature-driven-growth regimes $`\rho \xi (\epsilon )/L(t)\epsilon ^\nu /t^{1/2}`$, which eventually settle then in large enough systems, are less prone to the logarithmic corrections mentioned above. The scaling of the correlation length $`\xi (\epsilon )`$ yields $`\nu =0.45(7)`$, compatible with the simple ‘diffusive’ value $`\nu =\frac{1}{2}`$ (Fig. 4).

Compounding the above results, a conservative interpretation of the data is that $`\beta =0`$, $`\gamma =1`$, and $`\nu =\frac{1}{2}`$, with appropriate logarithmic corrections to scaling. This is further confirmed by similar, preliminary, results obtained when approaching any of the voter-like models studied above . We finally note that these exponents would obey all the standard scaling relations valid at a critical point, such as $`\beta =[d\lambda (H)]/\lambda (T_i)`$, $`\gamma =[2\lambda (H)d]/\lambda (T_i)`$, or $`\nu =1/\lambda (T_i)`$, with (in $`d=2`$) $`\lambda (T_i)=\lambda (H)=2`$. We tentatively associate the former RG-eigenvalue with the relevance of interfacial noise, and the latter with the presence of a ‘dynamically self-induced’ magnetic field breaking the $`Z_2`$-symmetry (as happens in KKE-like models). The behavior of the classes of voter-like models we have defined is consistent with such a set of exponents, which would thus characterize (in $`d=2`$) the genuine voter critical point. For instance, converting the static critical behavior $`m\epsilon ^\beta `$ to a dynamical one via $`\xi \epsilon ^\nu L(t)t^{1/z}`$ gives $`mt^{\beta /\nu z}`$. Now, if $`\beta =0`$ strictly, this implies $`m(t)=\mathrm{Cst}`$, while if $`\beta =0^+`$ is interpreted, as is customary, including logarithmic corrections, then $`m(t)1/\mathrm{ln}t`$. It is also nice to note that, despite the presence of the a priori relevant eigenvalue $`\lambda (H)=2`$, $`m`$-conserving rules without $`Z_2`$-symmetry may still display voter-like growth, because the critical exponent $`\delta `$ (which describes how the order parameter behaves under a magnetic field: $`mH^{1/\delta }`$), would be formally given by $`1/\delta =1+d/\lambda (H)=0`$.

Naturally, the RG picture sketched above needs to be substantiated by the study of an appropriate field theory, an endeavor left for future work. In particular, one would like to have a better understanding of the RG flow around the voter critical point as the space dimension varies, and of the special role played by $`d=2`$, which appears as the upper critical dimension where voter-like phase-ordering can be induced by the sole presence of interfacial noise . At any rate, we believe the results presented here reveal that the voter model, which was, up to now, perceived as a marginal system, embodies in fact a broad class of models for which coarsening occurs in the absence of surface tension. Our findings also suggest that the critical behavior associated to this class of systems is perhaps best characterized as an order-disorder transition driven by the interfacial noise between two absorbing states possessing equivalent ‘dynamical roles’, this symmetry being enforced either by $`Z_2`$-symmetry of the local rules, or by the global conservation of magnetization.