the potts model is one of the classical models of statistical mechanics exhibiting a phase transition . in its standard version
, it is defined on the square lattice @xmath1 , where it was first studied @xcite .
the parameter controlling its phase transition is temperature : at sufficiently high temperatures the gibbs measure is unique , while for low temperatures the number of translation invariant extremal gibbs measures ( pure phases ) coincides with the cardinality of the spin state space ( usually denoted by @xmath0 ) @xcite .
moreover , when @xmath0 is large enough , these regimes meet at a specific value of the temperature where @xmath0 distinct `` ordered '' phases and one `` disordered '' phase coexist .
this was shown in @xcite by using reflection positivity arguments , and in @xcite by pirogov - sinai theory .
the transition is in this case of first order meaning that exactly at the transition point the derivative of the pressure with respect to temperature has a jump .
the mechanism of phase transition is well understood .
when @xmath0 is in the low range , the appearance of phase transition is explained by ground state degeneracy , similarly to the ising model : the ising model has two ground states ( indeed , it is equivalent with the potts model for @xmath2 ) , while the potts model has exactly @xmath0 such states .
as @xmath0 is taken larger , there is ever increasing possibility for entropy to take domination , and for large enough @xmath0 there is a temperature at which energy and entropy balance each other , leading to coexistence of the high and low - temperature phases .    to understand the structure of these pure phases , one has to have a notion of what a typical spin configuration looks like in each such gibbs state .
presently , there is a suggestive picture offered by the random cluster representation . according to this ,
phase transition in the potts model occurs exactly at that value of the temperature for which the associated random cluster model is at the percolation threshold @xcite .
this is possible to prove for @xmath3 , and in fact for quite general underlying lattices .
the structure of the percolation clusters allows a good insight into the typical configurations of the potts pure phases .    in this paper
we consider the similar problem of non - uniqueness for the potts model placed in the continuum instead of a lattice . in this case , the particles are not sitting in lattice points but at random points in @xmath4 .
the _ a priori _ distribution of the set of occupied positions is poisson process with intensity @xmath5 , which is then modified by the potts interaction  a repulsion between particles of different types .
( in the case of zero temperature , this model coincides with the multitype hard - core exclusion model of widom and rowlinson @xcite . )
the crucial parameter is then the activity @xmath5 : it is known that , for each number @xmath0 of different types and at any fixed temperature , there is only one gibbs measure whenever @xmath5 is small enough , while for high enough values there are @xmath0 translation invariant extreme gibbs measures ; see @xcite and the more recent papers @xcite using random cluster methods .
however , in the continuum setting it has not been proved so far that these two regimes meet at a single critical activity @xmath6 , and that the phase transition at @xmath6 is of first order when @xmath0 is large enough .
the difficulty lies in the fact that there are no obvious extensions to the continuum of the methods available for the lattice potts model . on the one hand
, reflection positivity does not apply to continuum models . on the other , the contour techniques of pirogov - sinai theory used in @xcite
do not appear to admit an immediate extension .
these papers either deal with the continuum widom - rowlinson model , but then only cover the case when @xmath5 is large and @xmath0 is held fixed ( not necessarily large ) , proving coexistence of just @xmath0 phases , or show the coexistence of @xmath7 phases at @xmath6 for large @xmath0 , but this only for the _ lattice _ potts model .    as a rigorous proof is still lacking , it should be worthwhile to report on further progress . based on the random - cluster representation of the model
, we investigate the structure of clusters in terms of their dissociation probabilities under resampling of locations , and show that clusters with positive dissociation probabilities are unlikely to occur uniformly in the activity @xmath5 when @xmath0 is large .
( we believe that these ideas will eventually lead to a rigorous proof of first - order phase transition , but at this stage there are still a number of difficulties to overcome . )
on the other hand , we have undertaken a numerical study of these problems .
we use a natural continuum analog of the swendsen
wang cluster algorithm which was originally designed for the lattice potts model . arguing that a coexistence of ordered and disordered phases manifests itself as a medium - term dependence of the algorithm on the initial conditions
, we find that for any @xmath0 there is only one critical activity @xmath6 , and the phase transition at @xmath6 is of second order when @xmath8 , while it is of first order for @xmath9 .
this picture confirms the main results of earlier numerical studies @xcite based on the so - called invaded cluster algorithm .
however , the earlier results were not conclusive about the order of the transition in the @xmath10 case which we can better determine now .
in addition , the exact relationship between the stationary measure of the invaded cluster algorithm and the corresponding finite volume gibbs measures of the potts model is not known .
it has only been postulated that in the infinite volume limit there should be a unique activity @xmath5 such that they coincide , but this remains still to be proven .
therefore , we felt it necessary to make an independent numerical study using an algorithm whose stationary measure we can show to be a gibbs measure of the potts model .
this enables us to check , at least numerically , some of the results obtained by the invaded cluster algorithm .
as already mentioned , our results confirm qualitatively the earlier ones , and it is plausible that the invaded cluster algorithm describes the continuum potts model in the infinite volume limit .
however , we also found a case in which the invaded cluster algorithm gave results with significant finite size bias , slowly decreasing with the volume .
such behavior makes the control of finite size effects in the invaded cluster algorithm difficult , and a careful analysis of the bias would be advisable before the results are actually applied to describe the gibbs states of the potts model .
the outline of this paper is as follows : in section  2 we introduce the continuum potts model and the continuum swendsen
wang algorithm . in section
3 we analyze the typical structure of clusters in the high-@xmath0 continuum potts model in terms of their dissociation probabilities , and discuss the behavior of the algorithm in the presence of first - order phase transitions .
section  4 provides our simulation results , while section  5 contains a detailed discussion including a comparison with the results obtained by the invaded cluster algorithm , and a discussion on the structure of pure phases .
the continuum potts model is a model of point particles having @xmath11 different types and sitting in a rectangular box @xmath12 , @xmath13 . rather than of particles of different types
, one may also think of particles with a ferromagnetic spin with @xmath0 possible orientations .
a configuration of particles in @xmath14 is given by a pair @xmath15 , where @xmath16 is the set of occupied positions , and @xmath17 is a mapping attaching to each particle in @xmath16 its type , or `` color '' .
writing @xmath18 for the configuration of particles of type @xmath19 , we may also think of @xmath20 as the @xmath0-tuple of the pairwise disjoint sets @xmath21 belonging to @xmath22 , the set of all finite subsets of @xmath14 .
the configuration space is thus equal to @xmath23 , the set of @xmath0-tuples of pairwise disjoint elements of @xmath24 .
the particles are supposed to interact via a repulsive interspecies pair potential @xmath25 $ ] of bounded support . for simplicity
we confine ourselves to the case of a step potential @xmath26 already considered , e.g. , in @xcite .
the hamiltonian in @xmath14 is thus given by h_()=_1a < bq   _ xx_a , yx_b(x - y ) .
here we impose periodic boundary conditions , meaning that the difference @xmath27 has to be understood modulo @xmath14 .
( we note in passing that one could also add a molecular , type - independent interaction term , as was done in @xcite . here , however , we stick to the simple case above . )
the associated gibbs distribution with activity @xmath28 and temperature @xmath29 is then _  , z , t(d)= z_ , z , t^-1 _ a=1^q z^ # x_al_(dx_a ) , where @xmath30 is the lebesgue - poisson measure on @xmath24 defined by @xmath31 and @xmath32 is the normalizing constant .
the zero - temperature case corresponds to the classical model of widom and rowlinson @xcite with hard - core interspecies repulsion .
one can then imagine that the particles form balls of diameter @xmath33 which can overlap only when they are of the same type .
the behavior of the infinite - volume gibbs states of this model is completely understood when @xmath5 is either small or large .
if @xmath5 is small enough , there is a unique infinite - volume state which is disordered , in that it is invariant under permutations of particle types ; this can be seen , for example , by using disagreement percolation ; cf .
proposition 7 of @xcite .
if @xmath5 is sufficiently large ( depending on @xmath34 ) , there exist @xmath0 distinct phases which are ordered , or demixed , in that one particle type is more frequent than all other types ; see @xcite for the case @xmath35 and @xcite for general @xmath34 .
it is expected , but not rigorously known , that there exists a sharp activity threshold @xmath36 such that the infinite - volume gibbs state is unique when @xmath37 and non - unique for @xmath38 .
( this lack of knowledge is due to the fact that the model does not have any useful stochastic monotonicity properties .
the only monotonicity known is that the particle density is an increasing function of @xmath5 ; cf .
section 4.2 of @xcite and equation . )
if @xmath0 is large enough , it is further expected that the transition at @xmath6 is of first order , meaning that the disordered and the @xmath0 ordered phases exist simultaneously .
this is the problem we address in this paper .      just as the lattice potts model
, the continuum potts model admits a random - cluster representation of fortuin - kasteleyn type ; see @xcite and the references therein , as well as @xcite . this random - cluster representation will become important in the following .
the random - cluster measure associated to is a probability measure for random graphs @xmath39 in @xmath14 .
the vertex set @xmath16 is obtained from the configuration @xmath15 by disregarding the particle types described by @xmath40 , and the edge set @xmath41 is obtained by drawing random edges between the points of @xmath16 .
specifically , for each @xmath42 let @xmath43 consist of all sets of non - oriented edges between pairs of distinct points of @xmath16 , and @xmath44 be the probability measure on @xmath43 for which an edge between a pair @xmath45 is drawn , independently of all other edges , with probability @xmath46 ; as before , the difference @xmath27 is understood modulo @xmath14 .
( in the widom  rowlinson case of hard - core interspecies repulsion , the randomness of the edges disappears in that all points of distance @xmath47 are connected automatically . )
the random - cluster measure associated to thus lives on the space @xmath48 of all finite graphs in @xmath14 , and is given by _
 , z , t(dx , de ) = z_ , z , t^-1 z^#x q^k(x , e ) l_(dx)_x , t(de ) , where @xmath49 stands for the number of clusters of the graph @xmath50 , and @xmath32 again denotes the normalization constant .
( note that this definition makes sense for any real @xmath51 . ) as indicated by our notation , the normalization constant is in fact the same in either of equalities and for any allowed values of the parameters .
this was established in @xcite as part of the proof for the following precise relationship between the two measures :    [ prop : cont - rc ] ( @xmath52 ) take a particle configuration @xmath53 with distribution @xmath54 and define a random graph @xmath55 as follows : independently for each pair @xmath56 of points of the same type ( i.e. , @xmath57 ) let @xmath58 with probability @xmath46
. then @xmath50 has distribution @xmath59 .
( @xmath60 ) pick a random graph @xmath61 according to @xmath59 and define a type assignment @xmath40 as follows : for each cluster @xmath62 of @xmath63 assign a type @xmath64 independently and with equal probability , and then define @xmath65 for all @xmath66 in the union of all clusters of the type @xmath19 .
then @xmath15 has distribution @xmath54 .    to obtain a joint picture of the continuum potts model and its random - cluster representation
, one should think of cluster - colored graphs @xmath67 , where @xmath61 and @xmath40 is a mapping attaching to each cluster @xmath62 of @xmath63 a color @xmath68 .
let us use the notation @xmath69 for expectation values of a random variable @xmath70 on the cluster - colored graphs .
the continuum potts model is then obtained by interpreting @xmath40 as a function on @xmath16 which is constant on all clusters , and then forgetting the edges @xmath41 ; that is , for any @xmath70 which depends only on @xmath15 , @xmath71 . likewise , forgetting the colors one arrives at the random - cluster measure : for @xmath70 depending only on @xmath50 , we have @xmath72 .
the gibbs distribution @xmath73 in has also another useful property easily to be exploited for simulation .
namely , if we fix all particles except those of a given type @xmath64 , then the conditional distribution of the particles of type @xmath19 is poisson with a simple intensity function .
specifically , for any bounded non - negative function @xmath74 on @xmath14 let _
^u(dx ) = _ xxu(x )  l_(dx ) be the poisson point process on @xmath24 with intensity function @xmath74 .
then the following observation follows immediately from the definitions and :    [ prop : cond_single_type ] let @xmath75 be a given type and , for any @xmath76 , let @xmath77 be the set of positions of all particles having types different from @xmath19 .
then , under @xmath54 , the conditional distribution of @xmath21 given @xmath78 is equal to the poisson point process @xmath79 with intensity function @xmath80 , where @xmath81\,.\ ] ]    to simulate @xmath79 one can use the well - known fact that @xmath79 can be obtained from the homogeneous poisson point process @xmath82 with constant intensity function @xmath5 by a random thinning : each point @xmath66 from a @xmath82-sample @xmath16 is kept , independently of all other points , with probability @xmath83 ; otherwise @xmath66 is removed . in the spirit of the random - cluster representation discussed above , this can also be achieved by independently drawing ( virtual ) edges between the points @xmath66 of @xmath16 and @xmath84 of @xmath85 with probability @xmath86 , and deleting all @xmath87 that are connected by an edge to some @xmath88 .
the algorithm of swendsen and wang @xcite is by now a standard device for simulating the lattice ising and potts models .
it can be characterized as the algorithm which alternatively applies the transition probabilities relating the potts model with its random - cluster representation .
the naive analog for the continuum potts model would be an alternative application of the two steps described in proposition [ prop : cont - rc ] . note , however , that these steps always keep the set of occupied positions fixed .
that is , these transition steps are unable to equilibrate the particle positions .
( iterating these steps , one would rather arrive at the discrete random - cluster distribution of edges between the vertices chosen initially . )
so , one has to combine these steps with a further simulation step which takes care of the positions .
the simplest such step is the gibbs sampler based on the conditional probabilities of proposition [ prop : cond_single_type ] .
we are thus led to the following continuum version of the swendsen
wang algorithm , variants of which have already been proposed independently in @xcite and @xcite :    * continuum swendsen
wang algorithm : * start from any initial configuration @xmath89 and iterate the sweep consisting of the following three steps :    _ resampling of positions .
_ successively for @xmath90 , replace @xmath21 by a sample from the poisson point process @xmath91 , using a random thinning of @xmath92 .    _ drawing edges .
_ let @xmath93 and , independently for each pair @xmath56 of points of the same type , draw an edge from @xmath66 to @xmath84 with probability @xmath46 .
let @xmath41 be the resulting set of edges , and consider the graph @xmath39 .
_ choice of types .
_ for each cluster @xmath62 of @xmath63 , independently of all other clusters , pick a random type uniformly in @xmath94 and assign this type to each @xmath95 .
let @xmath21 be the set of vertices receiving type @xmath19 , and @xmath96 .
in view of propositions [ prop : cont - rc ] and [ prop : cond_single_type ] , it is clear that the gibbs distribution @xmath54 is invariant under this algorithm . in fact , the following ergodic theorem holds :    [ prop : ergodicity ] let @xmath97 , @xmath98 , be the realization of the continuum swendsen - wang algorithm after @xmath99 sweeps .
then the distribution of @xmath100 converges to @xmath54 in total variation norm at a geometric rate .
it suffices to observe that , in step csw 1 , @xmath101 for all @xmath19 with probability at least @xmath102 .
so , if @xmath100 and @xmath103 are two versions of the process starting from different initial configurations but otherwise using the same realizations of randomness , then @xmath104 whence the proposition follows immediately .    for practical purposes , particularly in our context ,
the ergodic theorem [ prop : ergodicity ] is rather misleading .
this is because the rate of convergence towards @xmath54 can be extremely small , even for @xmath14 of moderate size .
( this is already seen from the number @xmath105 above , though this is only a simple lower estimate of the coupling probability . ) in particular , this is the case in the presence of a first - order phase transition when @xmath54 is essentially supported on disjoint sets @xmath106 , @xmath107 , that are typical for the @xmath108 coexisting phases . in this case , the sets @xmath109 and @xmath110 are separated by tight bottlenecks of the csw - algorithm .
in fact , over a fairly long initial period the csw - algorithm will converge to the conditional probability @xmath111 , with @xmath112 or @xmath113 depending on the initial condition , and @xmath54 is reached only after a time that is far exceeding any reasonable observation period . in this way , one can detect a first order phase transition by comparing the csw - algorithm for different initial conditions .
we will discuss this point in more detail in subsection [ sec : absorption ] .
we conclude this section comparing the algorithm described above with the related algorithm invented in @xcite .
[ rem : cm ] instead of the systematic scan through all types in step csw 1 above , one could also use a random scan by resampling only the positions of a random ( or , by type symmetry , a fixed ) type .
contracting our step csw 3 with the successive step cws 1 ( for a single @xmath19 ) one then arrives at the following algorithm proposed in @xcite :    starting from any initial graph @xmath114 , iterate the following two steps :    1 .   each cluster @xmath62 of @xmath63 , independently of all others ,
is deleted with probability @xmath115 and retained with probability @xmath116 .
let @xmath117 be the remaining graph .
2 .   choose a sample @xmath118 from @xmath119 and , independently for each pair @xmath56 in @xmath118 , draw an edge from @xmath66 to @xmath84 with probability @xmath86 .
let @xmath120 be the resulting set of edges , and consider the graph @xmath121 .
while this version has the advantage of remaining completely in the random - cluster picture ( and thus working also for non - integer @xmath0 ) , a priori it is not evident whether it is more efficient or not .
clearly , @xmath0 sweeps of the random - scan version require the same numerical effort as one sweep of the systematic - scan version . however , the former has higher correlations even after @xmath0 sweeps since the waiting time until _ all _ clusters are resampled ( the maximum of the geometric waiting times for replacement of a single cluster ) has expectation larger than @xmath0 , and thus does not seem to converge at a geometric rate not depending on the number of clusters .
we performed a brief numerical comparison of the efficiencies and behavior of the above two algorithms , and these support the above picture : both algorithms lead to similar behavior but the systematic scan is slightly more efficient than the random scan .
in this subsection we present a rigorous result showing a common feature of _ all _ clusters at _ any _ activity when @xmath0 becomes large , in arbitrary dimensions .
we recall first what happens in the planar lattice potts model ; see @xcite . for large @xmath0
it is known that , with probability one , the plaquettes ( @xmath122 squares ) on which the configuration shows one particular of several typical patterns form an infinite cluster . in the ordered phase with dominating spin value @xmath19 the pattern corresponds to the local ground state in which spins take the same value @xmath19 , while in the disordered phase the pattern corresponds to a local ceiling state in which all nearest neighbor spins differ . configurations which belong to neither category fail to get weight in the thermodynamic limit . in the continuum potts system
we expect a similar characterization in terms of percolation : an ordered phase with dominating type @xmath19 should be characterized by percolation of spins of value @xmath19 , while the disordered phase by percolation of vacancies
. moreover , it should be possible to derive these properties from certain typical local patterns characteristic of the ordered or disordered case .
corollary [ cor : scenarios ] below will show which kind of local patterns can occur for any @xmath5 and any phase when @xmath0 is large .    in the following we confine ourselves to the widom
rowlinson case @xmath35 .
( we believe that similar estimates should hold also for @xmath123 , but this would need extra effort . ) consider a configuration @xmath124 in a box @xmath125 .
since we are in the widom - rowlinson case , the associated set of edges in the random cluster model is deterministic , viz.@xmath126 .
let @xmath127 be a cluster of the graph @xmath128 .
we write @xmath129 , and @xmath130 for the available free space of @xmath62 .
we consider the probability @xmath131 in the above , @xmath132 is the number of particles of @xmath62 , @xmath133 is the distribution of a configuration of @xmath134 particles thrown independently and uniformly into @xmath135 ( where @xmath136 is the lebesgue measure of @xmath137 ) , and @xmath138 is the number of clusters of @xmath139 .
we call @xmath140 _ dissociation probability _ , for it measures how big the chance is to split @xmath62 into two disconnected parts by a random resampling of its points in the room available after taking @xmath62 away
. in particular , a small dissociation probability makes it unlikely for @xmath62 to admit a pivotal point which can not be removed without splitting @xmath62 into disconnected parts , and therefore expresses some kind of robustness of @xmath62 .
the following result states that , for large @xmath0 , all clusters are robust in this sense , and this is a property uniform in @xmath5 .
[ prop : dissoc_prob ] let @xmath35 and @xmath141 be the maximal number of clusters in @xmath14 .
then for all @xmath51 , @xmath142 and @xmath28 we have @xmath143    note that @xmath144 is of the order @xmath145 when @xmath14 is a square .
therefore , this estimate can not be applied directly to the infinite volume limit .
the main point of the bound is that it is uniform in the activity @xmath5 , and thus applies to all possible finite - volume `` phases '' for sufficiently high values of @xmath0 .
we have not tried to optimize the constant in the proposition , and @xmath146 is most likely very far from being optimal .
postponing the proof for a moment , let us first dicuss the consequences of this result .
intuitively , a weak dissociation tendency of a cluster @xmath62 means that either @xmath62 is a singleton ( in which case it can not dissociate ) , or the available free space @xmath147 is small compared to the number of particles .
one instance of the latter case is captured by the following definition : for any given @xmath148 , let a cluster @xmath62 in a configuration @xmath16 be called _ @xmath149-confined _ if @xmath150 and @xmath151 admits no two borel subsets @xmath152 and @xmath153 such that they are at least a unit distance apart and each contains a fraction @xmath154 of the total free volume , i.e. , such that @xmath155 and @xmath156 .
of course , this condition means that @xmath151 must be small , in that it either has diameter at most one or consists of a solid core exceeding the diameter @xmath33 only by some tiny filaments ( possibly scattered all through @xmath14 ) .
[ cor : scenarios ] let @xmath35 , @xmath148 , a large number @xmath157 , and @xmath158 be given .
then there exists some @xmath159 such that , for all @xmath160 and @xmath161 , @xmath162 where @xmath163 and @xmath164    evidently , the event @xmath165 describes a scenario characteristic for the disordered phase : for very small @xmath5 , all clusters will typically be singletons , and the model is similar to the hard - core gas of balls of unit diameter . if @xmath5 increases , the singletons ( considered as balls ) will become more and more densely packed . at the close - packing density of balls the color entropy can not be increased any more , and the increasing particle density will force the system to build up confined clusters of two or more overlapping balls . but all clusters are still separated by channels of vacancies . at the threshold @xmath6 ,
color entropy breaks down in favor of positional entropy , which means that the system will form a large cluster @xmath62 of size @xmath166 , where particles have more positional `` degrees of freedom '' .
it is then plausible that @xmath147 fills a macroscopic part of @xmath14 and all other clusters are confined . since the color is constant on @xmath62 , we could conclude that a fixed spin value @xmath19 is dominating with overwhelming probability .
so , with a proper choice of @xmath167 , the @xmath168 scenario should be typical for the ordered phases above @xmath6 .
we now turn to the proofs of proposition [ prop : dissoc_prob ] and corollary [ cor : scenarios ] .
we start by noting a symmetry property of the lebesgue - poisson measure @xmath30 which readily follows from its definition : for any measurable function @xmath169 , the expression @xmath170 is invariant under the exchange of the first two arguments of @xmath171 .
now , @xmath172 since @xmath173 under the circumstances described by the indicator functions .
next we use the symmetry property of expressions of the form , together with the fact that @xmath174 depends only on @xmath175 .
the last integral then becomes @xmath176 finally , we estimate away the last probability in the last integrand simply by 1 and note that the condition @xmath177 means that @xmath178 is disconnected from @xmath175 and , therefore , consists of a union of clusters of @xmath16 .
since there are at most @xmath179 such unions of clusters , the last expression is not larger than @xmath180 , and the result follows .
let @xmath181 and @xmath182 be so large that @xmath183 . by proposition [ prop : dissoc_prob ]
, it will be sufficient to show that @xmath184 whenever @xmath185 and @xmath62 is not @xmath149-confined .
however , in this case there exist two borel subsets @xmath152 and @xmath153 such that @xmath155 and @xmath186 for @xmath187 .
so , a resampling of the points of @xmath62 within @xmath151 will certainly produce at least two clusters whenever all new points fall within @xmath188 , and each of the sets @xmath152 and @xmath153 gets at least one of them . hence
@xmath189   \ge \d,\ ] ] and the proof is complete .
we now take up the discussion begun after proposition [ prop : ergodicity ] on the behavior of the csw - algorithm in the presence of first - order phase transitions .
we will argue that a first - order phase transition is characterized by the appearance of two different sets which are nearly absorbing for the csw - algorithm , so that its behavior over a reasonable observation period strongly depends on the initial condition .
the occurrence of such a dependence on the initial condition is therefore an indication of a first order phase transition .
our reasoning consists of three parts : first we will ask how a first order transition will manifest itself in finite volume , then we will study the influence of a quasi - absorbing set on the medium - term behavior of the csw - algorithm , and finally we explain why a jump of the particle density should imply a bottleneck in the csw - algorithm .    \1 .
how can a first - order phase transition be observed in finite volume ? by definition , a first order transition is identified by a discontinuity of the first derivative of the infinite volume pressure . in our case , with @xmath5 as parameter , this corresponds to a discontinuity of the particle density at the transition point @xmath6 .
it is conjectured that for the continuum potts model with sufficiently large @xmath0 , the percolation threshold @xmath6 should drive such a first order transition .
in addition , at @xmath6 one expects a coexistence of disordered and ordered phases , in that there exist two mutually singular type - invariant gibbs measures , @xmath190 and @xmath191 , which can be obtained as limits of the unique type - invariant measures for @xmath192 resp .
@xmath193 , and are the only extremal elements of the set of type - invariant gibbs measures .
in particular , the average particle density of @xmath190 should be different from that of @xmath191 .
since the measure @xmath194 is also type - invariant , its infinite volume limit would then be a ( presumably non - trivial ) convex combination of these measures .
there are then two disjoint sets of configurations @xmath165 and @xmath168 , approaching the disjoint supports of @xmath190 and @xmath191 in the infinite volume limit in the sense that @xmath195 as @xmath196 , while separately each set has a probability strictly bounded away from zero , and the conditional measures @xmath197 have average densities which stay a fixed value apart from each other .
since in both cases the variance of the density tends to zero in the infinite volume limit , we can also assume the sets to be chosen so that the density distributions are are almost mutually singular .
what is the behavior of a markov chain admitting a unique invariant measure @xmath198 almost concentrated on two disjoint sets @xmath199 and @xmath200 such that the conditional measures @xmath201 can be distinguished by an observable @xmath70 ?
it is then plausible to expect that the sets @xmath106 are nearly absorbing , in that the markov chain stays within these sets with probability close to 1 .
the following remark explores the medium - term behavior of @xmath70 for such a markov chain .
[ rem : first_order ] let @xmath202 be a markov chain with a polish state space @xmath41 and stationary distribution @xmath198 , @xmath203 a measurable subset of @xmath41 with @xmath204 , @xmath205 the associated conditional distribution and @xmath206 the induced markov chain on @xmath203 with invariant distribution @xmath207 , and suppose @xmath206 is uniformly ergodic .
also , let @xmath208 be any measurable observable ( not constant on @xmath203 ) and @xmath158 . by the large deviation principle for markov chains there exists then some @xmath142 such that @xmath209 for all @xmath210 ; see theorems 6.3.8 and 2.3.6 of @xcite .
finally , suppose that @xmath203 is nearly absorbing for @xmath202 , in that @xmath211 where @xmath149 is so close to @xmath33 that @xmath212 for some prescribed error probability @xmath213 .
it then follows that , for large but not too large @xmath134 , the time average of @xmath70 along the first @xmath134 steps of the original markov chain @xmath202 is close to the conditional expectation @xmath214 , with probability close to @xmath33 .
namely , @xmath215 indeed , @xmath202 coincides with @xmath206 up to the first time @xmath34 such that @xmath202 leaves @xmath203 , and @xmath34 is geometrically distributed with parameter @xmath216 . splitting the event in question into two parts according to whether @xmath217 or not we therefore obtain the upper bound @xmath218 , and the result follows .    in other words , if a mcmc algorithm has a very small probability of leaving a set @xmath203 , it typically stays for the whole observation period within @xmath203 and thus , during this period , coincides with the induced markov chain on @xmath203 which converges to @xmath207 . in the case under consideration
, it turns out that the mixing properties of the induced markov chains are good enough for this scheme to work for both a set @xmath219 of ordered configurations , and a set @xmath220 of disordered configurations .
we can not yet give a proof for the existence of such absorbing sets for the values of @xmath0 we inspected here , but we believe they have a characterization similar to what was given for the high-@xmath0 limit in corollary [ cor : scenarios ] ( whence we have chosen the same notation ) .
in fact , the simulations described below support the existence of such absorbing sets and make clear that a first - order transition of the continuum potts model does indeed manifest itself by a pronounced `` bottleneck '' of the csw - algorithm between two different quasi - absorbing sets .
finally we ask : are there any indications that the csw - algorithm does indeed have a bottleneck between two different quasi - absorbing sets ?
we will argue that , for any given @xmath221 , a jump greater than @xmath222 in the particle density in one sweep of the csw - algorithm has probability tending to zero in the infinite volume limit ( apart from the very first sweeps ) .
therefore , if the sets @xmath223 and @xmath224 are defined in a way allowing a distinction by different particle densities then , near a first order transition point and for large enough volumes , these sets should be nearly absorbing , and passages from one to the other should create a bottleneck after a large enough number of sweeps , as this would require to pass through a gap in the density distribution of @xmath194 .
the density of a configuration can only be changed in step csw 1 .
suppose that the input configuration is @xmath225 .
we remove all particles of type @xmath19 , and consider the available free volume , denoted by @xmath226 as in sec .
[ sec : highq ] .
for the widom  rowlinson model , the new particles of type @xmath19 are distributed exactly according to a poisson measure with activity @xmath5 in this volume . since the density distribution given by the poisson measure on a set with lebesgue measure
@xmath227 has expectation value @xmath5 and variance @xmath228 , the new set has a density @xmath5 with fluctuations of the order of @xmath229 . if @xmath230 , these changes to the total particle density are negligible , and if @xmath231 , then the change in the total particle density is sharply concentrated to @xmath232 .
when @xmath123 , particles can also be added to the complement of @xmath226 , but even then the probability is significant only where the old particles are not too dense , that is , typically only near the boundary of the set @xmath226 .
if this is not the first sweep , then @xmath21 was obtained by the same procedure and should consist of regions which either are small containing not too many particles , or have particle density close to @xmath5 ; see also the discussion in sec .
[ sec : highq ] for the high-@xmath0 limit .
then the above argument indicates that typically the particle density should fluctuate like a poisson density , that is @xmath233 , in one sweep .
our numerical results , to be discussed in the next section , agree with this scaling relation , apart from second order phase transition points .
in this section we present our results from applying the csw algorithm to the _ two - dimensional _ potts model .
the main numerical hurdle to overcome in the simulation of the algorithm is the large number of particles in the kind of volumes we need in order to get reliable estimates about the properties of the infinite volume phases . here
the bottleneck is not the memory required to store the configurations , but rather the time required to find those `` old '' particles which lie within the interaction radius from a given `` new '' particle , as well as the time needed for dividing the particles into clusters according to a given edge configuration .
the second part , the forming of clusters for a given configuration of particles and edges , can be done very efficiently by using the algorithm described in @xcite .
we used the tree - based union / find algorithm given in section ii b.  of @xcite , while simultaneously keeping track of the size and of the `` corners '' of the clusters ( see section [ sec : observables ] for the precise definition ) .    to overcome the large volume problem in the first part of the algorithm
, we used `` hashing '' of the box into smaller cells , altogether @xmath234 of them .
the number of cells in one dimension , @xmath235 , was chosen so that the average number of particles in the cell , as determined by the poisson process with activity @xmath5 , would be about @xmath236 .
for each cell , we created @xmath0 directed lists , one for each possible type .
the list number @xmath19 contained pointers to all those particles which had the type @xmath19 and which were within the interaction radius ( here the unit distance ) from the cell .
this information was used to substantially reduce the time needed both in creation of the thinned poisson configuration , and in computation of the open bonds : by construction , if we add a particle of type @xmath19 anywhere in the cell , then it can interact only with particles in one of the lists of the cell with @xmath237 .
the use of @xmath0 separate lists allowed for easy removal of the particles with a certain type which was needed in the first part of the algorithm .
all simulations were performed using square boxes of linear size @xmath238 , i.e. , @xmath239 ^ 2 $ ] , with periodic boundary conditions .
we employed three different initial conditions : a poisson sample with activity @xmath5 , either assigning all particles the type @xmath33 , or choosing the types randomly , and a `` disordered crystal '' where the particles lie in a certain dense square lattice with alternating types .
the initial conditions with a uniformly colored poisson sample are called here `` ordered '' . the other two alternatives  randomly colored poisson and the disordered crystal  led to the same behavior ( i.e. , to measurements within error bars of each other ) in all those cases where we tried both .
therefore , we call them collectively `` disordered '' initial conditions in the following .      for measurement of the properties of the infinite volume gibbs states , we employed the numerical csw - update algorithm with several values of the box size @xmath238 to an initial configuration @xmath240 .
after a preset number of steps , @xmath241 ( called `` burn - in '' or equilibration period ) , we measured the value of an observable @xmath242 for the following consecutive @xmath243 steps , and obtained a sequence of samples @xmath244 for @xmath245 .
the values @xmath246 and @xmath247 were assumed to be chosen so large that the average would well approximate the corresponding expectation value , @xmath248 finding a good choice for @xmath246 and @xmath247 was not straightforward .
it was particularly difficult near the phase transition points where we found out that , even for this cluster algorithm , the equilibration and decorrelation times for relevant observables can be very large .
we chose , quite arbitrarily , @xmath249 and @xmath250 as a first guess , and increased these values when necessary ; when quoting the results we will use the short - hand phrase `` using @xmath251 sweeps '' to give the actual values used in computation of the results .    to estimate the error arising from the finiteness of @xmath247 , we computed the standard deviation from new samples obtained by dividing the data into @xmath236 blocks : the block averages are less correlated than two consecutive samples , and as long as @xmath252 this should yield a fairly reliable estimate of the error .
explicitly , the `` errors '' given later were obtained by defining , for @xmath253 and @xmath254 , @xmath255 then computing the sample variance @xmath256    = \frac{1}{9 }   \sum_{k=1}^{10 } \bigl(\bar f_k    - \textstyle \frac{1}{10 } \sum\limits_{i=1}^{10 } \bar f_i\bigr)^2\ ] ] of @xmath257 , and estimating the standard deviation of the average of @xmath258 by @xmath259 .
some of the decorrelation times for large boxes were indeed very long ( see , for instance , figure [ fig : swq4 ] ) and these more elaborate methods were required to get a sensible error estimate .    for any given colored cluster configuration @xmath67 we considered the following four observables @xmath260 , @xmath261 , @xmath262 and @xmath263 :    _ 1 .
particle density _
@xmath264 where @xmath265 is the total number of particles .
slope estimator @xmath261 .
_ since @xmath266 the scaled sample variance of @xmath260 , @xmath267\ ] ] estimates the derivative of @xmath268 with respect to @xmath5 .
this is not an observable in the previous sense , so we computed its error estimate by using as samples the 10 sample variances computed from the 10 sample blocks of @xmath260 .
note also that if @xmath261 remains bounded when @xmath269 , then the corresponding standard deviation of density in one csw - step is @xmath270 near stationarity .
largest cluster size @xmath262 .
_ this observable measures the ratio of particles in the largest cluster : @xmath271 where the maximum is taken over all clusters @xmath62 of @xmath39 .
_ 4 . percolation radius @xmath263 .
_ this quantity measures the spread - out of the clusters from a given @xmath238-independent set @xmath272 in the middle of @xmath14 . as reference set we used @xmath273 that is , a central @xmath274 square with rounded corners . for @xmath187 ,
let @xmath275 and @xmath276 denote the minimum and maximum of the coordinates of clusters with particles in @xmath272 , i.e. , @xmath277 where @xmath62 runs through the set of all clusters of @xmath63 .
our definition for the percolation radius then reads @xmath278 ( this particular choice is adapted to the widom  rowlinson case , @xmath35 , where the most natural percolating objects are the discs of radius 1/2 , as explained in sec .
[ sec : rcrep ] .
for convenience , we retained this definition also in the case of positive temperatures where it can appear to be unnecessarily complicated . ) for all practical purposes , it is safe to think of @xmath263 as the maximal distance the clusters of @xmath63 percolate away from the central @xmath274 square .    after determining the critical values of @xmath5
, we also repeated some of the simulations near these values in order to find out how the particles are distributed between clusters of different size . to this end , we built histograms for cluster sizes by using the observables @xmath279 where @xmath280 denotes that cluster of @xmath63 which contains the particle @xmath66 , and the second sum goes over all clusters of @xmath63 .
they describe the portion of the particles in clusters with size ( relative to @xmath134 ) in the interval @xmath135 . here
the intervals were chosen by dividing @xmath281 $ ] into @xmath282 pieces , i.e. , using @xmath283 , for @xmath284 , and @xmath285 $ ] .
we also measured the average ratio of particles in very small clusters , with sizes from @xmath33 to @xmath282 .
for the computation of the critical activity for a fixed temperature @xmath34 we started from a box with side length @xmath286 and computed the above observables for several values of @xmath5 by using an equidistant grid in a suitable range , always for _ both _ disordered and ordered initial conditions .
this allowed an inspection of the effect of initial conditions and , apart from a neighborhood of a first order transition , these values always agreed within the computed error bars .
it was expected that some percolation property could be an order parameter for the transition , and it turned out that both @xmath263 and @xmath262 had a pronounced change at the transition . using the values measured for @xmath260 , @xmath261 , @xmath262 and @xmath263
we could locate the critical value @xmath6 approximately .
the simulations were then repeated in a neighborhood of this value on a finer grid , but with twice the length @xmath238 .
this was repeated until sufficient accuracy was achieved , typically at @xmath287 , although we had to go up to box sizes @xmath288 for @xmath10 and @xmath289 .
figure [ fig : q10rho ] shows the results of such an iteration for the density in the case @xmath290 , @xmath35 .      as a function of @xmath5 for @xmath290 and @xmath35 using five different box sizes and @xmath291 sweeps , all with both ordered ( black ) and disordered ( grey ) initial conditions .
only the equilibrated results have been shown , see the text for explanation.,title="fig:",scaledwidth=90.0% ]    the order of the transition was determined from the dependence of the observables on using either ordered or disordered initial conditions . if the different initial conditions led to different values of density , the transition was determined to be of first order .
our results also fully support the discussion made in section [ sec : absorption ] which allows us to identify the two different results as properties of the different coexisting phases .
figures [ fig : q10rho ] and the @xmath289 part of [ fig : equilibration ] present typical examples of the behavior in these instances : both initial conditions lead to density fluctuations @xmath270 , but the average values are separated by a constant @xmath292 .
( this is true only for large enough @xmath238 . for very small
@xmath238 , there is a significant probability to jump from one density region to another , and then the result is some average of the values for each phase , and the standard deviation is of the order of the gap between these values . ) in addition , the observed values are right - continuous for the ordered initial conditions , and left - continuous for the disordered ones .    in case the values agreed , we next looked at the behavior of @xmath261 : since its maximum was then always found to diverge as some power of @xmath238 in a neighborhood of the percolation threshold , we call these second order transitions . in figure
[ fig : equilibration ] we have plotted the evolution of the density under our algorithm for the values in the borderline cases : the largest @xmath0 for which the transition was found to be of second order , @xmath10 , and the smallest @xmath0 for which it was of first order , @xmath289 .      under the algorithm for @xmath10 ( the left figure ) and @xmath289 ( the right figure ) , and for two different initial conditions as described in the text : ordered ( the black line ) and disordered ( the grey line ) . in all of these runs , @xmath35 , @xmath288 , and @xmath293 ( @xmath294 for @xmath10 and @xmath295 for @xmath289 ) .
@xmath296 denotes the number of `` sweeps '' performed , and the dotted line represents the chosen equilibration cutoff , @xmath246.,title="fig : " ]    in some cases , especially when using the `` wrong '' initial conditions near the borders of a first order transition region , the equilibration times turned out to be much longer than the chosen @xmath246
see figure  [ fig : q10therm ] for a typical instance .
similar problems , combined with very long decorrelation times , plagued the @xmath10 simulations in large boxes as well ; note , for instance , that @xmath297 is clearly insufficient for the left part in figure  [ fig : equilibration ] .
however , since typically only one of the initial conditions suffered from these long equilibration times , we decided , instead of redoing the simulations with very large @xmath246 , to throw away the non - equilibrated value and use only the equilibrated one .
this explains some of the apparently `` missing points '' in figure  [ fig : q10rho ] .
nevertheless , we _
always _ kept at least one result for each @xmath5 , redoing the simulations with larger @xmath246 when necessary .      for @xmath290 , @xmath35 , and @xmath298 , using @xmath287 and ordered initial conditions .
@xmath296 denotes the number of sweeps performed , and the dotted line the preset equilibration cutoff.,title="fig:",scaledwidth=60.0% ]    .estimates for the critical activity @xmath299 and the order of the transition in the @xmath269 limit for several @xmath0 and at zero and one non - zero temperature .
the error estimates are fairly conservative , see the text for how they were obtained from the simulations . [ cols=">,>,<,^,>,<,^ " , ]     the results from this analysis are given in table [ t : criticalz ] .
for estimating finite - size effects , i.e. , the difference of critical values from the @xmath269 limit , we used certain monotonicity properties observed while doing the simulations . for second order transitions , the observable @xmath261 exhibits a divergence near the transition points , and the value quoted is the position of the maximum of the peak for the largest box size used .
as can be seen also in figure [ fig : q3drho ] , this appears to increase monotonously with @xmath238 , and therefore it can reasonably be taken as a lower bound for the limiting value .
the error given , @xmath300 , is a value such that for @xmath301 the measurements of @xmath261 for the two largest boxes agree with each other .
again , as seen in figure [ fig : q3drho ] , this is quite robust a value , fairly independent of @xmath238 , and would in these cases be better understood as an upper bound for the error . for first order transitions , we used the property that the `` coexistence window '' between the disordered and ordered phase goes to zero as @xmath269 , apparently monotonously . in these cases ,
the error is given by the range of values in which both initial conditions were equilibrated but yielded differing results , plus one grid spacing .
for instance , in the table we have @xmath302 for @xmath290 , @xmath35 , which was obtained from the single coexistence value shown in figure [ fig : q10rho ] .      as the function of @xmath5 for four different box sizes , computed for @xmath303 and @xmath35 using @xmath304 sweeps .
the value shown is an average of the results with ordered and disordered initial conditions .
the shaded regions depict the results given in @xcite for the critical @xmath5 with @xmath305 ( left region ) and with @xmath306 ( right region).,title="fig:",scaledwidth=80.0% ]
the widom  rowlinson and continuum potts models have already been studied numerically before in @xcite and @xcite .
these simulations used the so - called `` invaded cluster '' ( ic ) algorithm introduced in @xcite for studying the lattice potts models near criticality .
this algorithm is similar to the swendsen
wang type of algorithms presented here .
the main difference is that instead of generating samples for the finite volume gibbs measure directly , a similar updating algorithm with a suitably chosen `` stopping rule '' is used for generating samples for a measure which differs from any of the finite volume gibbs measures , but which is claimed to approach the correct gibbs measure in the infinite volume limit .
the main advantage of the ic algorithm is that an advance scanning of the parameter space for finding the transition values is not necessary , as the stopping rule is assumed to be chosen so as to force the system to be at the transition point in the infinite volume limit .
two stopping rules are used in @xcite to study the continuum models : the percolation rule for @xmath307 when the transition was expected to be of second order , and the fixed density rule for @xmath308 to study whether the transition is of the first order .
the main disadvantage of the ic algorithm is that the above mentioned convergence to the correct limit measure has not been proved so far and , in any case , it is quite difficult to control the finite size effects .    in figure
[ fig : q3drho ] , we have compared the results for the critical activity @xmath6 for @xmath303 and @xmath35 from the present algorithm to those obtained using the percolating ic algorithm in @xcite . the finite size effects appear to be more prominent in the percolating ic algorithm : by figure [ fig : q3drho ] increasing the linear size fourfold from @xmath306 to @xmath305 does not appear even to halve the systematic error to the @xmath269 value which we estimated ( using lattice sizes up to @xmath309 ) from the position of the peak in @xmath261 .    for @xmath2 , @xmath35 , we found for the limiting value @xmath310 , while in @xcite @xmath311 for @xmath305 , and @xmath312 for @xmath306 were measured .
the finite size effects seem to be weaker in this case . in @xcite
, simulations were performed also for a few non - zero temperatures .
unfortunately , there is only one instance in which we can directly compare our results with theirs : for @xmath313 , @xmath2 we estimated @xmath314 while in @xcite for @xmath315 with the same parameter values @xmath316 is given . due to coarseness of our result
, we can not really compare the finite size effects in this case .
let us offer a possible explanation for the observed differences between the results from these two methods .
since percolation ( i.e. , the existence of a cluster spanning the whole of @xmath14 ) was used as the stopping condition in the above quoted results , every sample configuration contains a percolating cluster .
even if we assume that samples approximating the infinite volume measure at the percolation threshold are generated by the ic - algorithm , this sampling method introduces some bias into the measurements .
actually , comparing the ic results with ours , it appears that the ic - method overestimates the critical activity @xmath6 .
this can be understood by observing that , in finite volume , the probability of having a percolating cluster is a continuous function of @xmath5 ascending from @xmath317 to @xmath33 around @xmath6 , and thus is certainly not close to @xmath33 at @xmath6 but only when @xmath5 is sufficiently larger than @xmath6 .    for first order transitions
, we would expect exactly the opposite to happen : the percolating ic - algorithm should underestimate @xmath6 .
indeed , since this algorithm produces only samples with a percolating cluster , the ordered phase gains an advantage over the disordered phase whenever there is a chance for it to occur .
but , in finite volume , the ordered and disordered phases can coexist throughout a whole range of parameter values @xmath5 ( rather than only _ at _ @xmath6 , as in infinite volume ) .
the threshold detected by the ic - algorithm therefore identifies only the lower end of the coexistence interval .
unfortunately , we can not test this hypothesis , as the fixed - density stopping rule , and not the percolation one , was used in @xcite for obtaining the critical activity for those @xmath0 exhibiting first order transitions .
apart from these differences , our results confirm those found in @xcite and @xcite .
for both the widom  rowlinson model ( @xmath35 ) and the potts model ( at least with this particular non - zero temperature ) we found only a single phase transition point , and the onset of percolation is an order parameter for this transition . as in these references
, we also found that the transition is of second order for @xmath318 , and of first order for @xmath9 .
apart from localizing the critical activity @xmath6 and clarifying the nature of the transition , our simulation measurements also provide some insight into the structure of the pure phases .
let us start by considering figure [ fig : swq5 ] which shows the evolution of our observables @xmath260 ( density ) , @xmath262 ( largest cluster size ) and @xmath263 ( percolation distance ) for @xmath289 during the simulation steps for two initial conditions : ordered ( left - hand side ) and disordered ( right - hand side ) .
it is clear that @xmath319 and @xmath262 display more or less stationary fluctuations around some value that depends on the initial condition .
this indicates the stability of the ordered and disordered phases over the observation period and allows to infer that these phases coexist ; recall the discussion in section [ sec : absorption ] .
it also shows that the ordered phases have a higher particle density than the disordered phase , which means that the particle density in infinite volume should have a jump at @xmath6 .
likewise , the proportion of particles in the largest cluster is nearly @xmath33 in the ordered case and nearly @xmath317 in the disordered case , from which we conclude that the typical configurations of the ordered phases contain a macroscopic cluster , while those of the disordered phase do not .
a glance at the evolution of @xmath263 reveals that , in the ordered case , the macroscopic cluster typically hits the central @xmath274 square .
on the other hand , in the disordered case we see many `` spikes '' , telling that it can quite well happen that one can walk a long distance from the central @xmath274 square along the random graph , but the corresponding clusters are quite `` fragile '' and filamented , surviving only for a short time .
all these effects become more pronounced when @xmath0 gets larger , as can be seen from figure [ fig : swq10 ] for the case @xmath290 .     , @xmath262 , and @xmath263 , respectively ( see the text for precise definitions ) .
ordered initial conditions were used in the left case , disordered in the right , while otherwise in both cases @xmath289 , @xmath35 , @xmath320 , and @xmath288.,title="fig : " ]     , but for the case @xmath290 , @xmath35 , @xmath321 , and @xmath287.,title="fig : " ]    by way of contrast , figures [ fig : swq2 ] and [ fig : swq4 ] show the corresponding structure in cases @xmath2 and @xmath10 .
it is obvious that essentially no difference can be found between the ordered and disordered initial conditions , and that the criticality of @xmath6 manifests itself only by very large fluctuations .
we thus conclude that the phase transition is of second order .
in fact , it also becomes clear that @xmath10 is a boundary case : the portion of particles in the largest cluster is typically quite large , and so is the percolation distance .
this gives the hint that the onset of percolation at @xmath6 is quite rapid , and that the underlying value of @xmath5 in figure [ fig : swq4 ] is actually slightly above @xmath6 .     , but for the case @xmath2 , @xmath35 , @xmath322 , and @xmath287.,title="fig : " ]     , but for the case @xmath10 , @xmath35 , @xmath294 , and @xmath288.,title="fig : " ]      of the particles .
on the left , the data were obtained from the runs with @xmath10 depicted in figure [ fig : swq4 ] with the shaded area giving the histograms for the ordered initial condition and the gray line for the disordered .
the right figure shows the corresponding results for the @xmath289 runs given in figure [ fig : swq5 ] .
, title="fig : " ]     . measured from the same runs as the @xmath289 part of figure [ fig : histograms ] , again black corresponding to the ordered initial condition and grey to the disordered one.,title="fig : " ]    figure [ fig : histograms ]
presents the cluster - size distributions in the second - order case @xmath10 and the first - order case @xmath289 , again for ordered and disordered initial conditions . for @xmath10 , there is again almost no influence of the initial conditions , while for @xmath289 there is a dramatic difference , and the different phases are separated by a range of values of cluster size which were not observed in either phase : those corresponding to the case when about half of the particles are in the maximal cluster .
finally , figure [ fig : smallc_q5 ] shows that in both phases the portion of particles in small clusters decays like a power - law of the cluster size ( note the log - log scale in the figure ) .
however , in the ordered phase the decay is clearly faster .
we would like to thank j.  machta for useful discussions and kindly providing us with details about their simulations .
j.  lukkarinen also wishes to acknowledge support from the deutsche forschungsgemeinschaft ( dfg ) project sp  181/19 - 1 .
georgii , `` phase transition and percolation in gibbsian particle models , '' _ statistical physics and spatial statistics , the art of analyzing and modeling spatial structures and pattern formation _ , lecture notes in physics vol .
554 , eds .
, k.  l. mecke , and d.  stoyan , 267 - 294 .
springer , berlin etc . , 2000 .
o.  hggstrm , m.  n.  m. van lieshout , and j.  mller , characterization results and markov chain monte carlo algorithms including exact simulation for some spatial point processes , _ bernoulli _  * 5 * ( 1999 ) , 641658 .
l.  laanait , a.  messager , s.  miracle - sol , j.  ruiz , and s.  shlosman , interfaces in the potts model . i. pirogov - sinai theory of the fortuin - kasteleyn representation , _ comm .
_  * 140 * ( 1991 ) , 8191 .