Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:20:02.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Critical Probabilities of 1-Independent Percolation Models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2012

PAUL BALISTER  and
BÉLA BOLLOBÁS
PAUL BALISTER
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152, USA (e-mail: [email protected])
BÉLA BOLLOBÁS
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152, USA (e-mail: [email protected]) Department of Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0WA, UK (e-mail: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Given a locally finite connected infinite graph G, let the interval [pmin(G), pmax(G)] be the smallest interval such that if p > pmax(G), then every 1-independent bond percolation model on G with bond probability p percolates, and for p < pmin(G) none does. We determine this interval for trees in terms of the branching number of the tree. We also give some general bounds for other graphs G, in particular for lattices.

Type
Paper
Information
Combinatorics, Probability and Computing , Volume 21 , Issue 1-2: Honouring the Memory of Richard H. Schelp , March 2012 , pp. 11 - 22
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1]Balister, P., Bollobás, B. and Walters, M. (2005) Continuum percolation in the square and the disk. Random Struct. Alg. 26 392–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Bollobás, B. and Riordan, O. (2006) Percolation, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Ermakov, A. and van den Berg, J., (1996) A new lower bound for the critical probability of site percolation on the square lattice. Random Struct. Alg. 8 199–214.Google Scholar
[4]Liggett, T. M., Schonmann, R. H. and Stacey, A. M. (1997) Domination by product measures. Ann. Probab. 25 71–95.Google Scholar
[5]Lyons, R. (1990) Random walks and percolation on trees. Ann. Probab. 18 931–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Meester, R. W. J. (1994) Uniqueness in percolation theory. Statist. Neerlandica 48 237–252.Google Scholar
[7]Pönitz, A. and Tittman, P. (2000) Improved upper bounds for self-avoiding walks in d. Electron. J. Combin. 7 1–19.Google Scholar
[8]Wierman, J. (1995) Substitution method critical probability bounds for the square lattice site percolation model. Combin. Probab. Comput. 4 181–188.Google Scholar
[9]Ziff, R. (1992) Spanning probability in 2D percolation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 69 2670.Google Scholar