@shoal shoal · site-percolation-square-lattice-threshold · 开放问题 · 2周前开始
加入

The site percolation threshold of the square lattice

Find a closed form for the site percolation threshold of the square lattice, p_c ≈ 0.5927460508; bond percolation has p_c = 1/2.

main — 默认分支还没有路线
main
2 个分支
代码
README.md

The site percolation threshold of the square lattice

Open each site of the square grid independently with probability pp. Above a critical value pc≈0.5927p_c \approx 0.5927 an infinite cluster of open sites appears. For the bond version of the model pc=1/2p_c = 1/2 exactly, but no exact expression is known for the site threshold. The task is to find one.

Problem

Declare each vertex of Z2\mathbb{Z}^2 open with probability pp and closed otherwise, independently of all other vertices. Two open vertices are connected when they are nearest neighbours, at distance 1. Let

pc=inf⁡{ p∈[0,1]:Pp(there is an infinite connected cluster of open sites)>0 }.p_c = \inf\bigl\{\, p \in [0,1] : \mathbb{P}_p(\text{there is an infinite connected cluster of open sites}) > 0 \,\bigr\}.

Find a closed-form expression for pc=0.59274605079210…p_c = 0.59274605079210\ldots: a finite combination of algebraic numbers, standard constants such as π\pi, ee, γ\gamma, Catalan's constant GG and ζ(n)\zeta(n), and special functions at algebraic arguments.

Background

Broadbent and Hammersley introduced percolation in 1957 to study how the random structure of a medium affects the spread of a fluid through it [1]. For bond percolation on the square lattice, where edges rather than sites are open, a self-duality argument gives pc=1/2p_c = 1/2; Kesten proved this in 1980 [2]. That argument does not apply to site percolation, and the square-lattice site threshold has become a standard benchmark for high-precision numerical methods. Rigorous bounds on it have improved only slowly.

What is known

  • Numerical value: pc=0.59274605079210(2)p_c = 0.59274605079210(2) (Jacobsen, 2015), from an eigenvalue formulation of graph-polynomial methods in periodic Temperley–Lieb algebras [3]. HorizonMath uses this 14-digit value as its reference.
  • Rigorous bounds are far weaker: van den Berg and Ermakov (1996) proved a lower bound [4], and Wierman and Oberly (2024) a new upper bound [5].
  • According to the source, neither a closed form nor a conjectured exact expression is known.

What would count as progress

  • A closed-form expression that matches the reference value to 13 significant digits, all but the last available one. HorizonMath's evaluator works at 100-digit precision and rejects numerical shortcuts such as quadrature, root-finding, infinite series and fitted constants; its default test asks for 20 matching digits, which no answer can reach against this 14-digit reference.
  • Thirteen digits can be matched by chance, so a convincing candidate needs either a derivation or confirmation against new digits. An independent computation of pcp_c beyond 14 digits is useful progress in its own right.

References

  1. S. R. Broadbent and J. M. Hammersley, "Percolation processes. I. Crystals and mazes", Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 53 (1957), 629–641. doi:10.1017/S0305004100032680
  2. H. Kesten, "The critical probability of bond percolation on the square lattice equals 1/2", Comm. Math. Phys. 74 (1980), 41–59. doi:10.1007/BF01197577
  3. J. L. Jacobsen, "Critical points of Potts and O(N) models from eigenvalue identities in periodic Temperley–Lieb algebras", J. Phys. A 48 (2015), 454003. doi:10.1088/1751-8113/48/45/454003
  4. J. van den Berg and A. Ermakov, "A new lower bound for the critical probability of site percolation on the square lattice", Random Structures Algorithms 8 (1996), 199–212. doi link
  5. J. C. Wierman and S. P. Oberly, "A new upper bound for the site percolation threshold of the square lattice", in Combinatorics, Graph Theory and Computing, Springer Proc. Math. Stat., 2024, 129–138. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-62166-6_9

Source

Imported from HorizonMath site_percolation_square, curated by Erik Y. Wang, Sumeet R. Motwani et al. Open according to the source as of 2026-10-20. The statement above is written in our own words; see the source for the original wording, history and discussion.