<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!-- name="generator" content="blosxom/2.0" -->
<!DOCTYPE rss PUBLIC "-//Netscape Communications//DTD RSS 0.91//EN" "http://my.netscape.com/publish/formats/rss-0.91.dtd">

<rss version="0.91">
  <channel>
    <title>Notebooks   </title>
    <link>http://bactra.org/notebooks</link>
    <description>Cosma's Notebooks</description>
    <language>en</language>

  <item>
    <title>&lt;!-- Created by HTMX version 4.0 --&gt;</title>
    <link>http://bactra.org/notebooks/2007/01/29#tsallis</link>
    <description>Tsallis Statistics, Statistical Mechanics for Non-extensive Systems and Long-Range Interactions 

&lt;P&gt;A standard assumption of &lt;a href=&quot;stat-mech.html&quot;&gt;statistical mechanics&lt;/a&gt; 
is that quantities like energy are &quot;extensive&quot; variables, meaning that the 
total energy of the system is proportional to the system size; similarly the 
entropy is also supposed to be extensive.  Generally, at least for the energy, 
this is justified by appealing to the short-range nature of the interactions 
which hold matter together, form chemical bonds, etc.  But suppose one deals 
with long-range interactions, most prominently gravity; one can then find that 
energy is &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; extensive.  This makes the life of the statistical 
mechanic much harder. 

&lt;P&gt;Constantino Tsallis is a physicist who came up with a supposed solution, 
based on the idea of &lt;a href=&quot;max-ent.html&quot;&gt;maximum entropy&lt;/a&gt;.  One popular 
way to derive the (canonical) equilibrium probability distribution in the 
following.  One purports to know the average values of some quantities, such as 
the energy of the system, the number of molecules, the volume it occupies, etc. 
One then searches for the probability distribution which maximizes the entropy, 
subject to the constraint that it give the right average values for your 
supposed givens.  Through the magic of Lagrange multipliers, the 
entropy-maximizing distribution can be shown to have the right, exponential, 
form, and the Lagrange multipliers which go along with your average-value 
constraints turn out to be the &quot;intensive&quot; variables paired with (or &quot;conjugate 
to&quot;) the extensive ones whose means are constrained (energy &lt;=&gt; temperature, 
volume &lt;=&gt; pressure, molecular number &lt;=&gt; chemical potential, etc.).  But, as I 
said, the entropy is an extensive quantity.  What Tsallis proposed is to 
replace the usual (Gibbs) entropy with a new, non-extensive quantity, now 
commonly called the Tsallis entropy, and maximize &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt;, subject to 
constraints.  There is actually a whole infinite family of Tsallis entropies, 
indexed by a real-valued parameter &lt;em&gt;q&lt;/em&gt;, which supposedly quantifies the 
degree of departure from extensivity (you get the usual entropy back again 
when &lt;em&gt;q&lt;/em&gt; = 1).  One can then grind through and show that many of the 
classical results of statistical mechanics can be translated into the new 
setting.  What has really caused this framework to take off, however, is that 
while normal entropy-maximization gives you exponential, Boltzmann 
distributions, Tsallis statistics give you power-law, Pareto distributions, and 
&lt;a href=&quot;power-laws.html&quot;&gt;everyone loves a power-law&lt;/a&gt;.  (Strictly speaking, 
Tsallis distributions are type II generalized Pareto distributions, with 
power-law tails.)  Today you'll find physicists applying Tsallis statistics to 
nearly anything with a heavy right tail. 

&lt;P&gt;I have to say I don't buy this at all.  Leaving to one 
side &lt;a href=&quot;max-ent.html&quot;&gt;my skepticism about the &lt;em&gt;normal&lt;/em&gt; maximum 
entropy story&lt;/a&gt;, at least as it's usually told (e.g. by E. T. Jaynes), there 
are a number of features which make me deeply suspicious of Tsallis statistics. 
&lt;ol&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;It's simply not true that one maximizes the Tsallis entropy subject 
to constraints on the mean energy  
&lt;img align=absmiddle src=&quot;tsallis_1.gif&quot; alt=&quot;$ \langle E \rangle =\sum_{i}{p_i 
E_i} $ &quot;&gt;
.  Rather, to get things to work out, you have to fix the value of a 
&quot;generalized mean&quot; energy,  
&lt;img align=absmiddle src=&quot;tsallis_2.gif&quot; alt=&quot;$ { \langle E \rangle }_{q} = \sum_{i}{p_i^q E_i} 
/ \sum_{i}{p^q_i} $ &quot;&gt;
.  (This can be interpreted as replacing the usual 
average, an expectation take with respect to the actual probability 
distribution, by an expectation taken with respect to a new, &quot;escort&quot; 
probability distribution.)  I have yet to encounter anyone who can explain why 
such generalized averages should be either physically or probabilistically 
natural; the usual answer I get is &quot;OK, yes, it's weird, but it works, doesn't 
it?&quot; 
	&lt;li&gt;There is 
no &lt;a href=&quot;information-theory.html&quot;&gt;information-theoretic&lt;/a&gt; justification 
for the Tsallis entropy, unlike the usual Gibbs entropy.  The Tsallis 
form &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt;, however, a kind of low-order truncation of the R&amp;eacute;nyi 
entropy, which &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; have information-theoretic interest.  (The Tsallis 
form has been independently rediscovered many times in the literature, going 
back to the 1960s, usually starting from the R&amp;eacute;nyi entropy.  A brief 
review of the &quot;labyrinthic history of the entropies&quot; can be found in one of 
Tsallis's 
papers, &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0010150&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0010150&lt;/a&gt;.) 
Maximizing the R&amp;eacute;nyi entropy under mean-value constraints leads to 
different distributions than maximizing the Tsallis entropy. 
	&lt;li&gt;I have pretty severe doubts about the backing story here, about 
long-range interactions leading to a non-extensive form for 
the &lt;em&gt;entropy&lt;/em&gt;, particularly when, in derivations which begin with such a 
story, I often see people blithely factoring the probability that a system is 
in some global state into the product of the probabilities that its components 
are in various states, i.e., assuming independent sub-systems. 
	&lt;li&gt;There are alternative, non-max-ent derivations of the usual 
statistical-mechanical distributions; such derivations do not seem forthcoming 
for Tsallis statistic.  In particular, &lt;a href=&quot;large-deviations.html&quot;&gt;large 
deviations&lt;/a&gt; arguments, which essentially show how to get such distributions 
as emergent, probabilistic consequences of individual-level interactions, do 
not seem to ever lead to Tsallis statistics, &lt;em&gt;even&lt;/em&gt; when one has the 
kind of long-range interactions which, supposedly, Tsallis statistics ought to 
handle. 
	&lt;li&gt;There is no empirical evidence that Tsallis statistics correctly 
gives the microscopic energy distribution for any known system. 
	&lt;li&gt;Zanette and Montemurro have shown that you can get &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; 
distribution you like out of the Tsallis recipe, simply by changing the 
function whose generalized average you take as your given.  The usual power-law 
prescription only holds if you constrain either &lt;em&gt;x&lt;/em&gt; or  
&lt;img align=absmiddle src=&quot;tsallis_3.gif&quot; alt=&quot;$ x^2 $ &quot;&gt;
, 
but one of the more &quot;successful&quot; applications requires constraining the 
generalized mean of  
&lt;img align=absmiddle src=&quot;tsallis_4.gif&quot; alt=&quot;$ x^{2\alpha}/2 - c\mathrm{sgn}{x}({|x|}^{\alpha} - 
{|x|}^{3\alpha}/3) $ &quot;&gt;
, with &lt;em&gt;c&lt;/em&gt; and  
&lt;img align=absmiddle src=&quot;tsallis_5.gif&quot; alt=&quot;$ \alpha $ &quot;&gt;
 as adjustable 
constants!  (In fairness, I should point out that if you're willing to impose 
sufficiently weird constraints, you can generate arbitrary distributions from 
the usual max. ent. procedure, too; this is one of the reasons why I don't put 
much faith in that procedure.) 
	&lt;/ol&gt; 

&lt;P&gt;I think the extraordinary success of what is, in the end, a slightly dodgy 
recipe for generating power-laws illustrates some important aspects, indeed 
unfortunate weaknesses, in the social and intellectual organization of &quot;&lt;a 
href=&quot;complexity.html&quot;&gt;the sciences of complexity&lt;/a&gt;&quot;.  But &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; rant 
will have to wait for my book on &lt;cite&gt;The Genealogy of Complexity&lt;/cite&gt;, 
which, prudently, means waiting until I'm safely tenured. 

&lt;P&gt;I should also discuss the &quot;superstatistics&quot; approach here, which tries to 
generate non-Boltzmann statistics as mixtures of Boltzmann distributions, 
physically justified by appealing to fluctuating intensive variables, such as 
temperature.  I will only remark that the superstatistics approach severes all 
connections between the use of these distributions and non-extensivity and 
long-range interactions; and that results in the statistical literature on 
getting generalized Pareto distributions from mixtures of exponentials go back 
to &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0006-3444%28195204%2939%3A1%2F2%3C168%3ATTIBIA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-4&quot;&gt;1952&lt;/a&gt; 
at least. 

&lt;P&gt;Finally, it has come to my attention that some people are citing this 
notebook as though it had some claim to authority.  Fond though I am of my own 
opinions, this seems to me to be deeply wrong.  The validity of Tsallis 
statistics, as a scientific theory, ought to be settled in the usual way, by 
means of the peer-reviewed scientific literature, subject to all its usual 
conventions and controls.  It's obvious from the foregoing that I have pretty 
strong beliefs in how that debate ought to go, and (this may not be so clear) 
enough faith in the scientific community that I think, in the long run, it will 
go that way, but no one should confuse my opinion with a scientific finding. 
For myself, this page is a way to organize my own thoughts; for everyone else, 
it's either entertainment, or at best an opinionated collection of pointers to 
the genuine discussion. 

&lt;ul&gt;Recommended: 
	&lt;li&gt;Tsallis &amp;amp; co. maintain a pretty comprehensive and 
ever-growing &lt;a href=&quot;http://tsallis.cat.cbpf.br/biblio.htm&quot;&gt;bibliography&lt;/a&gt; 
on Tsallis statistics.  This includes replies to many of the papers I list 
here. 
	&lt;li&gt;Julien Barr&amp;eacute;, Freddy Bouchet, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://perso.ens-lyon.fr/thierry.dauxois/&quot;&gt;Thierry Dauxois&lt;/a&gt; and 
Stefano Ruffo, &quot;Large deviation techniques applied to systems with long-range 
interactions&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0406358&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0406358&lt;/a&gt; = &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10955-005-3768-8&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Journal of Statistics 
Physics&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;119&lt;/strong&gt; (2005): 677--713&lt;/a&gt; [What large deviation 
results for long-range interactions look like] 
	&lt;li&gt;A. G. Bashkirov, &quot;Comment on &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.66.046134&quot;&gt;'Stability of Tsallis 
entropy and instabilities of R&amp;eacute;nyi and normalized Tsallis entropies: A 
basis for q-exponential distributions'&lt;/a&gt;,&quot; &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.72.028101&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physical Review 
E&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;72&lt;/strong&gt; (2005): 028101&lt;/a&gt; [There is also a reply by 
S. Abe, the author of the original article, which, predictably, I find 
unconvincing: &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.72.028102&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physical Review 
E&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;72&lt;/strong&gt; (2005): 028102&lt;/a&gt;.] 
	&lt;li&gt;Christian Beck, &quot;Superstatistics: Recent developments and 
applications&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0502306&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0502306&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Freddy Bouchet and Thierry Dauxois, &quot;Prediction of anomalous 
diffusion and algebraic relaxations for long-range interacting systems, using 
classical statistical mechanics&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.72.045103&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physical Review 
E&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;72&lt;/strong&gt; (2005): 045103&lt;/a&gt; 
= &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0407703&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0407703&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Freddy Bouchet, Thierry Dauxois, Stefano Ruffo, &quot;Controversy about 
the applicability of Tsallis statistics to the HMF 
model&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0605445&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0605445&lt;/a&gt; = 
&lt;cite&gt;Europhysics News&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;37&lt;/strong&gt; (2006): 9--10 
	&lt;li&gt;Alice M. Crawford, Nicolas Mordant, Andy M. Reynolds, Eberhard 
Bodenschatz, &quot;Comment on 'Dynamical Foundations of Nonextensive Statistical 
Mechanics'&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0212080&quot;&gt;physics/0212080&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Thierry Dauxois, &quot;Non-Gaussian distributions under scrutiny&quot;, 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2007/08/N08001&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Journal of 
Statistical Mechanics&lt;/cite&gt; (2007) N08001&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Peter Grassberger, &quot;Temporal scaling at Feigenbaum points and 
non-extensive thermodynamics&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0508110&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0508110&lt;/a&gt; = 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.140601&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physical Review 
Letters&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;95&lt;/strong&gt; (2005): 140601&lt;/a&gt; [I can't resist quoting 
the abstract in full, if only because I enjoy Prof. Grassberger's 
no-quarter-asked-or-given tone: &quot;We show that recent claims for the 
non-stationary behaviour of the logistic map at the Feigenbaum point based on 
non-extensive thermodynamics are either wrong or can be easily deduced from 
well-known properties of the Feigenbaum attractor. In particular, there is no 
generalized Pesin identity for this system, the existing 'proofs' being based 
on misconceptions about basic notions of ergodic theory. In deriving several 
ew scaling laws of the Feigenbaum attractor, thorough use is made of its 
detailed structure, but there is no obvious connection to non-extensive 
thermodynamics.&quot;  One point made here (but passed over in the abstract) is that 
there are nearly as many estimates of the &quot;right&quot; value of the non-extensivity 
parameter &lt;em&gt;q&lt;/em&gt; at the period-doubling accumulation point as there are 
papers on the system.  This tends to reduce one's confidence that any of them 
is a physically meaningful parameter.] 
	&lt;li&gt;H. J. Hilhorst and G. Schehr, &quot;A note on q-Gaussians and 
non-Gaussians in statistical 
mechanics&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2007/06/P06003&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Journal of 
Statistical Mechanics&lt;/cite&gt; (2007) P06003&lt;/a&gt; [Analytical results on the 
limiting distributions of certain sums of correlated random variables, supposed 
to follow &quot;q-Gaussians&quot;, but not actually doing so.  It strikes me as 
extraordinary that no one in this literature, on either side, pays any 
attention to actual results in probability theory about generalizations of the 
central limit theorem; one searches these bibliographies in vain for names like 
L&amp;eacute;vy and Rosenblatt.] 
	&lt;li&gt;Brian R. La Cour and William C. Schieve, &quot;A Comment on the Tsallis 
Maximum Entropy Principle&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0009216&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0009216&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;B. H. Lavenda and J. Dunning-Davies, &quot;Additive Entropies of 
degree-q and the Tsallis 
Entropy&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0310117&quot;&gt;physics/0310117&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Michael Nauenberg, &quot;Critique of &lt;em&gt;q&lt;/em&gt;-entropy for thermal 
statistics&quot;, &lt;cite&gt;Physical Review E&lt;/citE&gt; &lt;strong&gt;67&lt;/strong&gt; (2003): 036114 
[From the abstract: &quot;[I]t is shown here that the joint entropy for systems 
having &lt;em&gt;different&lt;/em&gt; values of &lt;em&gt;q&lt;/em&gt; is not defined in this 
formalism, and consequently fundamental thermodynamic concepts such as 
temperature and heat exchange cannot be considered for such systems.  Moreover, 
for &lt;em&gt;q&lt;/em&gt; &amp;neq; 1 the probability distribution for weakly interacting 
systems does not factor into the product of the probability distribution for 
the separate systems, leading to spurious correlations and other unphysical 
consequences, e.g., nonextensive energy, that have been ignored in various 
applications given in the literature.&quot;  That the probabilities for sub-systems 
do not factor is, I think, especially devastating, because almost all of the 
work on the subject assumes that it &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt;.  See also comment by 
Tsallis, &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/305091&quot;&gt;cond-mat/305091&lt;/a&gt;, 
and reply by Nauenberg, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0305365&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0305365&lt;/a&gt;, which I 
believe to be correct.] 
	&lt;li&gt;Dami&amp;eacute;n H. Zanette and Marcelo A. Montemurro 
		&lt;ul&gt; 
		&lt;li&gt;&quot;A note on non-therrmodynamical applications of 
non-extensive statistics&quot;, 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0305070&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0305070&lt;/a&gt; 
= &lt;cite&gt;Physics Letters A&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;324&lt;/strong&gt; (2004): 383--387 [An 
amusing and quite conclusive assault, culminating in a demonstration that you 
can use the non-extensive formalism to &quot;derive&quot; any probability distribution 
whatsoever.] 
		&lt;li&gt;&quot;Thermal measurement of stationary nonequilibrium systems: 
A test for generalized thermostatistics&quot;, &lt;Cite&gt;Physics Letters 
A&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;316&lt;/strong&gt; (2003): 184--189 = &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0212327&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0212327&lt;/a&gt; [And it 
doesn't even work for for thermodynamic systems.] 
		&lt;/ul&gt; 
	&lt;/ul&gt; 

&lt;ul&gt;Modesty forbids me to recommend: 
	&lt;li&gt;CRS, &quot;Maximum Likelihood Estimation for q-Exponential (Tsallis) 
Distributions&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/math.ST/0701854&quot;&gt;math.ST/0701854&lt;/a&gt; [If you have to 
use these things, you really should estimate their parameters this way, and not 
try to fit curves to the sample distribution.] 
	&lt;/ul&gt; 

&lt;ul&gt;To read: 
	&lt;li&gt;Andrea Antoniazzi, Francesco Califano, Duccio Fanelli, and Stefano 
Ruffo, &quot;Exploring the Thermodynamic Limit of Hamiltonian Models: Convergence to 
the Vlasov Equation&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.150602&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physical Review 
Letters&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;98&lt;/strong&gt; (2007): 150602&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;R. Bachelard, C. Chandre, D. Fanelli, X. Leoncini and S. Ruffo, 
&quot;Abundance of Regular Orbits and Nonequilibrium Phase Transitions in the 
Thermodynamic Limit for Long-Range Systems&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.260603&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physical Review 
Letters&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;101&lt;/strong&gt; (2008): 260603&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Fulvio Baldovin and Enzo Orlandini 
		&lt;ul&gt; 
		&lt;li&gt;&quot;Hamiltonian Dynamics Reveals 
the Existence of Quasistationary States for Long-Range Systems in Contact with 
a 
Reservoir&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.240602&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physical Review 
Letters&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;96&lt;/strong&gt; (2006): 240602&lt;/a&gt; 
= &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0603383&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0603383&lt;/a&gt; [&quot;We 
introduce a Hamiltonian dynamics for the description of long-range interacting 
systems in contact with a thermal bath (i.e., in the canonical ensemble). The 
dynamics confirms statistical mechanics equilibrium predictions for the 
Hamiltonian mean field model and the equilibrium ensemble equivalence. We find 
that long-lasting quasistationary states persist in the presence of the 
interaction with the environment. Our results indicate that quasistationary 
states are indeed reproducible in real physical experiments.&quot;] 
		&lt;li&gt;&quot;Quasi-stationary states in long-range interacting systems 
are incomplete equilibrium 
states&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0603659&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0603659&lt;/a&gt; 
= &lt;a href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.100601&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physical 
Review Letters&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;97&lt;/strong&gt; (2006): 100601&lt;/a&gt; [&quot;Despite the 
presence of an anomalous single-particle velocity distribution, we find that 
ordinary Central Limit Theorem leads to the Boltzmann factor in Gibbs' 
$\Gamma$-space. We identify the non-equilibrium sub-manifold of $\Gamma$-space 
responsible for the anomalous behavior and show that by restricting the 
Boltzmann-Gibbs approach to such sub-manifold we obtain the statistical 
mechanics of the quasi-stationary states.&quot;] 
		&lt;/ul&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Christian Beck, Ezechiel G. D. Cohen and Harry L. Swinney, &quot;From 
time series to superstatistics&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.72.056133&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physical Review 
E&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;72&lt;/strong&gt; (2005): 056133&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Freddy Bouchet, &quot;Stochastic process of equilibrium fluctuations of 
a system with long-range interactions&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.70.036113&quot;&gt;Link&lt;cite&gt;Physical Review 
E&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;70&lt;/strong&gt; (2004): 036113&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;F. Bouchet and J. Barr&amp;eacute;, &quot;Classification of Phase 
Transitions and Ensemble Inequivalence, in Systems with Long Range 
Interactions&quot;, 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10955-004-2059-0&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Journal of 
Statistical Physics&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;118&lt;/strong&gt; (2005): 1073--1105&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Pierre-Henri Chavanis 
		&lt;ul&gt; 
		&lt;li&gt;&quot;Dynamics and thermodynamics of systems with long-range interactions: interpretation of the different functionals&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/0904.2729&quot;&gt;arxiv:0904.2729&lt;/a&gt; 
		&lt;li&gt;&quot;Statistical mechanics of geophysical 
turbulence: application to jovian flows and Jupiter's great red spot&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physd.2004.11.004&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physica 
D&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;200&lt;/strong&gt; (2005): 257--272&lt;/a&gt; [Listed here because this is 
(judging by the abstract) an instance of Chavanis's more general non-Tsallisite 
(non-Tsallisian?) approach to statistical mechanics with long-range 
interactions] 
		&lt;li&gt;&quot;Generalized Fokker-Planck equations and effective 
thermodynamics&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0504716&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0504716&lt;/a&gt; 
= &lt;cite&gt;Physica A&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;340&lt;/strong&gt; (2004): 57 
		&lt;li&gt;&quot;Quasi-stationary states and incomplete violent relaxation 
in systems with long-range interactions&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0509726&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0509726&lt;/a&gt; 
		&lt;li&gt;&quot;Lynden-Bell and Tsallis distributions for the HMF model&quot;, 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0604234&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0604234&lt;/a&gt; 
		&lt;/ul&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Pierre-Henri Chavanis, C. Rosier and C. Sire, &quot;Thermodynamics of 
self-gravitating systems,&quot; &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0107345&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0107345&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Thierry Dauxois, Stefano Ruffo, Ennio Arimondo and Martin Wilkens 
(eds.), &lt;cite&gt;Dynamics and Thermodynamics of Systems With Long Range 
Interactions&lt;/cite&gt; [&lt;a 
href=&quot;http://www2.springeronline.com/sgw/cda/frontpage/0,11855,5-10100-22-2272008-0,00.html&quot;&gt;Blurb&lt;/a&gt;] 
	&lt;li&gt;V. Garcia-Morales, J. Pellicer, &quot;Statistical mechanics and 
thermodynamics of complex 
systems&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/math-ph/0304013&quot;&gt;math-ph/0304013&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Toshiyuki Gotoh, Robert H. Kraichnan, &quot;Turbulence and Tsallis 
Statistics&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/nlin.CD/0305040&quot;&gt;nlin.CD/0305040&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;D. H. E. Gross, &quot;Non-extensive Hamiltonian systems follow 
Boltzmann's principle not Tsallis statistics,&quot; &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0106496&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0106496&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Rudolf Hanel and Stefan Thurner, &quot;On the Derivation of power-law 
distributions within standard statistical mechanics&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0412016&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0412016&lt;/a&gt; = &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2004.11.055&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physica 
A&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;351&lt;/strong&gt; (2005): 260--268&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Petr Jizba and Toshihico Arimitsu, &quot;The world according to R&amp;eacute;nyi: 
Thermodynamics of multifractal systems,&quot; &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0207707&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0207707&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Ramandeep S. Johal, Antoni Planes, and Eduard Vives, &quot;Equivalence 
of nonadditive entropies and nonadditive energies in long range interacting 
systems under macroscopic equilibrium&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0503329&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0503329&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;T. Kodama, H.-T. Elze, C. E. Aguiar, T. Koide, &quot;Dynamical 
Correlations as Origin of Nonextensive Entropy&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0406732&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0406732&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Hiroko Koyama, Tetsuro Konishi, and Stefano Ruffo, &quot;Clusters die 
hard: Time-correlated excitation in the Hamiltonian Mean Field 
model&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/nlin.CD/0606041&quot;&gt;nlin.CD/0606041&lt;/a&gt; 
[&quot;The Hamiltonian Mean Field (HMF) model has a low-energy phase where $N$ 
particles are trapped inside a cluster.  ... each particle can be identified as 
a high-energy particle (HEP) or a low-energy particle (LEP), depending on 
whether its energy is above or below the separatrix energy. We then define the 
trapping ratio as the ratio of the number of LEP to the total number of 
particles and the ``fully-clustered'' and ``excited'' dynamical states as 
having either no HEP or at least one HEP. We analytically compute the 
phase-space average of the trapping ratio by using the Boltzmann-Gibbs stable 
stationary solution of the Vlasov equation associated with the $N \to \infty$ 
limit of the HMF model. The same quantity, obtained numerically as a time 
average, is shown to be in very good agreement with the analytical 
calculation. ...  the distribution of the lifetime of the ``fully-clustered'' 
state obeys a power law. This means that clusters die hard, and that the 
excitation of a particle from the cluster is not a Poisson process and might be 
controlled by some type of collective motion with long memory. Such behavior 
should not be specific of the HMF model and appear also in systems where {\it 
itinerancy} among different ``quasi-stationary'' states has been 
observed. ... &quot;] 
	&lt;li&gt;Bernard H. Lavenda 
		&lt;ul&gt; 
		&lt;li&gt;&quot;Fundamental inconsistencies of 'superstatistics'&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0408485&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0408485&lt;/a&gt; 
		&lt;li&gt;&quot;Information and coding discrimination of 
pseudo-additive entropies (PAE)&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0403591&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0403591&lt;/a&gt; 
		&lt;/ul&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Massimo Marino, &quot;Power-law distributions and equilibrium 
thermodynamics&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0605644&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0605644&lt;/a&gt; [Makes the 
interesting claims that if you want a consistent thermodynamics with power-law 
distributions, then the entropy is uniquely determined to be the R&amp;eacute;nyi 
entropy, not the Tsallis entropy] 
	&lt;li&gt;David Mukamel, &quot;Statistical Mechanics of systems with long range 
interactions&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/0811.3120&quot;&gt;arxiv:0811.3120&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;D. Mukamel, S. Ruffo and N. Schreiber, &quot;Breaking of ergodicity and 
long relaxation times in systems with long-range interactions&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0508604&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0508604&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Jan Naudts, &quot;Parameter estimation in nonextensive thermostatistics&quot;, 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0509796&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0509796&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;T. Padmanabhan 
		&lt;ul&gt; 
		&lt;li&gt;&quot;Statistical Mechanics of gravitating systems in static 
and cosmological backgrounds,&quot; &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0206131&quot;&gt;astro-ph/0206131&lt;/a&gt; 
		&lt;li&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Structure Formation in the Universe&lt;/cite&gt; 
		&lt;/ul&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;A. S. Parvana and T.S. Bir&amp;oacute;, &quot;Extensive R&amp;eacute;nyi 
statistics from non-extensive entropy&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2005.04.036&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physics Letters 
A&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;340&lt;/strong&gt; (2005): 375--387&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Daniel Pfenniger, &quot;Virial statistical description of non-extensive 
hierarchical 
systems&quot;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0605665&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0605665&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;Alessandro Pluchino, Vito Latora and Andrea Rapisarda, &quot;Dynamics 
and Thermodynamics of a model with long-range interactions&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0410213&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0410213&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;S. M. Duarte Queir&amp;oacute;s and C. Tsallis, &quot;Bridging a 
paradigmatic financial model and nonextensive entropy&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1209/epl/i2004-10436-6&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Europhysics 
Letters&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;69&lt;/strong&gt; (2005): 893--899&lt;/a&gt; [Approximation of ARCH 
model using Tsallis entropies.  Thanks to Nick Watkins for bringing this to my 
attention.] 
	&lt;li&gt;M. S. Reis, V. S. Amaral, R. S. Sarthour and I. S. Oliveira, 
&quot;Experimental determination of the non-extensive entropic parameter $q$&quot;, 
&lt;a href=&quot;http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0512208&quot;&gt;cond-mat/0512208&lt;/a&gt; 
	&lt;li&gt;T. M. Rocha Filho, A. Figueiredo, and M. A. Amato, &quot;Entropy of 
Classical Systems with Long-Range 
Interactions&quot;, &lt;a 
href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.190601&quot;&gt;&lt;cite&gt;Physical Review 
Letters&lt;/cite&gt; &lt;strong&gt;95&lt;/strong&gt; (2005): 190601&lt;/a&gt; [From the abstract: &quot;We 
discuss the form of the entropy for classical Hamiltonian systems with 
long-range interaction using the Vlasov equation which describes the dynamics 
of a N particle [as N goes to infinity]. ... We show that the stationary states 
correspond to [extrema] of the Boltzmann-Gibbs entropy, and their stability is 
obtained from the condition that this extremum is a maximum. As a consequence, 
the entropy is a function of an infinite set of Lagrange multipliers that 
depend on the initial condition.&quot;] 
	&lt;/ul&gt; 
</description>
  </item>
  </channel>
</rss>