- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review E

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

One- and two-boundary problems for jump processes that slowly converge to Gaussian behavior

V. P. Shkilev*

  • *Contact author: shkilevv@ukr.net
PDF

Phys. Rev. E 112, 044131 – Published 17 October, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/fcs7-7g55

Abstract

We consider jump processes with finite variance which, from the point of view of experimental studies, apparently do not converge to the expected Gaussian behavior. A mathematically tractable example of such processes are those with a distribution of jump lengths in the form of a weighted sum of exponential distributions. For such processes on a half-line and on a finite interval, we calculate the probability densities of arrival at a given time at a given point on the line. The found probability densities allow us to calculate many quantities important for applications: coordinate probability density functions, first passage times, leapover-length distributions, splitting probabilities, conditional exit times, and others. The following results are obtained: for a given variance of the jump-length distribution, the ratio of the mean leapover length to the mean jump length can be arbitrarily large; for a given variance of the jump-length distribution and a given interval length, the transmission probability can be arbitrarily small; for a given variance of the jump-length distribution, a given interval length, and a given mean waiting time, the mean exit time can be arbitrarily large. These results are radically different from those previously obtained using the continuous limit for processes rapidly converging to Gaussian behavior.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (49)

  1. R. M. Ziff, S. N. Majumdar, and A. Comtet, J. Chem. Phys. 130, 204104 (2009).
  2. S. Rotter and S. Gigan, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 015005 (2017).
  3. Q. Baudouin, R. Pierrat, A. Eloy, E. J. Nunes-Pereira, P. A. Cuniasse, N. Mercadier, and R. Kaiser, Phys. Rev. E 90, 052114 (2014).
  4. M. O. Ara'ujo, T. P. de Silans, and R. Kaiser, Phys. Rev. E 103, L010101 (2021).
  5. N. Levernier, O. Bénichou, and R. Voituriez, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 100602 (2021).
  6. P. Romanczuk, M. Bar, W. Ebeling, B. Lindner, and L. Schimansky-Geier, EPJE-ST 202, 1 (2012).
  7. V. Tejedor, R. Voituriez, and O. Bénichou, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 088103 (2012).
  8. H. Meyer and H. Rieger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 070601 (2021).
  9. F. Mori, P. Le Doussal, S. N. Majumdar, and G. Schehr, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 090603 (2020).
  10. S. N. Majumdar, Physica A 389, 4299 (2010).
  11. A. Vezzani, E. Barkai, and R. Burioni, Phys. Rev. E 100, 012108 (2019).
  12. J. Klinger, R. Voituriez, and O. Bénichou, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 140603 (2022).
  13. J. Klinger, R. Voituriez, and O. Bénichou, Phys. Rev. E 107, 054109 (2023).
  14. M. Radice and G. Cristadoro, Phys. Rev. E 110, L022103 (2024).
  15. F. Mori, S. N. Majumdar, and G. Schehr, Phys. Rev. E 101, 052111 (2020).
  16. A. Comtet and S. N. Majumdar, J. Stat. Mech. (2005) P06013.
  17. P. Mounaix, S. N. Majumdar, and G. Schehr, J. Stat. Mech. (2018) 083201.
  18. R. N. Mantegna and H. E. Stanley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 2946 (1994).
  19. I. Koponen, Phys. Rev. E 52, 1197 (1995).
  20. M. F. Shlesinger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4959 (1995).
  21. A. Cartea and D. del-Castillo-Negrete, Phys. Rev. E 76, 041105 (2007).
  22. I. M. Sokolov, A. V. Chechkin, and J. Klafter, Physica A 336, 245 (2004).
  23. D. del-Castillo-Negrete, Phys. Rev. E 79, 031120 (2009).
  24. R. Cont, M. Potters, and J. P. Bouchaud, Scaling in stock market data: Stable laws and beyond, in Scale Invariance and Beyond: Les Houches Workshop (Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 1997).
  25. E. Montroll and G. Weiss, J. Math. Phys. 6, 167 (1965).
  26. H. Scher and E. W. Montroll, Phys. Rev. B 12, 2455 (1975).
  27. G. H. Weiss, Aspects and Applications of the Random Walk, Vol. 121, (Amsterdam, North-Holland, 1994).
  28. V. M. Kenkre, E. W. Montroll, and M. F. Shlesinger, J. Stat. Phys. 9, 45 (1973).
  29. J. W. Haus and K. W. Kehr, Phys. Rep. 150, 263 (1987).
  30. H. G. Othmer, S. R. Dunbar, and W. Alt, J. Math. Biol. 26, 263 (1988).
  31. V. V. Ivanov, Astron. Astrophys. 286, 328 (1994).
  32. C. Yin, Y. Wen, Z. Zong, and Y. Shen, The first passage time problem for mixed‐exponential jump processes with applications in insurance and finance, in Abstract and Applied Analysis (Hindawi Publishing Corporation, London, UK, 2014), pp. 571–724.
  33. N. Cai and S. G. Kou, Manag. Sci. 57, 2067 (2011).
  34. T. Koren, M. A. Lomholt, A. V. Chechkin, J. Klafter, and R. Metzler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 160602 (2007).
  35. V. P. Shkilev, Phys. Rev. E 110, 024139 (2024).
  36. A. Pal and V. V. Prasad, Phys. Rev. E 99, 032123 (2019).
  37. B. Rogozin, Theory Probab. Appl. 17, 332 (1973).
  38. A. Wardak, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 53, 375001 (2020).
  39. J. Klinger, R. Voituriez, and O. Bénichou, Phys. Rev. E 109, L052101 (2024).
  40. F. Bartumeus, F. Peters, S. Pueyo, C. Marras'e, and J. Catalan, Proc. Natl acad. Sci. USA 100, 12771 (2003).
  41. A. Mashanova, T. H. Oliver, and V. A. A. Jansen, J. R. Soc. Interface 7, 199 (2010).
  42. V. A. A. Jansen, A. Mashanova, and S. Petrovskii, Science 335, 918 (2012).
  43. G. C. Hays, T. Bastian, T. K. Doyle, S. Fossette, A. C. Gleiss, M. B. Gravenor, N. E. H. Victoria, J. Hobson and, M. K. S. Lilley, N. G. Pade, and D. W. Sims, Proc. R. Soc. B 279, 465 (2012).
  44. M. de Jager, F. Bartumeus, A. Kölzsch, F. Weissing, G. Hengeveld, B. Nolet, P. Herman, and J. van de Koppel, Proc. R. Soc. B 281, 20132605 (2014).
  45. O. B'enichou, C. Loverdo, M. Moreau, and R. Voituriez, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 81 (2011).
  46. G. Oshanin, H. S. Wio, K. Lindenberg, and S. F. Burlatsky, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 19, 065142 (2007).
  47. A. Reynolds, Physica A 388, 561 (2009).
  48. M. A. Lomholt, T. Koren, R. Metzler, and J. Klafter, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 105, 11055 (2008).
  49. P. Lencastre, Y. Bystryk, A. Yazidi, S. Denisov, and P. G. Lind, arXiv:2505.00864.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. E 112, 044131– Published 17 October, 2025
  • Received 9 April 2025
  • Revised 1 August 2025
  • Accepted 30 September 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation