How Can We Measure the Level of Order in Particle Arrangements on Surfaces?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jamesss
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Measure
Click For Summary
To measure the level of order in particle arrangements on surfaces, calculating the mean distance between particles and comparing it to an ideal grid arrangement is a viable approach. The definition of adjacency is crucial, as it determines which particles are considered adjacent based on their radial distance. A simple statistical method could involve dividing the surface into equal regions and comparing the observed versus expected particle counts in each region. This approach allows for assessing deviations from a random distribution, which can indicate levels of order. Ultimately, the focus should be on creating a straightforward and analyzable method for quantifying particle arrangement.
Jamesss
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Hello,
I'm trying to determine the level of order of a pattern of particles on a sample surface. One idea was to calculate the mean distance between one particle and those adjacent and compare them to the idealised (perfect grid arrangment) distance if I take the area of the surface divided by the number of particles. Would this be the right path to go down ? If so, what statistical criterion could I use to determine whether a particle is adjacent or not?

All the best,
James
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why would there be a statistical criterion for adjacency? Either they are or are not adjacent, I don't see any stastics in that decision. What is the defintion of adjacent that you are using?
 
For example: A nearby particle B may be in the viccinity of A but not necessarily adjacent. There may be another particle between A & B. Question is whether a radial distance (and how far it should extend) should be used to include particles in the viccinity of a given particle in the determining of the mean particle spacing, whether they are adjecent or not.

Thanks,
James
 
I'm trying to determine the level of order of a pattern of particles on a sample surface. One idea was to calculate the mean distance between one particle and those adjacent and compare them to the idealised (perfect grid arrangment) distance if I take the area of the surface divided by the number of particles. Would this be the right path to go down ? If so, what statistical criterion could I use to determine whether a particle is adjacent or not?
Really, it doesn't matter what you do to get a statistic for the "level of order"; as long as you can determine how a "random" distribution of particles will score, you can use your statistic to test for a deviation from "random".

If you're dead set on your approach, then I would suggest just coming up with something simple to calculate and easy to analyze, rather than spend a lot of time worrying about the "right" way to determine adjacency.

Incidentally, my first idea would have been to divide your surface up into regions of equal area and count the number of particles in each region. The score would be the sum of

(observed # of particles - expected # of particles)²

for each region. (You probably want to divide by something clever) A grid-like arrangement of particles would be "too perfect", and score much lower than random. Other arrangements might score higher. I don't know if this would detect the sort of "organization" you're looking for, though.
 
Last edited:
There is a nice little variation of the problem. The host says, after you have chosen the door, that you can change your guess, but to sweeten the deal, he says you can choose the two other doors, if you wish. This proposition is a no brainer, however before you are quick enough to accept it, the host opens one of the two doors and it is empty. In this version you really want to change your pick, but at the same time ask yourself is the host impartial and does that change anything. The host...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
4K