
doi: 10.1007/bf02761538
Spitzer has shown that every Markov random field (MRF) is a Gibbs random field (GRF) and vice versa when (i) both are translation invariant, (ii) the MRF is of first order, and (iii) the GRF is defined by a binary, nearest neighbor potential. In both cases, the field (iv) is defined onZ v, and (v) at anyxeZv, takes on one of two states. The current paper shows that a MRF is a GRF and vice versa even when (i)−(v) are relaxed, i.e., even if one relaxes translation invariance, replaces first order bykth order, allows for many states and replaces finite domains of Zv by arbitrary finite sets. This is achieved at the expense of using a many body rather than a pair potential, which turns out to be natural even in the classical (nearest neighbor) case when Zv is replaced by a triangular lattice.
Continuous-time Markov processes on general state spaces, Interacting random processes; statistical mechanics type models; percolation theory
Continuous-time Markov processes on general state spaces, Interacting random processes; statistical mechanics type models; percolation theory
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 34 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
