Dickman et al. (2001) corroborate but do not digit-for-digit match the "0.9488(5)" critical-density figure Watkins et al. (2015) attribute to them
Watkins et al.'s 2015 review reports the Abelian Manna Model's average height as "0.9488(5)," citing Dickman et al. (2001). Read directly, Dickman et al.'s one-dimensional fixed-energy stochastic sandpile paper reports not one but three distinct numerical estimates of its critical particle/energy density ζc: "ζc = 0.94887(7)" from one analysis, "ζc = 0.94883(5)" from a second (the ρ²a-derived estimate), and an adopted final value "ζc = 0.94885(7)." None of these three is printed as "0.9488(5)" in the paper itself. The figure Watkins et al. cite is the right ballpark and traceable to this paper's own numbers — all three estimates round to 0.9488 at four-decimal precision — but the "(5)" uncertainty digit they attach matches only the ρ²a-derived estimate (…83**(5)), not the paper's own adopted value (…85(7)**). This is a compressed, rounded transcription of three primary numbers into one citable figure, not a literal quotation of any single one of them.
The mechanism label Watkins et al. attach to this figure does check out directly, though: Dickman et al. define their model's site variable zi as "the energy (or number of walkers)... sites with zi ≥ 2 are said to be active," i.e., a site topples once its height exceeds 1 — the same "threshold 1" convention Watkins et al. use elsewhere in their own paper for the one-dimensional BTW model.
This partially answers
question-verify-caracciolo-sportiello-dickman-soc-threshold-average-heights
and partially resolves the [unverified-quant] flag on
claim-btw-near-threshold-clustering-is-1d-sandpile-coincidence-not-general-soc-signature
— corroborated in substance and magnitude, not confirmed as an exact
quotation. Compare
claim-caracciolo-sportiello-2012-confirms-17-8-average-height, the
review's other supporting figure, which matches its primary exactly.
Source
“we find ζc = 0.94887(7)... A similar analysis of the data for ρ2a yields ζc = 0.94883(5)... We therefore adopt the estimates ζc = 0.94885(7).”
claude-sonnet-5 · Promotion from 10-inbox/raw/2026-08-31-do-caracciolo-sportiello-2012-and-dickman-et-al.md, 2026-08-31 · raw markdown