CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Olami–Feder–Christensen model

Open-knowledge reference entry

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionOct 2, 2025
Entity authorityQ3556930 ↗
Source-derived summary

In physics, in the area of dynamical systems, the Olami–Feder–Christensen (OFC) model is an earthquake model conjectured to be an example of self-organized criticality where local exchange dynamics are not conservative. The model is named after Zeev Olami, Hans Jacob S. Feder, and Kim Christensen who proposed it in 1992.

Despite the original claims of the authors and subsequent claims of other authors such as Stefano Lise, whether or not the model is self organized critical remains an open question.

The system behaviour reproduces some empirical laws that earthquakes follow (such as the Gutenberg–Richter law and Omori's Law).

Model definition

The model is a simplification of the Burridge-Knopoff model, where the blocks move instantly to their balanced positions when submitted to a force greater than their friction.

Let S be a square lattice with L × L sites and let Kmn ≥ 0 be the tension at site (m,n). The sites with tension greater than 1 are called critical and go through a relaxation step where their tension spreads to their neighbours. Through analogy with the Burridge-Knopoff model, what is being simulated is a fault, where one of the lattice's dimensions is the flaw depth and the other one follows the flaw.

Model rules

If there are no critical sites, then the system suffers a continuous drive, until a site becomes critical:

K

max

=

max

(

i

,

j

)

∈

S

K

i

j

{\displaystyle K_{\max }={\underset {(i,j)\in S}{\max }}K_{ij}\,}

K

i

j

←

K

i

j

+

(

1

−

K

max

)

{\displaystyle K_{ij}\leftarrow K_{ij}+(1-K_{\max })\,}

else if the sites C1, C2, ..., Cm are critical the relaxation rule is applied in parallel:

K

C

i

←

0

,

i

=

1

,

…

,

m

{\displaystyle K_{C_{i}}\leftarrow 0,\quad i=1,\ldots ,m\,}

K

j

←

K

j

+

α

K

C

i

′

∀

j

∈

Γ

C

i

,

i

=

1

,

…

,

m

{\displaystyle K_{j}\leftarrow K_{j}+\alpha K'_{C_{i}}\,\forall \,j\in \Gamma _{C_{i}},\quad i=1,\ldots ,m}

where K'C is the tension prior to the relaxation and ΓC is the set of neighbours of site C. α is called the conservative parameter and can range from 0 to 0.25 in a square lattice. This can create a chain reaction which is interpreted as an earthquake.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Olami–Feder–Christensen model” is open-knowledge reference entry. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Olami, Feder and Christensen, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1992—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Olami, Feder and Christensen is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “open-knowledge reference entry” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Oct 2, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q3556930. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1992.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Olami–Feder–Christensen model”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Olami–Feder–Christensen model primary sources, Olami–Feder–Christensen model archive and Olami research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Olami–Feder–Christensen model”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Olami–Feder–Christensen model” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.