Phenomena of disordered arrest represent a challenging and highly intriguing area of study in statistical physics. They are ubiquitous – ranging from the vitrification of viscoelastic fluids, polymers, and colloidal suspensions, to the jamming of granular materials in flow, and even to the kinetic arrest of epithelial tissues. Spanning disciplines from materials science and engineering to physics and biology, dynamic arrest remains a complex and poorly understood behavior. A key difficulty in characterizing these phenomena lies in the lack of a clear thermodynamic signature, such as a phase transition or critical point. As a result, kinetic arrest continues to be one of unsolved mysteries in the study of collective behavior in many-body systems, driving the need for new theoretical and analytical tools.

This is even more true today than before, since (due to a reorientation in the field towards biological, functional and programmable matter) the focus has shifted to strongly nonequilibrium systems. Already the glass transition itself implies – strictly speaking – a deviation from equilibrium, if one defines a glass as a fluid whose relaxation got stuck. But on top of that, colloidal suspensions under shear, synthetic actively driven matter mimicking the conversion of thermal energy into motion found in living systems, or such living systems themselves, are just a few examples of systems of interest that cannot be understood by equilibrium concepts.

This nonequilibrium nature and a microscopic approach to it are the key to understanding the generality among the widely different systems and the differences that appear upon closer examination. While equilibrium statistical physics is guided by the concept of universality and the related concept of coarse-grained theories, kinetic arrest phenomena such as the glass transition, the active glass transition or the jamming transition appear alike at first, but they are not [1]. Loosely speaking, while equilibrium systems appear in equilibrium much the same way, every nonequilibrium system is out of equilibrium in its own way [2].

While the terms glass and jamming transition are used interchangeably in some context (especially biology), they are in principle not. This highlights a key question to nonequilibrium statistical physics: can one provide a picture of the “generic yet not universal”?

This calls for theoretical frameworks that are rooted in the microscopic equations of motion with as little prior coarse-graining as possible. In the context of the glass transition, the mode-coupling theory of the glass transition (MCT) [3] is still one of the few fully microscopic and mathematically most advanced approaches. 42 years after its initial proposal, the main debates regarding MCT’s usefulness, successes and failures have settled, and the MCT-predicted cross-over point from fully fluidized to ideally arrested motion is regarded as a central point of reference. Also other theory frameworks, such as that of replica-symmetry breaking (RSB) connected to Nobel laureate Parisi, and the approaches to understand the glassy landscape of deep learning in neural networks (Nobel Prize 2024), in principle contain an MCT-like cross-over point.

MCT is at the center of recent developments in two directions: since its introduction in the context of colloidal rheology, the integration-through transients (ITT) formalism has been established as a generic framework to deal with statistical physics far from equilibrium [4]. Combined with MCT, it makes quantitative predictions for driven systems on a first-principles basis and allows performing in principle systematic coarse-graining to nonequilibrium transport coefficients [5]. Even more recently, some of the core issues with MCT have been reassessed in theories like the stochastic β-relaxation theory (SBR) [6] or approaches using vertex renormalizations [7, 8]. Machine-learning and simulational tools have been further pushed to investigate the anatomy of kinetic arrest [9]. In combination, this provides us with novel theoretical tools to address the question: How to classify the different scenarios of kinetic arrest that appear in nonequilibrium systems across the disciplines?

This workshop is co-organized with the support of CECAM

If you are interested in participating in this workshop you may register on the connected CECAM website.

 

References

[1]        A. Ikeda, L. Berthier, and P. Sollich, “Rheology of soft glassy materials”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 018301 (2012).

[2]        T. Voigtmann, “News and views: the amorphous materials behind biophysics”, Nature Physics, 10.1038/s41567-025-02900-1 (2025).

[3]        W. Götze, Complex dynamics of glass-forming liquids, a mode-coupling theory (Oxford University Press, 2009).

[4]        M. Fuchs and M. E. Cates, “A mode coupling theory for Brownian particles in homogeneous steady shear flow”, J. Rheol. 53, 957 (2009).

[5]        V. E. Debets, L. Sarfati, T. Voigtmann, and L. M. C. Janssen, “Microscopic theory for nonequilibrium correlation functions in dense active fluids”, Phys. Rev. E 109, 054605 (2024).

[6]        T. Rizzo and T. Voigtmann, “Qualitative features at the glass crossover”, EPL (Eu- rophysics Letters) 111, 56008 (2015).

[7]        F. Vogel, P. Baumgärtel, and M. Fuchs, “Self-consistent current response theory of unjamming and vibrational modes in low-temperature amorphous solids”, Phys. Rev. X 15, 011030 (2025).

[8]        G. Szamel, “Self-consistent theory for sound propagation in a simple model of a disordered, harmonic solid”, Phys. Rev. E 111, 024137 (2025).

[9]        M. K. Winter, I. Pihlajamaa, V. E. Debets, and L. M. C. Janssen, “A deep learning approach to the measurement of long-lived memory kernels from generalized Langevin dynamics”, J. Chem. Phys. 158, 244115 (2023).

[10]      O. D’Angelo, M. Sperl, and W. T. Kranz, “Rheological regimes in agitated granular media under shear”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 148202 (2025).

[11]      R. P. Behringer and B. Chakraborty, “The physics of jamming for granular materials: a review”, Rep. Prog. Phys. 82, 012601 (2019).

[12]      P. Charbonneau, J. Kurchan, G. Parisi, P. Urbani, and F. Zamponi, “Glass and jam- ming transitions: from exact results to finite-dimensional descriptions”, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 8, 265–288 (2017).

[13]      H. Mizuno, L. E. Silbert, and M. Sperl, “Spatial distributions of local elastic moduli near the jamming transition”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 068302 (2016).

[14]      N. Grimm, J. Baschnagel, A. N. Semenov, A. Zippelius, and M. Fuchs, “Stress cor- relations and stress memory kernels in viscoelastic fluids”, Soft Matter, 10 . 1039 (2025).

[15]      W. Schirmacher, M. Paoluzzi, F. C. Mocanu, D. Khomenko, G. Szamel, F. Zamponi, and G. Ruocco, “The nature of non-phononic excitations in disordered systems”, Nat. Commun. 15, 3107 (2024).

[16]      A. Tanguy, “Vibrations and heat transfer in glasses: the role played by disorder”, Comptes Rendus 24, 74 (2023).

[17]      T. Martynec, S. H. L. Klapp, and S. A. M. Loos, “Entropy production at criticality in a nonequilibrium Potts model”, New J. Phys. 22, 093069 (2020).

[18]      M. Brizioli, T. Sentjabrskaja, S. U. Egelhaaf, M. Laurati, R. Cerbino, and F. Giavazzi, “Reciprocal space study of Brownian yet non-Gaussian diffusion of small tracers in a hard-sphere glass”, Front. Phys. 10, 893777 (2022).

[19]      J. Kurzidim, D. Coslovich, and G. Kahl, “Single-particle and collective slow dynamics of colloids in porous confinement”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 138303 (2009).

[20]      T. Konincks and V. Krakoviack, “Dynamics of fluids in quenched-random potential energy landscapes: a mode-coupling theory approach”, Soft Matter 13, 5283–5297 (2017).

[21]      T. Kawasaki and K. Miyazaki, “Unified understanding of nonlinear rheology near the jamming transition point”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 268201 (2024).

[22]      I. Pihlajamaa, V. E. Debets, C. C. Laudicina, and L. Janssen, “Unveiling the anatomy of mode-coupling theory”, SciPost Physics 15, 217 (2023).

[23]      T. Rizzo and T. Voigtmann, “Solvable models of supercooled liquids in three dimensions”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 195501 (2020).

[24]      G. Jung, T. Voigtmann, and T. Franosch, “Scaling equations for mode-coupling theories with multiple decay channels”, J. Stat. Mech., 073301 (2020).

[25]      M. K. Nandi and S. M. Bhattacharyya, “Microscopic theory of softness in supercooled liquids”, Phys.Rev. Lett. 126, 208001 (2021).

[26]      G. Jung, R. M. Alkemade, V. Bapst, D. Coslovich, L. Filion, F. P. Landes, A. J. Liu, F. S. Pezzicoli, H. Shiba, G. Volpe, F. Zamponi, L. Berthier, and G. Biroli, “Roadmap on machine learning glassy dynamics”, Nature Reviews Phys. 7, 91 (2025).

[27]      G. Del Monte and E. Zaccarelli, “Numerical study of neutral and charged microgel suspensions: from single-particle to collective behavior”, Phys. Rev. X 14, 041067 (2024).

[28]      N. Küchler and J. Horbach, “Choice of diameters in a polydisperse model glassformer: deterministic or stochastic?”, Phys. Rev. E 106, 064103 (2022).

[29]      R. N. Chacko, P. Sollich, and S. M. Fielding, “Slow coarsening in jammed athermal soft particle suspensions”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 108001 (2019).

[30]      I. Pihlajamaa, C. C. L. Laudicina, T. Voigtmann, and L. M. C. Janssen, “Modecouplingtheory.jl: a solver for mode-coupling-theory-like integro-differential equations”, JOSS 8, 5737 (2023).