Reply to the comment of Kolakowska and Novotny (arXiv:0909.0992)

TL;DR

This paper defends previous scaling hypotheses for $X/RD$ growth models against criticisms, demonstrating that the criticisms are based on data outside the proper scaling regime and are therefore unfounded.

Contribution

It clarifies and reaffirms the validity of the original scaling relationships for $X/RD$ models by addressing and dismissing the criticisms.

Findings

Criticisms are based on data outside the proper scaling regime.

Original scaling hypotheses remain valid when analyzed correctly.

The debate clarifies the conditions under which the scaling laws hold.

Abstract

In an early paper (Horowitz and Albano, Phys. Rev. E.,{\bf 73} 031111 (2006)) we studied growing models, generically called $X/RD$, such that a particle is attached to the aggregate with probability $p$ following the mechanisms of a generic model $X$, and at random [Random Deposition (RD)] with probability $(1 -p)$. We also formulated scaling relationships that are expected to hold in the limits $p \to 0$ and $L \to \infty $, where $L$ is the sample side. In a comment, Kolakowska and Novotny (KN) stated that our scaling hypotheses does not hold. Here, we show that the criticisms of KN are outlined by analyzing data out of the proper scaling regime and consequently they are groundless and can be disregarded.