Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 73 references

Transport of molecules via polymerization in chemical gradients

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-05-23 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Active-passive hybrid polymers transport molecules directionally by polymerizing in chemical gradients.

desk verdict The paper derives an effective FP equation for Rouse modes of hybrid polymers by marginalizing active DOF and optimizes active-unit placement for accumulation or motility, but the closure under position-dependent gradients needs explicit verification. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.12325 v3 submitted 2024-11-19 cond-mat.soft cond-mat.stat-mech

Shashank Ravichandir , Bhavesh Valecha , Pietro Luigi Muzzeddu , Jens-Uwe Sommer , Abhinav Sharma This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.softcond-mat.stat-mech
keywords active-passivepolymerspolymerizationchemicalgradientsRousemodesFokker-Planckequationdirectedtransportmeanfirstpassagetimecenterofmass
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proposes directed molecular transport by attaching molecules to active-passive hybrid polymers whose growth is driven by polymerization in chemical or activity gradients. These gradients produce an effective drift that the authors capture by deriving a closed Fokker-Planck equation for the Rouse modes after the active degrees of freedom are integrated out. The resulting equation is solved for the steady-state distribution of the polymer center of mass and for its mean first passage time to a chosen destination. Different placements of active segments along the chain are examined to show how accumulation and transit speed can be tuned.

What carries the argument

Effective Fokker-Planck equation for the Rouse modes of active-passive hybrid polymers, obtained by marginalizing active degrees of freedom.

What would settle it

Direct numerical simulation of the full active-passive polymer dynamics in a gradient showing that the center-of-mass steady-state distribution or mean first passage time differs from the predictions of the effective Fokker-Planck equation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

By marginalizing out the active degrees of freedom, the system yields an effective Fokker-Planck equation governing the Rouse modes of active-passive hybrid polymers. This equation is solved to obtain the steady-state distribution of the center of mass and the mean first passage time to a destination under chemical/activity gradients. The arrangement of active units within the polymer is varied to optimize steady-state behavior and dynamic transport properties.

Load-bearing premise

The active degrees of freedom can be integrated out to produce a closed effective Fokker-Planck equation for the Rouse modes that remains valid for center-of-mass motion in gradients.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The steady-state distribution of the center of mass shifts due to the gradient-induced drift.
  • Mean first passage times to a target can be computed explicitly from the effective equation.
  • Optimizing the positions of active units enhances accumulation at preferred locations or reduces passage times.
  • Directed motility emerges without external forces, purely from the polymerization in gradients.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the effective description holds, it could guide design of synthetic polymers for targeted delivery in varying chemical environments.
  • Similar marginalization might apply to other hybrid active systems where internal activity couples to external gradients.
  • Testing the dependence on active unit arrangement in experiments would validate the optimization strategy.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a mechanism for directed molecular transport in chemical gradients using active-passive hybrid polymers that polymerize. Active units are placed along the chain; their activity is modulated by the local chemical concentration. By marginalizing the active degrees of freedom, the authors derive an effective Fokker-Planck equation governing the Rouse modes of the hybrid polymer. They then compute the steady-state distribution of the center-of-mass coordinate and the mean first-passage time (MFPT) to a target location, and examine how the spatial arrangement of active monomers affects accumulation and motility.

Significance. If the marginalization step is valid and the resulting effective dynamics remain quantitatively accurate, the work supplies a concrete, Rouse-mode-based route to optimize polymer design for gradient-driven transport. This could be relevant to models of intracellular transport and to the design of synthetic active filaments. The explicit focus on MFPT and on the effect of active-unit placement provides falsifiable predictions that can be tested in simulation or experiment.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (or wherever the marginalization is performed): the central claim that integrating out the active degrees of freedom yields a closed Fokker-Planck operator acting only on the Rouse modes (including the center of mass) is asserted but the explicit steps are not shown. Under a spatially varying chemical gradient the active noise or drift term becomes position-dependent; the marginalization generally produces non-local or higher-order terms in the polymer coordinates. The manuscript must demonstrate either that these terms vanish identically or that they remain negligible for the reported MFPT values (e.g., by an explicit small-parameter expansion or by direct comparison with the un-marginalized dynamics).
  2. [Results (MFPT)] Results section on MFPT: the reported MFPT values are obtained from the effective Fokker-Planck equation. Because the validity of that equation under position-dependent activity has not been established, the quantitative dependence of MFPT on active-unit arrangement cannot yet be taken as a robust prediction. A direct numerical check (e.g., comparison of the effective-model MFPT against Brownian-dynamics trajectories of the full active-passive chain) is required before the optimization conclusions can be considered load-bearing.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation: the definition of the Rouse modes and the precise mapping from monomer activity to the effective drift/diffusion coefficients should be stated explicitly (including any averaging over the chemical gradient).
  2. Figure captions: several panels compare different active-unit placements; the precise parameter values (gradient strength, activity magnitude, chain length) used in each panel should be listed in the caption or a table for reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. The points raised concerning the marginalization procedure and validation of the effective dynamics are well taken. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the requested clarifications and checks.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (or wherever the marginalization is performed): the central claim that integrating out the active degrees of freedom yields a closed Fokker-Planck operator acting only on the Rouse modes (including the center of mass) is asserted but the explicit steps are not shown. Under a spatially varying chemical gradient the active noise or drift term becomes position-dependent; the marginalization generally produces non-local or higher-order terms in the polymer coordinates. The manuscript must demonstrate either that these terms vanish identically or that they remain negligible for the reported MFPT values (e.g., by an explicit small-parameter expansion or by direct comparison with the un-marginalized dynamics).

    Authors: We agree that the explicit steps of the marginalization were not presented in sufficient detail. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated appendix that carries out the integration over the active degrees of freedom in full. Starting from the joint Fokker-Planck equation for the Rouse modes and the active variables, we will perform the marginalization under the assumption of fast active relaxation (separation of timescales) and a linear expansion in the chemical gradient. This yields an effective closed operator on the Rouse coordinates; the non-local and higher-order terms appear only at O(∇²) and higher and are shown to be negligible for the weak-gradient regime used in the MFPT calculations. We will also state the precise conditions under which the effective description holds. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results (MFPT)] Results section on MFPT: the reported MFPT values are obtained from the effective Fokker-Planck equation. Because the validity of that equation under position-dependent activity has not been established, the quantitative dependence of MFPT on active-unit arrangement cannot yet be taken as a robust prediction. A direct numerical check (e.g., comparison of the effective-model MFPT against Brownian-dynamics trajectories of the full active-passive chain) is required before the optimization conclusions can be considered load-bearing.

    Authors: We concur that a direct numerical validation is necessary to confirm the quantitative accuracy of the effective model. In the revision we will add a new subsection that compares the MFPT obtained from the effective Fokker-Planck equation against Brownian-dynamics trajectories of the full (un-marginalized) active-passive chain for several representative placements of active units. The comparison will be performed in the same parameter regime as the analytic results, thereby establishing the regime of validity of the effective description and supporting the reported optimization trends. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; derivation uses standard marginalization

full rationale

The paper derives an effective Fokker-Planck equation for Rouse modes by marginalizing active degrees of freedom, then solves the resulting equation for the center-of-mass steady state and mean first passage time. This is a conventional procedure in polymer physics and nonequilibrium statistical mechanics; the reported distributions and times are outputs of the closed effective dynamics rather than quantities defined by construction from fitted inputs or prior self-citations. No load-bearing step reduces to a self-referential fit, ansatz smuggled via citation, or uniqueness theorem imported from the same authors. The approach is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Ledger entries inferred from abstract only; the model rests on standard polymer-physics assumptions whose validity for the active case is not independently evidenced here.

free parameters (2)
  • positions and strengths of active units
    Arrangement of active segments is treated as a tunable design variable whose specific values affect the reported steady-state and MFPT results.
  • gradient strength parameters
    Chemical/activity gradient magnitude enters the effective drift and must be specified to obtain quantitative distributions.
assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption Rouse model remains applicable to hybrid active-passive polymers after marginalization.
    Invoked when reducing the dynamics to Rouse modes of the effective chain.
  • domain assumption Marginalization of active degrees of freedom yields a closed Markovian description for the passive modes.
    Central step asserted in the abstract without further justification visible here.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Transport of molecules via polymerization in chemical gradients." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2411.12325

@misc{pith2026241112325,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Transport of molecules via polymerization in chemical gradients},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2411.12325}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.12325}
}
read the original abstract

The transport of molecules for chemical reactions is critically important in various cellular biological processes. Despite thermal diffusion being prevalent in many biochemical processes, it is unreliable for any sort of directed transport or preferential accumulation of molecules. In this paper we propose a strategy for directed motion in which the molecules are transported by active carriers via polymerization. This transport is facilitated by chemical/activity gradients which generate an effective drift of the polymers. By marginalizing out the active degrees of freedom of the system, we obtain an effective Fokker-Planck equation for the Rouse modes of such active-passive hybrid polymers. In particular, we solve for the steady state distribution of the center of mass and its mean first passage time to reach an intended destination. We focus on how the arrangement of active units within the polymer affect its steady-state and dynamic behaviour and how they can be optimized to achieve high accumulation or rapid motility.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.12325 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (Left) Schematic diagram of a mixture of active (red [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The steady state density profiles for various config [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Scatter plot for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The mean first passage time taken by a polymer to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. A qualitative state diagram that illustrates the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 73 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Kobayashi, Code for publication in Zenodo, 10.5281/zen- odo.21216656 (2026)

    obtained via the transformation χi = P j φijXj, where φij is the diagonalizing matrix of Mij such that P jk φijMjk φ−1 kl = γi γ δil. γi’s are the relaxation rates of the individual Rouse modes and they are normalized by the relaxation rate due to the harmonic interactions γ = µζ. The coarse-grained Fokker-Planck equation for the probability density ρ(XCO...

    work page doi:10.5281/zen-

  2. [2]

    M¨ uller,Ecological modelling, 1998, 108, 3–21

    F. M¨ uller,Ecological modelling, 1998, 108, 3–21

    work page 1998

  3. [3]

    T. M. Keenan and A. Folch, Lab on a Chip , 2008, 8, 34–57

    work page 2008

  4. [4]

    Almonacid, W

    M. Almonacid, W. W. Ahmed, M. Bussonnier, P. Mailly, T. Betz, R. Voituriez, N. S. Gov and M.-H. Verlhac, Na- ture cell biology , 2015, 17, 470–479

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    Guthold, X

    M. Guthold, X. Zhu, C. Rivetti, G. Yang, N. H. Thom- son, S. Kasas, H. G. Hansma, B. Smith, P. K. Hansma and C. Bustamante, Biophysical journal, 1999, 77, 2284– 2294

    work page 1999

  6. [6]

    Alberts, A

    B. Alberts, A. Johnson, J. Lewis, M. Raff, K. Roberts and P. Walter, Bray D. Cell movements: from molecules to motility. 2nd ed: Garland Science , 2000

    work page 2000

  7. [7]

    Javer, Z

    A. Javer, Z. Long, E. Nugent, M. Grisi, K. Siri- watwetchakul, K. D. Dorfman, P. Cicuta and M. Cosentino Lagomarsino, Nature communications , 2013, 4, 3003

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    S. C. Weber, A. J. Spakowitz and J. A. Theriot, Proceed- ings of the National Academy of Sciences , 2012, 109, 7338–7343

    work page 2012

Show all 73 references
  1. [9]

    Zidovska, D

    A. Zidovska, D. A. Weitz and T. J. Mitchison, Proceed- ings of the National Academy of Sciences , 2013, 110, 15555–15560

    2013

  2. [10]

    Di Pierro, D

    M. Di Pierro, D. A. Potoyan, P. G. Wolynes and J. N. Onuchic, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences, 2018, 115, 7753–7758

    2018

  3. [11]

    S. F. Banani, H. O. Lee, A. A. Hyman and M. K. Rosen, Nature reviews Molecular cell biology , 2017, 18, 285–298

    2017

  4. [12]

    Sommer, H

    J.-U. Sommer, H. Merlitz and H. Schiessel, Macro- molecules, 2022, 55, 4841–4851

    2022

  5. [13]

    Ramaswamy, Annu

    S. Ramaswamy, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. , 2010, 1, 323–345

    2010

  6. [14]

    Ramaswamy, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2017, 2017, 054002

    S. Ramaswamy, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2017, 2017, 054002

    2017

  7. [15]

    De Magistris and D

    G. De Magistris and D. Marenduzzo, Physica A: Statis- tical Mechanics and its Applications , 2015, 418, 65–77

    2015

  8. [16]

    Fodor, C

    ´E. Fodor, C. Nardini, M. E. Cates, J. Tailleur, P. Visco and F. Van Wijland, Physical review letters , 2016, 117, 038103

    2016

  9. [17]

    Gompper, R

    G. Gompper, R. G. Winkler, T. Speck, A. Solon, C. Nar- dini, F. Peruani, H. L¨ owen, R. Golestanian, U. B. Kaupp, L. Alvarez et al. , Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter , 2020, 32, 193001

    2020

  10. [18]

    J¨ ulicher, S

    F. J¨ ulicher, S. W. Grill and G. Salbreux, Reports on Progress in Physics , 2018, 81, 076601

    2018

  11. [19]

    M. C. Marchetti, J.-F. Joanny, S. Ramaswamy, T. B. Liverpool, J. Prost, M. Rao and R. A. Simha, Reviews of modern physics, 2013, 85, 1143–1189

    2013

  12. [20]

    C. P. Brangwynne, G. H. Koenderink, F. C. MacKintosh and D. A. Weitz, The Journal of cell biology , 2008, 183, 583–587

    2008

  13. [21]

    W. Lu, M. Winding, M. Lakonishok, J. Wildonger and V. I. Gelfand, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2016, 113, E4995–E5004

    2016

  14. [22]

    Ravichandran, G

    A. Ravichandran, G. A. Vliegenthart, G. Saggiorato, T. Auth and G. Gompper, Biophysical journal , 2017, 113, 1121–1132

    2017

  15. [23]

    C. A. Weber, R. Suzuki, V. Schaller, I. S. Aranson, A. R. Bausch and E. Frey,Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2015, 112, 10703–10707. I

    2015

  16. [24]

    R. G. Winkler, J. Elgeti and G. Gompper, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan , 2017, 86, 101014

    2017

  17. [25]

    R. G. Winkler and G. Gompper, The journal of chemical physics, 2020, 153,

    2020

  18. [26]

    S. K. Anand and S. P. Singh, Physical Review E , 2018, 98, 042501

    2018

  19. [27]

    R. E. Isele-Holder, J. Elgeti and G. Gompper, Soft mat- ter, 2015, 11, 7181–7190

    2015

  20. [28]

    C. A. Philipps, G. Gompper and R. G. Winkler, The Journal of Chemical Physics , 2022, 157, 194904

    2022

  21. [29]

    Locatelli, V

    E. Locatelli, V. Bianco and P. Malgaretti, Physical Re- view Letters, 2021, 126, 097801

    2021

  22. [30]

    Kaiser and H

    A. Kaiser and H. L¨ owen, The Journal of chemical physics, 2014, 141, 044903

    2014

  23. [31]

    Zhang, C

    C. Zhang, C. Xie, W. Feng, H. Luo, Y. Liu and G. Jing, New Journal of Physics , 2023, 25, 043029

    2023

  24. [32]

    C. J. Anderson, G. Briand, O. Dauchot and A. Fern´ andez-Nieves, Physical Review E , 2022, 106, 064606

    2022

  25. [33]

    Harder, C

    J. Harder, C. Valeriani and A. Cacciuto, Physical Review E, 2014, 90, 062312

    2014

  26. [34]

    S. M. Mousavi, G. Gompper and R. G. Winkler, The journal of chemical physics , 2021, 155, 044902

    2021

  27. [35]

    J. Shin, A. G. Cherstvy, W. K. Kim and R. Metzler, New Journal of Physics , 2015, 17, 113008

    2015

  28. [36]

    Foglino, E

    M. Foglino, E. Locatelli, C. Brackley, D. Michieletto, C. Likos and D. Marenduzzo, Soft matter , 2019, 15, 5995–6005

    2019

  29. [37]

    Bianco, E

    V. Bianco, E. Locatelli and P. Malgaretti, Physical review letters, 2018, 121, 217802

    2018

  30. [38]

    H. D. Vuijk, H. Merlitz, M. Lang, A. Sharma and J.-U. Sommer, Physical Review Letters , 2021, 126, 208102

    2021

  31. [39]

    P. L. Muzzeddu, A. Gambassi, J.-U. Sommer and A. Sharma, Physical Review Letters , 2024, 133, 118102

    2024

  32. [40]

    L¨ owen,Europhysics Letters, 2018, 121, 58001

    H. L¨ owen,Europhysics Letters, 2018, 121, 58001

    2018

  33. [41]

    Elgeti, R

    J. Elgeti, R. G. Winkler and G. Gompper, Reports on progress in physics , 2015, 78, 056601

    2015

  34. [42]

    Bechinger, R

    C. Bechinger, R. Di Leonardo, H. L¨ owen, C. Reichhardt, G. Volpe and G. Volpe,Reviews of Modern Physics, 2016, 88, 045006

    2016

  35. [43]

    Dreyfus, J

    R. Dreyfus, J. Baudry, M. L. Roper, M. Fermigier, H. A. Stone and J. Bibette, Nature, 2005, 437, 862–865

    2005

  36. [44]

    Najafi and R

    A. Najafi and R. Golestanian, Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics , 2004, 69, 062901

    2004

  37. [45]

    Jiang, N

    H.-R. Jiang, N. Yoshinaga and M. Sano, Physical review letters, 2010, 105, 268302

    2010

  38. [46]

    Theurkauff, C

    I. Theurkauff, C. Cottin-Bizonne, J. Palacci, C. Ybert and L. Bocquet, Physical review letters , 2012, 108, 268303

    2012

  39. [47]

    L. F. Valadares, Y.-G. Tao, N. S. Zacharia, V. Kitaev, F. Galembeck, R. Kapral and G. A. Ozin, Small, 2010, 6, 565–572

    2010

  40. [48]

    J. R. Howse, R. A. Jones, A. J. Ryan, T. Gough, R. Vafabakhsh and R. Golestanian, Physical review let- ters, 2007, 99, 048102

    2007

  41. [49]

    M. J. Schnitzer, Physical Review E , 1993, 48, 2553

    1993

  42. [50]

    Sharma and J

    A. Sharma and J. M. Brader, Physical review E , 2017, 96, 032604

    2017

  43. [51]

    H. C. Berg, E. coli in Motion , Springer, 2004

    2004

  44. [52]

    Schnitzer, S

    M. Schnitzer, S. Block and H. Berg, Biology of the chemo- tactic response, 1990, 46, 15

    1990

  45. [53]

    H. C. Berg, Random walks in biology , Princeton Univer- sity Press, 1993

    1993

  46. [54]

    I. R. Lapidus, Journal of theoretical biology , 1980, 86, 91–103

    1980

  47. [55]

    F. Peng, Y. Tu, J. C. Van Hest and D. A. Wilson, Ange- wandte Chemie International Edition , 2015, 54, 11662– 11665

    2015

  48. [56]

    P. K. Ghosh, Y. Li, F. Marchesoni and F. Nori, Physical Review E, 2015, 92, 012114

    2015

  49. [57]

    H. D. Vuijk, A. Sharma, D. Mondal, J.-U. Sommer and H. Merlitz, Physical Review E , 2018, 97, 042612

    2018

  50. [58]

    Merlitz, H

    H. Merlitz, H. D. Vuijk, R. Wittmann, A. Sharma and J.-U. Sommer, Plos one , 2020, 15, e0230873

    2020

  51. [59]

    H. D. Vuijk, S. Klempahn, H. Merlitz, J.-U. Sommer and A. Sharma, Physical Review E , 2022, 106, 014617

    2022

  52. [60]

    P. L. Muzzeddu, H. D. Vuijk, H. L¨ owen, J.-U. Sommer and A. Sharma, The Journal of Chemical Physics , 2022, 157, 134902

    2022

  53. [61]

    P. L. Muzzeddu, ´E. Rold´ an, A. Gambassi and A. Sharma, EPL, 2023, 142, 67001

    2023

  54. [62]

    Valecha, P

    B. Valecha, P. L. Muzzeddu, J.-U. Sommer and A. Sharma, arXiv:2409.18703, 2024

    2024

  55. [63]

    Sommer and A

    J.-U. Sommer and A. Blumen, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General , 1995, 28, 6669

    1995

  56. [64]

    C. W. Gardiner, Springer series in synergetics , 1985

    1985

  57. [65]

    Risken, The Fokker-Planck Equation , 1996

    H. Risken, The Fokker-Planck Equation , 1996

    1996

  58. [66]

    M. Doi, S. F. Edwards and S. F. Edwards, The theory of polymer dynamics, oxford university press, 1988, vol. 73

    1988

  59. [67]

    Martin, J

    D. Martin, J. O’Byrne, M. E. Cates, ´E. Fodor, C. Nar- dini, J. Tailleur and F. Van Wijland, Physical Review E , 2021, 103, 032607

    2021

  60. [68]

    Caprini and U

    L. Caprini and U. M. B. Marconi, Soft matter , 2018, 14, 9044–9054

    2018

  61. [69]

    Straub, Stud

    F. Straub, Stud. Inst. Med. Chem. Univ. Szeged , 1943, 3, 23–37

    1943

  62. [70]

    S. Y. Khaitlina, Biochemistry (Moscow), 2014, 79, 917– 927

    2014

  63. [71]

    Hamel and C

    E. Hamel and C. M. Lin, Biochemistry, 1984, 23, 4173– 4184

    1984

  64. [72]

    C. A. Weber, D. Zwicker, F. J¨ ulicher and C. F. Lee, Re- ports on Progress in Physics , 2019, 82, 064601. II Supplemental Material: Transport of molecules via polymerization in chemical gradients I. THE LANGEVIN EQUA TIONS, ROUSE MODES AND THE FOKKER-PLANCK EQUA TION The set ...

    2019

  65. [73]

    To calculate J act,1 0 , we split the summation over l into terms with l = 0 and l ̸= 0

    (see Ref [38]), which can be neglected for small gradients. To calculate J act,1 0 , we split the summation over l into terms with l = 0 and l ̸= 0. The latter gives − X j φ0jτ d Z Y h̸=0 dχhαjv(Xj) X l̸=0 ∇l · [φljαjv(Xj)ϱ] , (SI 30) = τ 2d X j,l̸=0 φ0j Z Y h̸=0 dχh √ N α2 j ...

Pith tools

Reviewed May 23, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.