Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

A Universal Control Budget for First-Passage Kinetics

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read For any finite Markov chain, the logarithmic sensitivity of the mean first-passage time to each rate is bounded by one and the sensitivities sum to -1.

desk verdict A new unit bound on first-passage time sensitivities, correct in its essentials; the only real weakness is a key response identity imported from an unpublished preprint rather than proved here. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06368 v2 pith:T4BFFIEG submitted 2026-08-06 cond-mat.stat-mech physics.bio-ph

Shiling Liang , Ruicheng Bao This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mechphysics.bio-ph MSC 60J2760J4582C3192C40 PACS 05.40.-a82.20.-w87.10.-e
keywords first-passagetimemeanlogarithmicsensitivityconservedcontrolbudgetkineticproofreadingMarkovjumpprocessresponsetheorybarrierperturbation
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 claims that for any finite Markov chain with a starting state A and an absorbing target B, the mean first-passage time has a strictly limited response to rate changes: the logarithmic sensitivity of this time to any single rate always lies between -1 and +1, and the sensitivities of all rates together always sum to -1. These two laws form a conserved control budget, meaning the total capacity to speed up a process exceeds the total capacity to delay it by exactly one unit, so any acceleration of one step must be paid for by other steps. This is a universal statement that applies to any process modelled as a Markov chain, from enzyme reactions to search processes, and it gives a concrete accounting tool for interpreting kinetic experiments. The paper applies the budget to kinetic proofreading, showing that discrimination between correct and wrong substrates is capped at one power of selectivity per checkpoint, and that near-maximal discrimination forces the completion time to depend almost entirely on substrate concentration.

What carries the argument

The working machinery is the redirection map: every edge ending at the target B is cut and re-routed to the source A at the same rate, making the chain irreducible while preserving first-passage statistics, so the stationary absorption current $J^{\mathrm{red}}_{A\to B}$ equals the reciprocal MFPT, $1/\tau_{A\to B}$. The bound then rests on a single-channel response formula (Eq. (5)), imported from the authors' companion preprint, which expresses the logarithmic response of a channel flux as a hitting-time difference times the traffic plus a Kronecker delta. Two inequalities confine that formula: the triangle inequality for mean hitting times squeezes the hitting-time difference between the two legs of the perturbed edge's commute, and the Kac recurrence formula for stationary point processes bounds the traffic times that commute by one. Averaging over absorption channels with occupation-time weights gives the closed edge formula $s_e = \tilde{j}_e (\tau_{m_e\to B} - \tau_{n_e\to B})$, from which the barrier, state, and proofreading results follow by summation.

What would settle it

Compute, for a small Markov chain with a cycle (for example states A, M, B with forward rates $k_a$, $k_b$ and backward rate $k_w$), the exact rational expression for the mean first-passage time $\tau$, and evaluate $s_e = (k_e/\tau)\,\partial\tau/\partial k_e$ on a dense grid of rates; any single point with $|s_e| > 1$ or with $\sum_e s_e \neq -1$ would refute the paper's central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a pair of response laws for the mean first-passage time (MFPT) of any finite Markov chain from a source A to an absorbing target B. Writing $s_e = \partial \log \tau_{A\to B} / \partial \log k_e$ for the logarithmic sensitivity to the rate of edge $e$, the paper proves $-1 \leq s_e \leq 1$ for every edge and $\sum_e s_e = -1$ over all retained edges. The summation rule follows immediately from the fact that uniformly scaling every rate by $\lambda$ rescales the clock, so $\tau$ is homogeneous of degree $-1$ in all rates, while the unit bound follows from redirecting every absorption edge back to A, which turns the transient problem into a stationary current equal to $1/\tau$, and then applying a channel-flux response identity together with the Kac recurrence formula and the triangle inequality for hitting times. The paper then derives structured consequences for multi-rate controls: a barrier perturbation that scales the two directions of one link has response bounded by one minus the traversal ratio across that link, a state-energy perturbation that scales all rates leaving a state has response exactly equal to minus that state's stationary occupancy, and in the standard reset model of kinetic proofreading the discrimination gain equals the delaying budget and is capped by the number of checkpoints, with a cost identity that forces near-maximal discrimination to approach unit sensitivity to substrate concentration.

Load-bearing premise

The unit bound rests on the channel-flux response identity of Eq. (5), which the paper imports from a companion preprint rather than deriving; if that identity is wrong, the local bound $-1 \leq s_e \leq 1$ does not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single-rate perturbation can change the mean completion time by at most its own fractional change, so no individual transition is more than linearly controlling in log terms.
  • Barrier controls scale both directions of one link at once, yet their response is bounded by one minus the traversal ratio, so a symmetrically shuttled edge is invisible to its own barrier perturbation.
  • State-energy controls partition the unit: each state's sensitivity is the negative of its stationary occupancy, and no single state can hold more than one unit of the budget.
  • Kinetic-proofreading discrimination gain is bounded by the checkpoint count, $\Delta \leq m$, and approaching the cap forces the completion time to scale inversely with substrate concentration.
  • Any resolved kinetic scheme with finite rates and finite first-passage times falls under the same accounting, so the budget acts as a diagnostic for where rate control sits and how it moves as conditions change.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension is to test whether the local unit bound carries over to higher completion moments; if it does, the summation and bound together would give a family of control budgets for variance and precision, possibly tightening existing first-passage uncertainty relations.
  • The barrier-invisibility result suggests that mutation or drug experiments that exclusively alter transition-state barriers may miss the most heavily used edges; state-energy perturbations should be combined to reveal them.
  • The proofreading cost identity gives a concrete, testable prediction: a system running near the discrimination cap should show nearly unit logarithmic sensitivity of its completion time to substrate concentration, a signature distinguishable from the discrimination ratio alone.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper claims a universal 'control budget' for the logarithmic sensitivity of the mean first-passage time (MFPT) of a finite Markov chain to its individual rate constants. For a fixed source-target pair, the sensitivity s_e = ∂log τ/∂log k_e is shown to satisfy the local bound |s_e| ≤ 1 and the global summation rule Σ s_e = −1. The proof maps the absorbing process to an irreducible 'redirected' chain whose stationary current equals the reciprocal MFPT, applies a steady-state response identity (Eq. 5) for channel fluxes, and combines triangle and traffic–MFPT inequalities to obtain the unit bound. The summation rule follows from the homogeneity of the MFPT. The budget picture (B− = 1 + B+) is then used to bound the response to multi-edge controls (barrier and state perturbations) and to analyze kinetic proofreading, giving a cap on the discrimination gain Δ ≤ m (checkpoint count) and a tradeoff between discrimination and concentration sensitivity.

Significance. If the central theorems hold, the paper provides a genuinely general constraint on how any single rate, or any coordinated rate change, can affect a first-passage time. The result is presented with a clear physical interpretation (conserved control budget, comparison to metabolic control analysis), and it yields falsifiable quantitative predictions for kinetic proofreading. The manuscript includes exact linear-algebra numerics that cross-validate Eq. (9), and Appendices A–D contain substantial technical derivations. The novelty is appropriate for the journal: the unit bound is, to my knowledge, not previously established, and the proofreading application gives a concrete reason to care.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section II, Eq. (5)] The unit bound and all downstream results rest on the response identity (5), which is imported from the authors' own unpublished preprint (Ref. [9]) and not derived in this manuscript. Since the central theorem is not self-contained without this identity, the authors should include a proof in the text or an appendix (for example, from the stationary-distribution perturbation formula δπ = π δQ Z and the MFPT representation E_i[τ_j] = (Z_jj − Z_ij)/π_j), or replace the citation with a peer-reviewed derivation.
  2. [Section II, traffic–MFPT inequality] The proof of the key inequality j̃_e(τ̃_{n_e→m̃_e}+τ̃_{m̃_e→n_e}) ≤ 1 is presented as an informal Palm-process argument. The argument is plausible and correct in essence, but it should be made formal: state the decomposition of the inter-firing interval under the Palm distribution, use the fact that the expected waiting time for e to fire from n_e is 1/k_e and hence that τ̃_{n_e→m̃_e} ≤ 1/k_e, and then invoke the Kac recurrence formula. Since Appendix B already proves a group Kac identity, the single-edge case can be obtained as the G={e} specialization, which would make the proof fully rigorous.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Introduction] The word 'timming' should be 'timing'.
  2. [Section III, Eq. (8)] The statement of the budget cap would benefit from explicitly noting that N_− ≥ 1 because Σ s_e = −1, so the expression min(N_+, N_− −1) is nonnegative and the bound is non-vacuous.
  3. [Figure 1 caption] In part (d), the phrase 'the excess paid by the backward edge’s delaying budget' is slightly ambiguous; clarify whether 'excess' refers to the additional unit beyond the single-edge bound in B−.
  4. [References] Ref. [9] is a non-peer-reviewed arXiv preprint; given its central role, the authors should either provide a proof in the appendix or cite a published version, and state the current status of the preprint in the reference.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the summation rule follows from Euler homogeneity, the unit bound uses an imported steady-state flux identity that does not assume the target result, and the proofreading application is a direct consequence of the budget without fitted parameters.

full rationale

The two laws in Eq. (3) are not assumed. The summation rule sum_e s_e = -1 is derived from the scaling homogeneity τ(λk) = λ^{-1}τ(k) via Euler's theorem, as stated in Sec. II, so it is an identity imposed by clock rescaling rather than an input. The unit bound -1 ≤ s_e ≤ 1 is obtained by redirecting absorption edges to the source, applying the channel-flux response identity Eq. (5) to the resulting steady state, and then squeezing the hitting-time difference with the MFPT triangle inequality and the Kac/traffic-MFPT inequality; the latter two are argued directly in the text and Appendix B. Eq. (5) is imported from the authors' own preprint (Ref. [9]) and is not re-derived here, and it is load-bearing for the unit bound. That is a self-containedness or provenance concern about an unstated lemma, but it is not circularity: the identity concerns logarithmic response of steady-state channel fluxes j̃_α, not the MFPT sensitivity s_e, and its assumptions (irreducible steady-state Markov process) do not include the target bound. The proofreading result Δ = B_+ ≤ m follows from the closed-form sensitivities in Appendix C and the edge-count bound Eq. (8); no fitted parameter is later renamed as a prediction. Numerical cross-validation in Appendix D is auxiliary, not part of the derivation chain. No equation in the paper reduces to its own input by construction, and no claim is forced by a self-citation chain whose content is the claimed result. Therefore the paper deserves a no-circularity finding.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central theorem is parameter-free and relies on standard Markov chain theory plus one imported response identity from the authors' own earlier work. No data are fitted; the proofreading application is an exact consequence of the budget, not a fit.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The response identity for Markov jump processes, Eq. (5) in Sec. II, is correct.
    The unit-bound proof in Sec. II rests on this identity, which is imported from Bao and Liang, arXiv:2412.19602, without proof in the present text.
  • domain assumption The retained chain is finite with positive rates, and B is reached from every state with probability one in finite mean time.
    Stated in Sec. II; these conditions guarantee the redirected chain is irreducible and the recycled-current interpretation (Eq. 4) is valid.
  • standard math Standard Markov chain facts: Perron-Frobenius theorem, Kac recurrence formula, Palm inversion formula, MFPT triangle inequality, and the strong Markov property.
    Used in Secs. II and Appendices A-B to derive the traffic-MFPT inequality and the group Kac identity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Universal Control Budget for First-Passage Kinetics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/T4BFFIEG

@misc{pith2026260806368,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Universal Control Budget for First-Passage Kinetics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/T4BFFIEG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06368}
}
read the original abstract

The first-passage time is the natural observable of reaction completion, yet how its mean responds to a rate change has lacked a general constraint. We show that the logarithmic sensitivity of the mean first-passage time of any finite Markov chain to any rate is bounded by one in magnitude, and that these sensitivities sum to -1. Together the two laws form a conserved control budget: speeding completion through some transitions must be paid for by others, and a coordinated change shifts the completion time only as far as the budget allows. Raising an activation barrier or shifting the depth of a well moves many rates at once, yet neither can shift the completion time further than a single rate could. The budget caps kinetic-proofreading discrimination at the checkpoint count, and prices it in sensitivity to substrate concentration.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.06368 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. a shows the envelope approached across random networks. For the state perturbation defined above, summing Eq. (9) over the edges leaving v and using the backward equation P e: ne=v ke(τme→B − τv→B) = −1 collapses the group response to an identity: s out v = X e: ne=v se = −π˜v ∈ [−1, 0], X v s out v = −1. (11) State sensitivities are therefore simply a partition of one: each state’s share of the control is its share… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Exact First-Passage Time Response Theory from Steady-State Response

    cond-mat.stat-mech 2026-08 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    Mean first-passage time response to arbitrary single-rate perturbations is expressed exactly through unperturbed MFPTs and steady-state probabilities, via a fast-reset correspondence.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [9]

    Bao and S

    R. Bao and S. Liang, Nonlinear response identities and bounds for nonequilibrium steady states (2024), arXiv:2412.19602 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Redner,A Guide to First-Passage Processes(Cam- bridge University Press, 2001)

    S. Redner,A Guide to First-Passage Processes(Cam- bridge University Press, 2001)

    2001

  3. [2]

    Condamin, O

    S. Condamin, O. Bénichou, V. Tejedor, R. Voituriez, and J. Klafter, First-passage times in complex scale-invariant media, Nature450, 77 (2007)

    2007

  4. [3]

    Bénichou and R

    O. Bénichou and R. Voituriez, From first-passage times of random walks in confinement to geometry-controlled kinetics, Phys. Rep.539, 225 (2014)

    2014

  5. [4]

    T. L. Hill,Free Energy Transduction and Biochemical Cycle Kinetics(Springer-Verlag, New York, 1989)

    1989

  6. [5]

    C. L. Kussius and G. K. Popescu, Kinetic basis of par- tial agonism at nmda receptors, Nat. Neurosci.12, 1114 (2009)

    2009

  7. [6]

    R. D. Vale and R. A. Milligan, The way things move: Looking under the hood of molecular motor proteins, Science288, 88 (2000)

    2000

  8. [7]

    K. B. Gromadski and M. V. Rodnina, Kinetic determi- nants of high-fidelity tRNA discrimination on the ribo- some, Mol. Cell13, 191 (2004)

    2004

Show all 50 references
  1. [8]

    J. A. Owen, T. R. Gingrich, and J. M. Horowitz, Universal thermodynamic bounds on nonequilibrium response with biochemical applications, Phys. Rev. X10, 011066 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    Aslyamov and M

    T. Aslyamov and M. Esposito, Nonequilibrium response for Markov jump processes: Exact results and tight bounds, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 037101 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    Aslyamov and M

    T. Aslyamov and M. Esposito, General theory of static response for Markov jump processes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 107103 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    P. E. Harunari, S. Dal Cengio, V. Lecomte, and M. Polet- tini, Mutual linearity of nonequilibrium network currents, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 047401 (2024)

    2024

  5. [13]

    Dal Cengio, P

    S. Dal Cengio, P. E. Harunari, V. Lecomte, and M. Po- lettini, Mutual multilinearity of nonequilibrium network currents, SciPost Phys.19, 111 (2025)

    2025

  6. [14]

    Bebon and T

    R. Bebon and T. Speck, Mutual linearity is a generic property of steady-state Markov networks, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 137401 (2026)

    2026

  7. [15]

    Z. Wang, C. Wang, and J. Ren, Sensitivity analysis of cycle flux response in nonequilibrium dynamics, J. Chem. Phys.165, 044105 (2026)

    2026

  8. [16]

    Fancher and J

    S. Fancher and J. M. Horowitz, Topological build- ing blocks of nonequilibrium response (2026), arXiv:2607.12096 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2026 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Katayama, R

    K. Katayama, R. Nagayama, and S. Ito, Diagrammatic expressions for steady-state distribution and static re- sponses in population dynamics, Phys. Rev. Research8, 013312 (2026)

    2026

  10. [18]

    Goerlich, A

    R. Goerlich, A. Tartar, Y. Roichman, and I. M. Sokolov, Fluctuation-response relation for a nonequilibrium system with resolved Markovian embedding, Phys. Rev. E114, 014138 (2026)

    2026

  11. [19]

    Klett and B

    K. Klett and B. Lindner, Fluctuation-response relations and response-response relations for membrane voltage and spike train of stochastic integrate-and-fire neurons, Phys. Rev. E112, 044404 (2025)

    2025

  12. [20]

    Aslyamov, K

    T. Aslyamov, K. Ptaszyński, and M. Esposito, Nonequi- librium fluctuation-response relations: From identities to bounds, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 157101 (2025)

    2025

  13. [21]

    Liu and J

    K. Liu and J. Gu, Dynamical activity universally bounds precision of response in Markovian nonequilibrium sys- tems, Commun. Phys.8, 62 (2025)

    2025

  14. [22]

    J.ZhengandZ.Lu,Universalresponseinequalitiesbeyond steady states via trajectory information geometry, Phys. Rev. E112, L012103 (2025)

    2025

  15. [23]

    Zheng and Z

    J. Zheng and Z. Lu, Unified linear fluctuation-response theory arbitrarily far from equilibrium, Phys. Rev. E112, 064103 (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    Kwon, H.-M

    E. Kwon, H.-M. Chun, H. Park, and J. S. Lee, Fluctuation- response inequalities for kinetic and entropic perturba- tions, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 097101 (2025)

    2025

  17. [25]

    Dechant, Finite-frequency fluctuation-response inequal- ity, Phys

    A. Dechant, Finite-frequency fluctuation-response inequal- ity, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 207101 (2026)

    2026

  18. [26]

    Gao, H.-M

    Q. Gao, H.-M. Chun, and J. M. Horowitz, Thermo- dynamic constraints on kinetic perturbations of homo- geneous driven diffusions, Europhys. Lett.146, 31001 (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    Khodabandehlou, C

    F. Khodabandehlou, C. Maes, and K. Netočný, Affine relationships between steady currents, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.58, 155002 (2025)

    2025

  20. [28]

    Kamp and A

    F. Kamp and A. Szabo, Fluxes, first passage times, and the reduction of Hill diagrams, Cell Biophys.12, 145 (1988)

    1988

  21. [29]

    J. J. Hopfield, Kinetic proofreading: A new mechanism for reducing errors in biosynthetic processes requiring high specificity, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.71, 4135 (1974)

    1974

  22. [30]

    Ninio, Kinetic amplification of enzyme discrimination, Biochimie57, 587 (1975)

    J. Ninio, Kinetic amplification of enzyme discrimination, Biochimie57, 587 (1975)

    1975

  23. [31]

    Rao and L

    R. Rao and L. Peliti, Thermodynamics of accuracy in kinetic proofreading: Dissipation and efficiency trade-offs, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp.2015(6), P06001

    2015

  24. [32]

    Kumar, K

    P. Kumar, K. Banerjee, and G. Gangopadhyay, Interplay of energy, dissipation, and error in kinetic proofreading: Control via concentration and binding energy, Physica A 603, 127735 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    Sekimoto, Derivation of the first passage time distri- bution for Markovian process on discrete network (2021), arXiv:2110.02216 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    K. Sekimoto, Derivation of the first passage time distri- bution for Markovian process on discrete network (2021), arXiv:2110.02216 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2021 arXiv

  26. [34]

    D. R. Cox,Renewal Theory(Methuen, 1962)

    1962

  27. [35]

    D. J. Daley and D. Vere-Jones,An Introduction to the Theory of Point Processes, Vol. I: Elementary Theory and Methods, 2nd ed. (Springer, New York, 2003)

    2003

  28. [36]

    Kacser and J

    H. Kacser and J. A. Burns, The control of flux, Symp. Soc. Exp. Biol.27, 65 (1973)

    1973

  29. [37]

    Heinrich and T

    R. Heinrich and T. A. Rapoport, A linear steady-state treatment of enzymatic chains: General properties, con- trol and effector strength, Eur. J. Biochem.42, 89 (1974)

    1974

  30. [38]

    D. A. Fell, Metabolic control analysis: A survey of its theoretical and experimental development, Biochem. J. 286, 313 (1992)

    1992

  31. [39]

    Meléndez-Hevia, N

    E. Meléndez-Hevia, N. V. Torres, J. Sicilia, and H. Kacser, Control analysis of transition times in metabolic systems, Biochem. J.265, 195 (1990)

    1990

  32. [40]

    Liu, Simple proofs of the summation and connec- tivity theorems in metabolic control analysis (2025), arXiv:2501.12519 [q-bio.MN]

    W. Liu, Simple proofs of the summation and connec- tivity theorems in metabolic control analysis (2025), arXiv:2501.12519 [q-bio.MN]

    2025 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Murugan, D

    A. Murugan, D. A. Huse, and S. Leibler, Speed, dissipa- tion, and error in kinetic proofreading, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.109, 12034 (2012). 9

    2012

  34. [42]

    T. W. McKeithan, Kinetic proofreading in T-cell receptor signal transduction, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.92, 5042 (1995)

    1995

  35. [43]

    Sartori and S

    P. Sartori and S. Pigolotti, Kinetic versus energetic dis- crimination in biological copying, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 188101 (2013)

    2013

  36. [44]

    Eslami-Mossallam, M

    B. Eslami-Mossallam, M. Klein, C. van der Smagt, K. van der Sanden, S. K. Jones, Jr., J. A. Hawkins, I. J. Finkel- stein, and M. Depken, A kinetic model predicts SpCas9 activity, improves off-target classification, and reveals the physical basis of targeting fidelity, Nat. Com...

    2022

  37. [45]

    B. E. Clancy, W. M. Behnke-Parks, J. O. L. Andreasson, S. S. Rosenfeld, and S. M. Block, A universal pathway for kinesin stepping, Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol.18, 1020 (2011)

    2011

  38. [46]

    M. Rief, R. S. Rock, A. D. Mehta, M. S. Mooseker, R. E. Cheney, and J. A. Spudich, Myosin-v stepping kinetics: A molecular model for processivity, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.97, 9482 (2000)

    2000

  39. [47]

    T. R. Gingrich and J. M. Horowitz, Fundamental bounds on first passage time fluctuations for currents, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 170601 (2017)

    2017

  40. [48]

    A. Pal, S. Reuveni, and S. Rahav, Thermodynamic uncer- tainty relation for first-passage times on markov chains, Phys. Rev. Research3, L032034 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    Hiura and S.-i

    K. Hiura and S.-i. Sasa, Kinetic uncertainty relation on first-passage time for accumulated current, Phys. Rev. E 103, L050103 (2021)

    2021

  42. [50]

    D. M. Busiello, S. Liang, and S. Pigolotti, Non-equilibrium symmetry of cyclic first-passage times, New J. Phys.28, 064602 (2026)

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.