MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904485109 · doi:10.1088/1751-8121/aaf5fa

Brownian motion on a stochastic harmonic oscillator chain: limitations of the Langevin equation

2018· article· en· W2904485109 on OpenAlexafffund
Mykhaylo Evstigneev, A. D. Alhaidari

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLangevin equationBrownian motionHarmonic oscillatorBrownian dynamicsChain (unit)Stochastic differential equationPhysicsHarmonicGeometric Brownian motionStatistical physicsStochastic dynamicsClassical mechanicsDiffusion processQuantum mechanicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Diffusion of a Brownian particle along a linear chain of coupled stochastic harmonic oscillators is investigated using molecular dynamics (MD) and stochastic modeling. The latter technique is based on the Langevin equation (LE) derived by applying linear response theory to the chain degrees of freedom. When the coupling strength between the particle and the chain oscillators is comparable to or exceeds the chain coupling strength, the LE becomes inaccurate in its predictions of the diffusion coefficient value; however, it does reproduce qualitatively correctly the non-monotonic dependence of the diffusion coefficient on the particle-chain coupling strength, also found in MD simulations. The diffusion coefficient versus temperature curves determined from MD and Langevin simulations agree very well with each other at low temperatures. At high temperatures, the diffusion coefficient obtained from Langevin simulations is proportional to temperature, as predicted by Einstein’s relation. In contrast, the diffusion coefficient from MD is a non-linear function of temperature and is significantly greater than in Langevin simulations. Next, it is shown that Langevin description breaks down when the coupling between the chain oscillators is too strong. Finally, when an external constant force is applied to the particle, the Langevin description becomes qualitatively wrong. Namely, MD shows that the particle quickly detaches itself from the chain and moves at a constant acceleration due to the external force, whereas Langevin simulations predict constant terminal velocity of the particle.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and TheoreticalSame topicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical MechanicsFrench-language works237,207