Inferring interaction potentials from stochastic particle trajectories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate interaction potentials between microscopic components such as colloidal particles or cells are crucial to understanding a range of processes, including colloidal crystallization, bacterial colony formation, and cancer metastasis. Even in systems where the precise interaction mechanisms are unknown, effective interactions can be measured to inform simulation and design. However, these measurements are difficult and time-intensive, and often require conditions that are drastically different from conditions of the system of interest. Moreover, existing methods of measuring interparticle potentials rely on constraining a small number of particles at equilibrium, placing limits on which interactions can be measured. We introduce a method for inferring interaction potentials directly from trajectory data of interacting particles. We explicitly solve the equations of motion to find a form of the potential that maximizes the probability of observing a known trajectory. Our method is valid for systems both in and out of equilibrium, is well-suited to large numbers of particles interacting in typical system conditions, and does not assume a functional form of the interaction potential. We apply our method to infer the interactions of colloidal spheres from experimental data, successfully extracting the range and strength of a depletion interaction from the motion of the particles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".