1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
First passage times for a tracer particle in single file diffusion and fractional Brownian motion
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.4707349
/content/aip/journal/jcp/136/17/10.1063/1.4707349
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/136/17/10.1063/1.4707349

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Schematic representation of the lattice simulations of a SFD system. All particles (including the tracer—here in black) move under Brownian motion and are hard-core (the particles cannot occupy the same lattice site), meaning that they cannot pass each other, keeping their order for all times. Hence the tracer is in the center of all other particles for all times. The top panel shows the start of the simulation in thermal equilibrium, whereas the bottom panel shows that after some time, the tracer has achieved a first passage event.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Collapsed (log-log) plot of FPTD for a homogeneous SFD system with different absorption points and fBm FPTD (for simulation parameters see Tables I and III, respectively). Immediately, the collapsed plot shows that homogeneous SFD and fBm have the same FPTD dynamics over all time frames in the correct scaling, Sec. III. The MIA, Eq. (12), and the WFA, Eq. (5), are shown for comparison, both of which show poor agreement. The averaged proposed functional form, , Eq. (13), is constructed by collapsing all simulated data and fitting (see Appendix C), keeping the power-law exponent in the pre-factor fixed to H − 2; with H = 1/4, and setting C according to Eq. (14). The parameters (Table II) were then averaged and a single mean curve plotted. This conjecture shows excellent agreement with both anomalous diffusive systems on all time scales.63 The Molchan long-time prediction52 is given to guide the eye. The fBm FPTD consists of two different absorption points (Δx = 50, Δx = 100, 6 × 104 simulations)64 and displays good agreement with SFD results. (Inset) The short-time regime (linear axes) agreement between homogeneous SFD, fBm, and . Remaining simulation details are presented in Tables I, III, and II. The subscript s on each axis variable denotes “scaled,” namely t s = ϖt and f s = ϖ−1 f(t), where ϖ = C 1/2H x)−1/H .

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Collapsed plot of FPTD for a heterogeneous SFD system (Table I) with different absorption points. Also within, fBm FPTD is plotted for H = 1/6, see Table III. The long-time dynamics for both systems agree very well with each other and also with Molchan's equation, Eq. (1). In the very short-time the systems part, most likely because of the complex nature of heterogeneity-averaged SFD systems (see inset). The MIA, Eq. (12), and the WFA, Eq. (5), are shown for comparison. Both approximations show ill agreement with the simulated data for both systems and the theory. , Eq. (13), was fitted to the fBm data (displaying excellent agreement), Table III, as opposed to the SFD data, due to its poor fit (discussion in inset caption here, and Sec. IV).65 The data are scaled (signified by subscript s) using Eq. (15), with H = 1/6 (since α = 1/2)—see Fig. 2 caption for further explanation of the scaling. All remaining simulation details are presented in Tables I and III. (Inset) Collapsed plot of the FPTD for 3 different sets of heterogeneous friction constants, kept constant for each simulation. For this non-averaged case we use x c = 50 for all simulations, with all other system parameters displayed in Table I. The inset illustrates the fact that no self-averaging takes place in this heterogeneity-averaged system (see Sec. IV for further discussion).

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Collapsed plot of FPTD of sub-diffusive fBm with H = 0.35 (top), H = 0.45 (bottom) (simulation parameters: Table III). Both panels show that the WFA has the correct heavy-tailed gradient (compare to Molchan's prediction). The fBm also agrees with Eq. (1), as the tail is fixed (H − 2) and the data are modeled well by our conjecture, Eq. (13). Our conjecture models all time scales well, see Table III for quantitative details.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Collapsed plot of FPTD for super-diffusive fBm, H = 3/4, see Table III. Both the WFA and the fBm data only agree with Eq. (1) in the long time, as expected. Using the conjecture, Eq. (13), keeping H fixed, the 2 remaining degrees of freedom (γ, β, see Table III) cannot account for the discrepancy seen between the our conjectured FPTD and the fBm data. It is apparent that the MIA fails on all time scales. (Inset) Collapsed plots on linear axes illustrate short-time dynamics (fBm data as crosses).

Tables

Generic image for table
Table I.

SFD simulation parameters. Not applicable is abbreviated to N.A.

Generic image for table
Table II.

Homogeneous fit parameters. is the normalized chi-squared parameter. Raw data placed into 30 natural log-bins (see Appendix C).

Generic image for table
Table III.

fBm simulation and fit parameters. Each simulation has: C = 5; ; N = 6 × 104. Raw data placed in 50 natural log-bins, fitted to parameters (γ, β) (see Appendix C) to test the applicability of our simple conjecture, Eq. (13). is the normalized chi-squared parameter.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jcp/136/17/10.1063/1.4707349
2012-05-04
2014-04-25
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: First passage times for a tracer particle in single file diffusion and fractional Brownian motion
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/136/17/10.1063/1.4707349
10.1063/1.4707349
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM