Abstract
Transition path dynamics have been widely studied in chemical, physical, and technological systems. Mostly, the transition path dynamics is obtained for smooth barrier potentials, for instance, generic inverse-parabolic shapes. We here present analytical results for the mean transition path time, the distribution of transition path times, the mean transition path velocity, and the mean transition path shape in a rough inverted parabolic potential function under the driving of Gaussian white noise. These are validated against extensive simulations using the forward flux sampling scheme in parallel computations. We observe how precisely the potential roughness, the barrier height, and the noise intensity contribute to the particle transition in the rough inverted barrier potential.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
E. Pollak, P. Talkner, Chaos 15, 026116 (2005)
S. Arrhenius, Z. Phys, Chem. (Leipzig) 4, 216 (1889)
H. Eyring, J. Chem. Phys. 3, 107 (1935)
B.C. Garrett, Theor. Chem. Acc. 103, 200 (2000)
E. Wigner, Trans. Faraday Soc. 34, 29 (1938)
G.A. Petersson, Theor. Chem. Acc. 103, 190 (1995)
H.A. Kramers, Physica 7, 284 (1940)
A. Einstein, Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) 322, 549 (1905)
M. Smoluchowski, Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) 21, 756 (1906)
P. Hänggi, P. Talkner, M. Borkovec, Rev. Mod. Phys. 62, 251 (1990)
H.S. Chung, K. McHale, J.M. Louis, W.A. Eaton, Science 335, 981 (2012)
H.S. Chung, W.A. Eaton, Nature 502, 685 (2013)
H.S. Chung, S. Piana-Agostinetti, D.E. Shaw, W.A. Eaton, Science 349, 1504 (2015)
K. Neupane, A.P. Manuel, M.T. Woodside, Nat. Phys. 12, 700 (2016)
F. Sturzenegger, F. Zosel, E.D. Holmstrom, K.J. Buholzer, D.E. Makarov, D. Nettels, B. Schuler, Nat. Commun. 9, 4708 (2018)
K. Neupane, D.A.N. Foster, D.R. Dee, H. Yu, F. Wang, M.T. Woodside, Science 352, 239 (2016)
P. Cossio, G. Hummer, A. Szabo, J. Chem. Phys. 148, 123309 (2018)
D.E. Makarov, J. Chem. Phys. 143, 194103 (2015)
D. Chandler, J. Chem. Phys. 68, 2959 (1978)
C. Dellago, P.G. Bolhuis, D. Chandler, J. Chem. Phys. 108, 9236 (1998)
J.F. Lu, J. Nolen, Probab. Theory Rel. 161, 195 (2015)
A.T. Hawk, S.S.M. Konda, D.E. Makarov, J. Chem. Phys. 139, 064101 (2013)
C. Dellago, P.G. Bolhuis, P.L. Geissler, Adv. Chem. Phys. 123, 1 (2002)
P.G. Bolhuis, D. Chandler, C. Dellago, P.L. Geissler, Ann. Rev. Phys. Chem. 53, 291 (2002)
A.M. Berezhkovskii, G. Hummer, S.M. Bezrukov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 020601 (2006)
N. Krishna, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 068102 (2012)
H.S. Chung, W.A. Eaton, Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 48, 30 (2018)
K. Neupane, A.P. Manuel, J. Lambert, M.T. Woodside, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 6, 1005 (2015)
N.Q. Hoffer, M.T. Woodside, Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 53, 68 (2019)
P.C. Bressloff, S.D. Lawley, J. Phys. A Math. Theor. 48, 225001 (2015)
A. Godec, R. Metzler, Sci. Rep. 6, 20349 (2016)
A. Godec, R. Metzler, Phys. Rev. X 6, 041037 (2016)
A. Godec, R. Metzler, J. Phys. A 50, 084001 (2017)
O. Pulkkinen, R. Metzler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 198101 (2013)
D. Grebenkov, R. Metzler, G. Oshanin, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 20, 16393 (2018)
D. Grebenkov, R. Metzler, G. Oshanin, Commun. Chem. 1, 96 (2018)
D. Grebenkov, R. Metzler, G. Oshanin, New J. Phys. 21, 122001 (2019)
Y. Xu, H. Li, H.Y. Wang, W.T. Jia, X.L. Yue, J. Kurths, J. Appl. Mech. Trans. ASME 84, 091004 (2017)
A.M. Berezhkovskii, L. Dagdug, S.M. Bezrukov, J. Phys. Chem. B 121, 5455 (2017)
J. Deepika, J. Phys. A Math. Theor. 51, 285001 (2018)
A.M. Berezhkovskii, D.E. Makarov, J. Chem. Phys. 148, 201102 (2018)
N.Q. Hoffer, K. Neupane, A.G.T. Pyo, M.T. Woodside, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116, 8125 (2019)
H. Yu, A.N. Gupta, X. Liu, K. Neupane, A.M. Btigley, I. Sosova, M.T. Woodside, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 14452 (2012)
M. Laleman, E. Carlon, H. Orland, J. Chem. Phys. 147, 214103 (2017)
E. Pollak, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 18, 28872 (2016)
A.M. Berezhkovskii, L. Dagdug, S.M. Bezrukov, J. Phys. Chem. B 123, 3786 (2019)
W.K. Kim, R.R. Netz, J. Chem. Phys. 143, 224108 (2015)
H.S. Chung, I.V. Gopich, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 16, 18644 (2014)
E. Medina, R. Satija, D.E. Makarov, J. Phys. Chem. B 122, 11400 (2018)
R. Satija, D.E. Makarov, J. Phys. Chem. B 123, 802 (2019)
R. Satija, A. Das, D.E. Makarov, J. Chem. Phys. 147, 152707 (2017)
E. Carlon, H. Orland, T. Sakaue, C. Vanderzande, J. Phys. Chem. B 122, 11186 (2018)
J. Gladrow, R. Crivellari, F. Ritort, U.F. Keyser, Nat. Commun. 10, 55 (2019)
H. Janovjak, H. Knaus, D.J. Muller, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 129, 246 (2007)
P. Scheidler, W. Kob, K. Binder, J. Phys. Chem. B 108, 6673 (2004)
T.S. Chow, Phys. Lett. A 342, 148 (2005)
J. Wang, J. Onuchic, P. Wolynes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 4861 (1996)
R. Zwanzig, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 85, 2029 (1998)
Y.G. Li, Y. Xu, J. Kurths, X.L. Yue, Chaos 27, 103102 (2017)
Y.G. Li, Y. Xu, J. Kurths, Phys. Rev. E 96, 052121 (2017)
Y.G. Li, Y. Xu, J. Kurths, X.L. Yue, Phys. Rev. E 94, 042222 (2016)
Y.G. Li, Y. Xu, J. Kurths, Phys. Rev. E 99, 052203 (2019)
M. Hu, J.D. Bao, Phys. Rev. E 97, 062143 (2018)
Y.G. Li, Y. Xu, J. Kurths, J.Q. Duan, Chaos 29, 101102 (2019)
D. Mondal, P.K. Ghosh, D.S. Ray, J. Chem. Phys. 130, 074703 (2009)
H. Li, Y. Xu, J. Kurths, X.L. Yue, Eur. Phys. J. B 92, 76 (2019)
R.J. Allen, P.B. Warren, P.R.T. Wolde, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 018104 (2005)
H. Risken, The Fokker–Planck Equation: Methods of Solution and Applications (Springer, Berlin, 1996)
B.W. Zhang, D. Jasnow, J. Chem. Phys. 126, 074504 (2007)
B.G. Wenslwy, S. Batey, F.A.C. Bone, Z.M. Chan, N.R. Tumelty, A. Steward, L.G. Kwa, A. Borgia, J. Clarke, Nature 463, 685 (2010)
G. Hummer, J. Chem. Phys. 120, 516 (2004)
A.G.T. Pyo, N.Q. Hoffer, K. Neupane, M.T. Woodside, J. Chem. Phys. 149, 115101 (2018)
C.W. Gardiner, Handbook of Stochastic Methods (Springer, Berlin, 1985)
V.V. Palyulin, R. Metzler, J. Stat. Mech. 2012, L03001 (2012)
V.V. Palyulin, R. Metzler, J. Phys. A 47, 032002 (2014)
T. Mattos, C. Mejía-Monasterio, R. Metzler, G. Oshanin, Phys. Rev. E 86, 031143 (2012)
V.V. Palyulin, A.V. Chechkin, R. Metzler, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, 2931 (2014)
V.V. Palyulin, A.V. Chechkin, R. Klages, R. Metzler, J. Phys. A 49, 394002 (2016)
V.V. Palyulin, G. Blackburn, M.A. Lomholt, N. Watkins, R. Metzler, R. Klages, A.V. Chechkin, New J. Phys. 21, 103028 (2019)
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the NSF of China (11772255, 11902118), the Research Funds for Interdisciplinary subject, NWPU, the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, China and Shaanxi Province Project for Distinguished Young Scholars, as well as by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (ME 1535/7-1). RM acknowledges the Foundation for Polish Science (Fundacja na rzecz Nauki Polskiej) for support within an Alexander von Humboldt Honorary Polish Research Scholarship.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix A: The transition path probability density function
Appendix A: The transition path probability density function
According to Eq. (1), the reactive trajectories from \(x_\mathrm{A}\) to \(x_\mathrm{B}\) should satisfy the stochastic differential equation [21]
where W(t) is the unit Wiener process, \(\phi _\mathrm{B}(x)\) is the committor function as shown in Eq. (11). Then, the probability density function for the transition paths, \(P_{\mathrm {TP}}(x,t)\) from \(x_\mathrm{A}\) to \(x_\mathrm{B}\), satisfies
With \(f(x)=-\mathrm{d}V(x)/\mathrm {d}x=-(1/D)\mathrm{d}G(x)/\mathrm {d}x\),
Defining \(M(x)=\exp \left( G(x)/D\right) \), we obtain
Hence, Eq. (A2) is recast in the Smoluchowski equation [72].
This is Eq. (9) in the main text.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Li, H., Xu, Y., Li, Y. et al. Transition path dynamics across rough inverted parabolic potential barrier. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 135, 731 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-020-00752-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-020-00752-7