Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 58 references

A Simulation Algorithm for Brownian Dynamics on Complex Curved Surfaces

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that Brownian dynamics on curved surfaces can be simulated by triangulating the surface and folding velocities at triangle edges.

desk verdict A practical and novel mesh-based Brownian dynamics algorithm whose flat/sphere benchmarks are solid, but whose central velocity-folding step lacks convergence evidence on complex surfaces. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.07166 v1 pith:RD53TLFZ submitted 2019-08-20 cond-mat.soft

Yuguang Yang , Bo Li This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.soft
keywords Browniandynamicscurvedsurfacestrianglemeshvelocityfoldingcolloidalassemblysurfacediffusiontopologicaldefectsgeodesicmotion
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

Brownian dynamics of colloidal particles has largely been confined to surfaces that can be written down analytically, such as spheres, cylinders, and ellipsoids. This paper claims that the restriction is unnecessary: any curved surface, however complex, can be approximated by a triangle mesh, and a Brownian simulation can be run directly on that mesh. The key move is to compute forces and velocities in global coordinates but update positions in the local barycentric frame of each triangle, folding the velocity at edges so particles continue along geodesic paths. Benchmarks on a flat plane and a sphere match analytic diffusion predictions, and demonstrations on a torus and a knot show free diffusion, field-driven transport, and crystallization into hexagonal packings with pentagon-heptagon defects. If the folding step is correct, the algorithm opens arbitrary biological, chemical, and engineered geometries to particle-scale simulation.

What carries the argument

The central object is the triangle-mesh surface, with particle positions stored both in 3D lab coordinates and in per-triangle barycentric coordinates tied to the Jacobian matrix $J$ and its pseudo-inverse $J^*$. The central mechanism is velocity folding: whenever a particle's local update would cross an edge, the remaining velocity is rotated about that edge into the neighboring triangle, as though the two faces were unfolded into a plane, preserving speed while changing direction. This is what lets the mesh stand in for a smooth surface: the particle always remains on the mesh without constraint forces, and constant-velocity motion plus edge folding is argued to reproduce geodesic motion. The projection operator $P = I - nn^T$ keeps velocities tangent, and the edge-hitting times in Eq. (13) decide which face to fold into.

What would settle it

Run the algorithm on a spherical surface at several mesh refinements and compare the mean-square angular displacement to the exact short-time law $4Dt/R^2$ and the long-time plateau $(\pi^2-4)/2$. If the folded random walk does not converge to these limits as the mesh is refined, velocity folding is introducing a spurious stochastic drift.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes a practical algorithm: triangulate a curved surface; at each step compute the unconstrained velocity from deterministic and Brownian forces in 3D lab coordinates; project it onto the triangle's tangent plane; convert to barycentric local coordinates; advance the barycentric position; and when the step would cross an edge, fold the remaining velocity into the neighboring triangle as if the two triangles were hinged flat, preserving speed and rotating the direction. This velocity-folding device keeps particles on the mesh without constraint forces and makes the random walk follow geodesic paths across the mesh. It verifies the device by reproducing the exact Gaussian distribution on a flat mesh, and on a sphere by matching the Legendre-polynomial diffusion kernel and the mean-square angular displacement in both short- and long-time limits. On tori and knots it shows MSD plateaus reflecting global geometry and topology, field-biased transport, and crystalline packing with topological defects.

Load-bearing premise

The method's accuracy rests on the assumption that folding a particle's random tangent step across triangle edges reproduces the same diffusion as on the smooth curved surface; the paper supports this with benchmarks but gives no proof of convergence.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any surface representable as a triangle mesh becomes a valid arena for Brownian dynamics, with no analytic parametrization required.
  • On flat and spherical meshes the simulated displacement distributions and mean-square angular displacements match closed-form theory, so the method reproduces known diffusion in those limits.
  • On tori and knots, single-particle MSD shows the expected short-time $4Dt$ behavior, curvature-induced softening, and a long-time plateau set by the surface's global geometry and topology.
  • With a uniform external field, particles descend and equilibrate at the bottom of a torus or knot, and their descent path is sensitively controlled by Brownian fluctuations.
  • Multi-particle simulations with depletion attraction produce hexagonally packed crystals whose $g(r)$ peaks broaden with curvature, and pentagon-heptagon defects appear as required by the surface topology.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because velocity folding treats a random tangent velocity exactly like a deterministic one, the same algorithm should work for self-propelled active particles; the paper lists active systems as an outlook but does not test them.
  • A natural open question is convergence: on a fixed smooth surface, refining the mesh should drive the folded walk toward true Laplace-Beltrami diffusion, and the rate of that convergence can be measured from the sphere benchmarks.
  • The similar confinement plateaus on the much larger knot and smaller torus suggest that the plateau MSD is controlled by intrinsic geodesic diameter or graph structure of the mesh, not by Euclidean size; this could be tested by varying tube geometry at fixed area.
  • Because the algorithm is built from pre-computable rotation and projection matrices, it is straightforward to parallelize across particles and could be embedded in existing mesh-processing pipelines for organ- or scaffold-scale geometries.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a Brownian dynamics (BD) simulation algorithm for particles constrained to curved surfaces represented by triangle meshes. The method computes unconstrained forces and velocities in global coordinates, projects them onto the local tangent plane, and updates particle positions in local barycentric coordinates via an Euler–Maruyama scheme. When a particle crosses a triangle edge, the velocity is 'folded' across the edge, a procedure the authors justify by analogy with deterministic geodesic motion on polyhedral surfaces. The algorithm is benchmarked against analytical solutions for diffusion on a flat plane (2D Gaussian, Eq. (17)) and on a sphere (Legendre expansion, Eq. (19)), with good agreement, and then demonstrated on single- and multi-particle dynamics on torus and knot surfaces, including MSD analysis, field-driven transport, and curvature-induced crystallization with topological defects.

Significance. If the algorithm is correct, it fills a practical gap: existing BD methods for curved surfaces require analytic parametrizations, while the mesh-based hybrid global/local scheme could handle arbitrarily complex geometries, with a C++ implementation made publicly available. The benchmarks are genuinely independent of the algorithm's internal assumptions, so the central results are not circular. The paper also demonstrates potential applications to crystallization and defect formation on non-trivial topologies. However, the central stochastic-transport premise—that velocity folding produces correct Brownian dynamics on the polyhedral surface in the continuum limit—is not rigorously established, and the validation lacks a convergence study. The significance therefore rests on a plausible but partially supported algorithmic claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods and Results (spherical surface)] No mesh-convergence or time-step-convergence study is presented. The flat and sphere benchmarks are each run at a single mesh resolution (face length ~0.05a and ~0.018a, respectively) and a single integration time step (Δt = 0.0001 s), and agreement with theory is assessed visually rather than by a quantitative error norm with error bars. Since the abstract claims the method 'captures well' diffusion on extremely complex surfaces, the absence of a resolution/convergence study leaves the central claim under-supported: the torus and knot results in Figs. 4–6 could be subject to uncontrolled discretization bias.
  2. [Algorithm, velocity-folding paragraph] The velocity-folding rule is justified only for deterministic geodesic motion, and its only quantitative validation is the authors' own supplementary geodesic experiment (Fig. S1), which is a self-referential test of the same folding rule. For Brownian displacements, the step is a stochastic parallel-transport operation on a piecewise-flat surface, and the paper does not prove or numerically test that the folded random walk converges to Laplace–Beltrami diffusion as the mesh is refined. In particular, the algorithm does not specify how to treat a particle that reaches a vertex (where the angle defect concentrates curvature and holonomy), nor does it discuss potential Stratonovich/Ito drift corrections on the mesh. This is a load-bearing gap in the stochastic-transport premise.
  3. [Results: single particle dynamics on complex surfaces] The torus and knot simulations are not benchmarked against any independent analytical or high-resolution reference solution. The MSAD plateaus in Fig. 4(c,d) and the defect statistics in Fig. 6 are presented as physical results, but without a mesh-resolution or Δt-convergence check on those surfaces they remain qualitative demonstrations. The paper should either provide such checks or explicitly frame these as illustrative, pending validation.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Results: spherical surface and Fig. 3(c)] The spherical displacement distribution is compared with 'Eq. (18)' in both the text and the Fig. 3(c) caption, but Eq. (18) is the flat-plane radial distribution; the correct reference is the Legendre expansion in Eq. (19). Please correct this typo.
  2. [Eqs. (10)–(11)] The variance specification for the Brownian force in Eq. (11) is missing explicit ensemble-averaging brackets and is hard to parse; please rewrite with standard notation such as ⟨F_i^B'(t) F_i^B'(t')⟩.
  3. [Eq. (20)] The definition of mean-square angular displacement (MSAD) in Eq. (20) is garbled in the typeset version; please rewrite it in a clear form and define all quantities (e.g., whether r(t) is the lab-coordinate position vector and what the inner product is normalized by).
  4. [Fig. 6 caption] The caption for Fig. 6 is confusing: it refers to '(b, c) Pair distribution function' but then discusses panels (d) and (e); please renumber the figure panels and rewrite the caption so that each panel is clearly identified.
  5. [Algorithm pseudocode] The pseudocode does not explicitly state that when a particle crosses an edge within a time step, the remaining part of the interval is used to continue integration on the adjacent face. This event-driven sub-stepping is described in the text but should appear in the pseudocode for reproducibility.
  6. [Methods, mesh information] The mesh statistics are presented as an unnumbered text list; converting this into a proper table would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the algorithm's core validation uses independent analytical solutions, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks. The constrained Brownian dynamics equation (Eq. (8)) follows from standard projection arguments applied to Eq. (5), and the algorithm's position update is defined by local-coordinate Euler–Maruyama steps with a velocity-folding rule for crossing triangle edges. The central validation on the flat surface compares simulated displacement distributions with the closed-form 2D Gaussian solution, Eq. (17), and on the sphere with the Legendre-expansion solution, Eq. (19); both use the same diffusivity D as the simulation input but are independent analytical results, not fits to simulation output. The spherical MSAD is likewise compared with the short-time 4Dt prediction and the long-time geometric plateau (π²−4)/2, neither of which is derived from the algorithm. The velocity-folding procedure is justified by classical geodesic motion and by a numerical round-trip test; this is an implementation check rather than a circular reduction of the central claim to its assumptions. The paper does cite some prior work by the same authors (e.g., Refs. 28, 37, 38), but these citations support interaction potentials and diffusivity conventions, not the claimed correctness of the mesh-based algorithm, so they are not load-bearing self-citations. The absence of a convergence proof for the folded random walk on meshes is a legitimate correctness or rigor concern, but it is not circularity: the measured agreement with independent theory is external evidence. No equation or fitted parameter was found that defines the claimed result in terms of its own inputs, and no self-citation chain forces the algorithm's choice.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central algorithmic mechanism (velocity folding) rests on an unproved transport assumption; the benchmark uses external analytical solutions, so no fitted parameter is used to define the target result. The hand-chosen time step and mesh resolution are user inputs rather than derived constraints. The pair interaction parameters (B, Debye length, depletion strength) are material-model inputs, not fit to the benchmark.

free parameters (3)
  • Integration time step Δt = 0.0001 s
    Chosen in Methods; the paper does not report a convergence test showing how small Δt must be relative to face length to keep edge-folding errors negligible.
  • Mesh face length = 0.018a (sphere) to 0.19a (torus)
    Chosen per surface; no resolution study is provided, so the accuracy of the mesh approximation is not quantified.
  • Pair interaction parameters (B, κ^-1, ΔΠ, L) = B=2.29a/kT, κ^-1=20 nm, ΔΠ=5.8e-6 kT/nm^3, L=0.2a
    Chosen in Methods to yield about 5 kT attractions; they set the physical model for the demonstrations but are not used to fit the flat/sphere benchmarks.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption A watertight triangle mesh of the surface is available or constructible at sufficient resolution.
    The algorithm operates on a given mesh (Fig. 1); the paper assumes such a mesh can be produced, citing established mesh-generation tools.
  • ad hoc to paper Velocity folding at edges gives the correct stochastic transport of Brownian motion on a polyhedral surface.
    The paper validates this for force-free geodesic motion (Fig. S1) but gives no derivation for random tangent displacements; this is the core unproved premise.
  • domain assumption Edges and vertices can be ignored for the constrained dynamics because they have zero area.
    Stated near Eq. (9): 'edges have zero measure'. The paper does not address vertex singularities or pathwise edge-crossing effects in the stochastic process.
  • domain assumption Pair forces on curved surfaces may be computed from ambient chord distances and then projected to tangent planes.
    Used in Eq. (14) for multiple particles; the paper does not discuss whether geodesic-distance potentials would be more physical, especially on thin tubes.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Simulation Algorithm for Brownian Dynamics on Complex Curved Surfaces." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RD53TLFZ

@misc{pith2026190807166,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Simulation Algorithm for Brownian Dynamics on Complex Curved Surfaces},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RD53TLFZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.07166}
}
read the original abstract

Brownian dynamics of colloidal particles on complex surfaces has found important applications in diverse physical, chemical and biological processes. However, current Brownian dynamics simulation algorithms mostly work for relatively simple surfaces that can be analytically parameterized. In this work, we develop an algorithm to enable Brownian dynamics simulation on extremely complex surfaces. We approximate complex surfaces with triangle mesh surfaces and employ a novel scheme to perform particle simulation on these triangle mesh surfaces. Our algorithm computes forces and velocities of particles in global coordinates but updates their positions in local coordinates, which benefits from the advantages of simulation schemes in both global and local coordinate alone. We benchmark the proposed algorithm with theory and then simulate Brownian dynamics of both single and multiple particles on torus and knot surfaces. The results show that our method captures well diffusion, transport, and crystallization of colloidal particles on complex surfaces with non-trivial topology. This study offers an efficient strategy for elucidating the impact of curvature, geometry, and topology on particle dynamics and microstructure formation in complex environments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.07166 by the authors.

Figure 4
Figure 4. Trajectories of 100 s Brownian simulation of single particle diffusing on surfaces with non-trivial topology, including a torus (a) and a knot (b). (c, d) MSD analysis of a long simulation trajectory (10,000 s) on the torus (c) and the knot (d). We calculate the MSD in terms of Euclidean distance (instead of geodesic distance) based on particle lab coordinates. The dashed lines are the theory MSD = 4Dt that applies … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    R.; Manoharan, V

    Meng, G.; Paulose, J.; Nelson, D. R.; Manoharan, V . N., Elastic instability of a crystal growing on a curved surface. Science 2014, 343 (6171), 634-637

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    D.; Yang, Y .; Everett, W

    Edwards, T. D.; Yang, Y .; Everett, W. N.; Bevan, M. A., Reconfigurable multi -scale colloidal assembly on excluded volume patterns. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 13612

    work page 2015

  3. [3]

    N., Colloidal matter: Packing, geometry, and entropy

    Manoharan, V . N., Colloidal matter: Packing, geometry, and entropy. Science 2015, 349 (6251), 1253751

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    B.; Abkarian, M.; Mahadevan, L.; Stone, H

    Subramaniam, A. B.; Abkarian, M.; Mahadevan, L.; Stone, H. A., Colloid science: Non-spherical bubbles. Nature 2005, 438 (7070), 930

    work page 2005

  5. [5]

    Soft Matter 2013, 9 (38), 9072-9087

    Kruglova, O.; Demeyer, P.-J.; Zhong, K.; Zhou, Y .; Clays, K., Wonders of colloidal assembly. Soft Matter 2013, 9 (38), 9072-9087

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    T.; Vitelli, V .; Chaikin, P

    Irvine, W. T.; Vitelli, V .; Chaikin, P. M., Pleats in crystals on curved surfaces. Nature 2010, 468 (7326), 947-951

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    Weiss, M.; Hashimoto, H.; Nilsson, T., Anomalous protein diffusion in living cells as seen by fluorescence correlation spectroscopy. Biophys. J. 2003, 84 (6), 4043-4052

    work page 2003

  8. [8]

    Neuroscience 2009, 158 (1), 19-24

    Jaskolski, F.; Henley, J., Synaptic receptor trafficking: the lateral point of view. Neuroscience 2009, 158 (1), 19-24

    work page 2009

Show all 58 references
  1. [9]

    J.; Schwartz, M

    Ridley, A. J.; Schwartz, M. A.; Burridge, K.; Firtel, R. A.; Ginsberg, M. H.; Borisy, G.; Parsons, J. T.; Horwitz, A. R., Cell migration: integrating signals from front to back. Science 2003, 302 (5651), 1704-1709

    2003

  2. [10]

    Trends Biotechnol

    Baptista, D.; Teixeira, L.; van Blitterswijk, C.; Giselbrecht, S.; Truckenmüller, R., Overlooked? Underestimated? Effects of Substrate Curvature on Cell Behavior. Trends Biotechnol. 2019

    2019

  3. [11]

    B.; Ladoux, B.; Lim, C

    Xi, W.; Sonam, S.; Saw, T. B.; Ladoux, B.; Lim, C. T., Emergent patterns of collective cell migration under tubular confinement. Nature communications 2017, 8 (1), 1517

    2017

  4. [12]

    G.; Duclos, G.; Bonnet, I.; Silberzan, P., Architecture and migration of an epithelium on a cylindrical wire

    Yevick, H. G.; Duclos, G.; Bonnet, I.; Silberzan, P., Architecture and migration of an epithelium on a cylindrical wire. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2015, 112 (19), 5944-5949

    2015

  5. [13]

    C.; Loiseau, E.; Sanchez, T.; DeCamp, S

    Keber, F. C.; Loiseau, E.; Sanchez, T.; DeCamp, S. J.; Giomi, L.; Bowick, M. J.; Marchetti, M. C.; Dogic, Z.; Bausch, A. R., Topology and dynamics of active nematic vesicles. Science 2014, 345 (6201), 1135

    2014

  6. [14]

    J.; Marchetti, M

    Shankar, S.; Bowick, M. J.; Marchetti, M. C., Topological sound and flocking on curved surfaces. Physical Review X 2017, 7 (3), 031039

    2017

  7. [15]

    R.; Glotzer, S

    Bruss, I. R.; Glotzer, S. C., Curvature -induced microswarming. Soft matter 2017, 13 (30), 5117- 5121

    2017

  8. [16]

    W.; Pearce, D

    Ellis, P. W.; Pearce, D. J.; Chang, Y . -W.; Goldsztein, G.; Giomi, L.; Fernandez -Nieves, A., Curvature-induced defect unbinding and dynamics in active nematic toroids. Nature Physics 2018, 14 (1), 85

    2018

  9. [17]

    Biophysical journal 2016, 110 (6), 1226-1233

    Paquay, S.; Kusters, R., A method for molecular dynamics on curved surfaces. Biophysical journal 2016, 110 (6), 1226-1233

    2016

  10. [18]

    M.; Castañeda-Priego, R.; Estrada- 27 Jiménez, S., A Brownian dynamics algorithm for colloids in curved manifolds

    Castro-Villarreal, P.; Villada-Balbuena, A.; Méndez-Alcaraz, J. M.; Castañeda-Priego, R.; Estrada- 27 Jiménez, S., A Brownian dynamics algorithm for colloids in curved manifolds. The Journal of chemical physics 2014, 140 (21), 214115

    2014

  11. [19]

    Backofen, R.; V oigt, A.; Witkowski, T., Particles on curved surfaces: A dynamic approach by a phase-field-crystal model. Phys. Rev. E 2010, 81 (2), 025701

    2010

  12. [20]

    T.; Bowick, M

    Irvine, W. T.; Bowick, M. J.; Chaikin, P. M., Fractionalization of interstitials in curved colloidal crystals. Nature materials 2012, 11 (11), 948

    2012

  13. [21]

    Soft Matter 2018, 14 (48), 9928- 9936

    Apaza, L.; Sandoval, M., Active matter on Riemannian manifolds. Soft Matter 2018, 14 (48), 9928- 9936

    2018

  14. [22]

    L.; McCammon, J

    Ermak, D. L.; McCammon, J. A., Brownian dynamics with hydrodynamic interactions. The Journal of chemical physics 1978, 69 (4), 1352-1360

    1978

  15. [23]

    J.; Harris, T

    Banigan, E. J.; Harris, T. H.; Christian, D. A.; Hunter, C. A.; Liu, A. J., Heterogeneous CD8+ T cell migration in the lymph node in the absence of inflammation revealed by quantitative migration analysis. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2015, 11 (2), e1004058

    2015

  16. [24]

    L.; Rosenfeld, S

    Klank, R. L.; Rosenfeld, S. S.; Odde, D. J., A Brownian dynamics tumor progression simulator with application to glioblastoma. Convergent science physical oncology 2018, 4 (1), 015001

    2018

  17. [25]

    R.; Wade, R

    Gabdoulline, R. R.; Wade, R. C., Brownian dynamics simulation of protein –protein diffusional encounter. Methods 1998, 14 (3), 329-341

    1998

  18. [26]

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 1998, 95 (8), 4288-4292

    Rojnuckarin, A.; Kim, S.; Subramaniam, S., Brownian dynamics simulations of protein folding: access to milliseconds time scale a nd beyond. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 1998, 95 (8), 4288-4292

    1998

  19. [27]

    C.; Pasquali, M., Brownian dynamics algorithm for bead -rod semiflexible chain with anisotropic friction

    Montesi, A.; Morse, D. C.; Pasquali, M., Brownian dynamics algorithm for bead -rod semiflexible chain with anisotropic friction. The Journal of chemical physics 2005, 122 (8), 084903

    2005

  20. [28]

    A., Interfacial colloidal rod dynamics: Coefficients, simulations, and analysis

    Yang, Y .; Bevan, M. A., Interfacial colloidal rod dynamics: Coefficients, simulations, and analysis. J. Chem. Phys. 2017, 147 (5), 054902

    2017

  21. [29]

    I., Mathematical methods of classical mechanics

    Arnol'd, V . I., Mathematical methods of classical mechanics . Springer Science & Business Media: 2013; V ol. 60

    2013

  22. [30]

    J., Brownian motion with stiff bonds and rigid constraints

    Hinch, E. J., Brownian motion with stiff bonds and rigid constraints. J. Fluid Mech. 1994, 271, 219- 234

    1994

  23. [31]

    S., Finite element mesh generation

    Lo, D. S., Finite element mesh generation. CRC Press: 2014

    2014

  24. [32]

    J., Geometric modeling and mesh generation from sca nned images

    Zhang, Y . J., Geometric modeling and mesh generation from sca nned images . Chapman and Hall/CRC: 2018

    2018

  25. [33]

    CRC press: 2010

    Botsch, M.; Kobbelt, L.; Pauly, M.; Alliez, P.; Lévy, B., Polygon mesh processing . CRC press: 2010

    2010

  26. [34]

    Hinch, E., Brownian motion with stiff bonds and rigid constraints. J. Fluid Mech. 1994, 271, 219- 234

    1994

  27. [35]

    SIAM Review 2001, 43 (3), 525-546

    Higham, D., An Algorithmic Introduction to Numerical Simulation of Stochastic Differential Equations. SIAM Review 2001, 43 (3), 525-546

    2001

  28. [36]

    Revista mexicana de física 2017, 63 (1), 26-31

    Santiago, J.; Chacón-Acosta, G.; González-Gaxiola, O.; Torres-Vargas, G., Geometry of classical particles on curved surfaces. Revista mexicana de física 2017, 63 (1), 26-31

    2017

  29. [37]

    D.; Bevan, M

    Edwards, T. D.; Bevan, M. A., Depletion -Mediated Potentials and Phase Behavior for Micelles, Macromolecules, Nanoparticles, and Hydrogel Particles. Langmuir 2012, 28 (39), 13816-13823

    2012

  30. [38]

    D.; Bevan, M

    Yang, Y .; Edwards, T. D.; Bevan, M. A., Modeling depletion mediated colloidal assembly on topographical patterns. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2015, 449, 270-278

    2015

  31. [39]

    A., Energy landscapes for ellipsoids in non-uniform 28 AC electric fields

    Torres-Díaz, I.; Rupp, B.; Yang, Y .; Bevan, M. A., Energy landscapes for ellipsoids in non-uniform 28 AC electric fields. Soft matter 2018, 14 (6), 934-944

    2018

  32. [40]

    D.; Bevan, M

    Edwards, T. D.; Bevan, M. A., Controlling colloidal particles with electric fields. Langmuir 2014, 30 (36), 10793-10803

    2014

  33. [41]

    M.; Bevan, M

    Yang, Y .; Thyagarajan, R.; Ford, D. M.; Bevan, M. A., Dynamic colloidal assembly pathways via low dimensional models. J. Chem. Phys. 2016, 144 (20), 204904

    2016

  34. [42]

    J.; Bevan, M

    Juárez, J. J.; Bevan, M. A., Feedback Controlled Colloidal Self-Assembly. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2012, 22 (18), 3833-3839

    2012

  35. [43]

    D.; Grover, M

    Tang, X.; Rupp, B.; Yang, Y .; Edwards, T. D.; Grover, M. A.; Bevan, M. A., Optimal Feedback Controlled Assembly of Perfect Crystals. ACS nano 2016, 10 (7), 6791-6798

    2016

  36. [44]

    D.; Yang, Y .; Beltran-Villegas, D

    Edwards, T. D.; Yang, Y .; Beltran-Villegas, D. J.; Bevan, M. A., Colloidal crystal grain boundary formation and motion. Scientific Reports 2014, 4, 6132

    2014

  37. [45]

    J.; Cacciuto, A.; Dinsmore, A.; Hsu, M.; Nelson, D.; Nikolaides, M.; Travesset, A.; Weitz, D., Grain boundary scars and spherical crystallography

    Bausch, A.; Bowick, M. J.; Cacciuto, A.; Dinsmore, A.; Hsu, M.; Nelson, D.; Nikolaides, M.; Travesset, A.; Weitz, D., Grain boundary scars and spherical crystallography. Science 2003, 299 (5613), 1716-1718

    2003

  38. [46]

    C., Colloidal glasses

    Poon, W. C., Colloidal glasses. MRS Bulletin 2004, 29 (2), 96-99

    2004

  39. [47]

    Current opinion in colloid & interface science 2001, 6 (5-6), 479-483

    Härtl, W., Colloidal glasses. Current opinion in colloid & interface science 2001, 6 (5-6), 479-483

    2001

  40. [48]

    L.; Weeks, E

    Hunter, G. L.; Weeks, E. R., The physics of the colloidal glass transition. Rep. Prog. Phys. 2012, 75 (6), 066501

    2012

  41. [49]

    P.; Malins, A.; Dunleavy, A

    Royall, C. P.; Malins, A.; Dunleavy, A. J.; Pinney, R., Strong geometric frustration in model glassformers. J. Non-Cryst. Solids 2015, 407, 34-43

    2015

  42. [50]

    A., Jamming phase diagram for attractive particles

    Trappe, V .; Prasad, V .; Cipelletti, L.; Segre, P.; Weitz, D. A., Jamming phase diagram for attractive particles. Nature 2001, 411 (6839), 772

    2001

  43. [51]

    -C.; Cates, M

    Stratford, K.; Adhikari, R.; Pagonabarraga, I.; Desplat, J. -C.; Cates, M. E., Colloidal jamming at interfaces: A route to fluid-bicontinuous gels. Science 2005, 309 (5744), 2198-2201

    2005

  44. [52]

    D.; Comas -Garcia, M.; Garmann, R

    Cadena-Nava, R. D.; Comas -Garcia, M.; Garmann, R. F.; Rao, A.; Knobler, C. M.; Gelbart, W. M., Self-assembly of viral capsid protein and RNA molecules of different sizes: requirement for a specific high protein/RNA mass ratio. J. Virol. 2012, 86 (6), 3318-3326

    2012

  45. [53]

    Soft matter 2019

    Liu, Y .; Yang, Y .; Li, B.; Feng, X.-Q., Collective oscillation in dense suspension of self -propelled chiral rods. Soft matter 2019

    2019

  46. [54]

    E.; Kessler, J

    Dombrowski, C.; Cisneros, L.; Chatkaew, S.; Goldstein, R. E.; Kessler, J. O., Self -concentration and large-scale coherence in bacterial dynamics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 93 (9), 098103

    2004

  47. [55]

    C., Active jamming: Self-propelled soft particles at high density

    Henkes, S.; Fily, Y .; Marchetti, M. C., Active jamming: Self-propelled soft particles at high density. Phys. Rev. E 2011, 84 (4), 040301

    2011

  48. [56]

    Soft matter 2018, 14 (14), 2610-2618

    Martín-Gómez, A.; Levis, D.; Díaz -Guilera, A.; Pagonabarraga, I., Collective motion of active Brownian particles with polar alignment. Soft matter 2018, 14 (14), 2610-2618

    2018

  49. [57]

    L.; Yang, Y .; Duncan, G.; Fairbrother, H.; Bevan, M

    Bitter, J. L.; Yang, Y .; Duncan, G.; Fairbrother, H.; Bevan, M. A., Interfacial and Confined Colloidal Rod Diffusion. Langmuir 2017, 33 (36), 9034-9042

    2017

  50. [58]

    F.; Bossis, G., Stokesian Dynamics

    Brady, J. F.; Bossis, G., Stokesian Dynamics. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1988, 20 (1), 111-157

    1988

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.