Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Stochastic calculus of run-and-tumble motion: an applied perspective

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a generalized Itô lemma for jump and diffusion processes gives a direct sample-path route to the Chapman-Kolmogorov equations of one-dimensional run-and-tumble motion, including resetting, sticky boundaries, entropy…

desk verdict A useful consolidation of the author's own RTP program: the sticky-boundary and global-resetting sections are the real content, but the sticky-boundary derivation rests on an unproven delta-layer ansatz and contains a sign inconsistency that should be fixed. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15544 v1 pith:4OUNROTC submitted 2024-11-23 cond-mat.stat-mech

Paul C Bressloff This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mech MSC 60H1060J7682C31 PACS 05.40.-a05.60.-k
keywords run-and-tumbleparticlestochasticcalculusItôlemmaChapman-Kolmogorovequationresettingstickyboundaryentropyproductionglobal
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

Run-and-tumble motion is usually studied through its Chapman-Kolmogorov equation for the joint probability of position and velocity state. This paper develops the opposite route: model the velocity switches and any resetting events as Poisson processes, write the position as a jump-diffusion, and apply a generalized Itô lemma to the empirical measure $\rho_k(x,t)=\delta(x-X(t))\delta_{k,\sigma(t)}$. The resulting stochastic partial differential equation, when averaged over the noise sources, is exactly the CK equation. The author uses this pipeline to derive resetting and sticky-boundary equations, to define stochastic entropy along individual trajectories, and to show that global resetting makes noninteracting particles statistically correlated.

What carries the argument

The workhorse is the generalised Itô lemma for jump-diffusions driven by Brownian motion and Poisson processes: for a test function $f$, $df = (v\sigma f' + D f'')dt + \sqrt{2D}f'dW + [f(X,-\sigma)-f(X,\sigma)]dN$, plus resetting jump terms when present. Its role is to convert sample-path dynamics into an SPDE for the empirical measure; averaging that SPDE over the independent noise sources, using the Poisson-process independence identity $\mathbb{E}[F(X(t^-),\sigma(t^-))dN(t)]=\alpha\,dt\,\mathbb{E}[F]$, is the single step that produces every Chapman-Kolmogorov equation in the paper.

What would settle it

Numerically integrate the boundary-layer SDE for a sticky wall with a finite layer width $\epsilon$ and a spatially distributed bound state, and test whether the flux relation $\alpha Q(t)=v p_1(0^+,t)$ together with $dQ/dt=-\alpha Q+v p_{-1}(0^+,t)$ holds as $\epsilon\to 0$; a persistent discrepancy would show the delta-function boundary-layer ansatz is not a consequence of the stochastic calculus.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that for a one-dimensional run-and-tumble particle with dynamics $dX=v\sigma\,dt+\sqrt{2D}\,dW$ plus jump terms and $d\sigma=-2\sigma(t^-)dN(t)$, with an independent resetting Poisson process when present, the generalised Itô lemma determines everything. Applied to the empirical measure, it yields an SPDE whose expectation reproduces the forward CK equation $\partial_t p_k = -v k\partial_x p_k + D\partial_x^2 p_k + \alpha(p_{-k}-p_k)$ together with the resetting and boundary terms. The same machinery re-derives, rather than postulates, the occupation-time propagator equations for a partially absorbing sticky boundary and the stochastic CK equation for a population with global resetting. The paper also establishes that the pathwise stochastic entropy defined by $S_{\rm sys}(t)=-\ln p_{\sigma(t)}(X(t),t)$ averages to the Gibbs-Shannon entropy, with steady-state total entropy production $v^2/D$ in the purely diffusive case.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a particle stuck at a sticky wall can be treated as a point mass localised at a single boundary-layer point, with the layer width sent to zero before averaging over the Poisson switching process; if the bound state has finite spatial extent or position-dependent tumbling, the derived sticky-boundary equations are not implied.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For an RTP with diffusion and resetting, averaging the empirical-measure SPDE gives the CK equation (3.13), recovering the standard resetting master equation when $D=0$.
  • The sticky-boundary CK equations, including the occupation-time propagator for absorption at a threshold, follow from the boundary-layer ansatz rather than being assumed; the Laplace-transformed equations reproduce the encounter-based model introduced earlier heuristically.
  • Along individual trajectories the stochastic entropy production rate averages to the Gibbs-Shannon entropy rate $\frac{d}{dt}S_{\rm GS}(t)$, so the second law appears only after ensemble averaging.
  • For a population of noninteracting RTPs, a global resetting clock makes $\mathbb{E}[\Phi_j(x,t)\Phi_k(y,t)]\ne \mathbb{E}[\Phi_j(x,t)]\,\mathbb{E}[\Phi_k(y,t)]$, so global resetting alone creates particle correlations.
  • The moment equations of the population density form a hierarchy of ODEs with resetting in which lower-order moments are embedded in higher-order equations, so joint distributions of low-order moments are needed at each level.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the same SPDE-averaging pipeline should extend to biased runs or position-dependent switching rates, because the Poisson-jump calculus does not use symmetry between the two velocity states.
  • Editorial inference: the boundary-layer ansatz suggests a concrete modelling test—comparing the derived flux relation $\alpha Q(t)=v p_1(0^+,t)$ against simulations with a finite-width sticky zone would show how much resolution the point-localization limit actually retains.
  • Editorial inference: the global-resetting correlation mechanism could be observed in experiments where active colloids or bacteria are synchronously returned to starting conditions by an external global pulse; the predicted two-particle covariance is a measurable signature that does not require interactions.
  • Editorial inference: the embedded moment hierarchy hints at a closure problem for population statistics under global resetting; a possible extension is to ask whether a truncated set of moments with resetting reproduces the full density statistics in some limit.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a sample-path, stochastic-calculus framework for one-dimensional run-and-tumble particles, using a generalised Itô lemma for Poisson and diffusion processes to derive Chapman-Kolmogorov equations for standard motion, position/velocity resetting, and sticky boundaries. It then applies the framework to stochastic entropy production and to a population of globally resetting RTPs, and it derives exact non-equilibrium steady states in an appendix. The appendix recovers the Evans-Majumdar result in the symmetric-resetting case, and the sticky-boundary equations reproduce the author's earlier equations from Ref. [15].

Significance. If the derivation is made fully rigorous, the paper offers a useful unified route from RTP sample paths to CK equations, including encounter-based sticky boundaries, and it introduces a population-level SPDE whose global-resetting correlations and moment hierarchy are genuinely interesting. The stochastic-entropy analysis and the explicit NESS formulas are also valuable. However, the central sticky-boundary derivation depends on an assumed delta-layer ansatz rather than on the stated stochastic calculus alone, and several equations contain sign or factor errors. The paper's main contribution is therefore currently a promising program with important local corrections needed.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.1, Eq. (4.9)] The boundary-layer ansatz rho_{epsilon,k}(x,t)=rho_k(x,t)1_{x>0}+delta(x+epsilon)delta_{k,-1}q(t) is assumed, not derived from the SDE (4.2). In that SDE a particle with X<0 has dX=0, so it remains at the point where it entered the layer rather than at x=-epsilon; the delta at x=-epsilon is an extra coordinate choice. If a finite-width layer has density q(t)/epsilon on [-epsilon,0], the epsilon-to-0 limit of the averaged equations need not equal the limit obtained by inserting the delta ansatz before averaging. Since Eqs. (4.13) and (4.27) are the main new results of Section 4, the paper must either state (4.9) explicitly as a modeling definition of the sticky state and soften the claim of a rigorous derivation, or provide a genuine limiting argument from a finite-width layer.
  2. [Section 4.2, Eq. (4.25c) vs. Eq. (4.28c)] The printed plus sign in front of q(0,t)delta(a) in Eq. (4.25c) is inconsistent with the integration-by-parts calculation in Eq. (4.24), which gives a boundary term -f(0-,0,-1)q(0,t) and hence should yield -q(0,t)delta(a) in (4.25c). The Laplace-transformed equation (4.28c) is also consistent with the negative sign, not the printed plus sign. The sign must be corrected, or the discrepancy explained; as written, the SPDE (4.25c) does not reproduce the boundary value problem (4.28) that is subsequently used.
  3. [Section 6, Eq. (6.5)] The coefficient of the white-noise term in Eq. (6.5) is -2 sqrt(D)/M sum_j xi_j(t) partial_x delta(x-X_j(t)), but the SDE (6.1) has sqrt(2D) dW_j(t), so the correct coefficient is -sqrt(2D)/M sum_j ... = -sqrt(2) sqrt(D)/M sum_j ... . This is a factor-of-sqrt(2) error in a stated SPDE. Although the term has zero mean and therefore does not affect the averaged equation (6.8), it would affect any fluctuation-level statement derived from (6.5), so it must be fixed.
  4. [Section 6, Eq. (6.16)] The sign of the resetting term in Eq. (6.16) is wrong. From Eq. (6.15b), subtracting the equations for k=1 and k=-1 gives dZ0/dt=-2alpha Z0 + h(t)[lambda_-^(0)-Z0(t-)], not -h(t)[lambda_-^(0)-Z0(t-)]. As printed, a reset event maps Z0 to 2Z0-lambda_-^(0) instead of to lambda_-^(0). The subsequent solution (6.17)-(6.19) uses the correct positive sign, so the inconsistency is localized but should be corrected.
  5. [Section 5.2, Eq. (5.58)] Eq. (5.58) states Rsys(t)-Rsys(t)=alpha integral ... >=0, which is identically zero on the left and cannot be positive on the right. This is not a meaningful second-law statement as printed. The intended left-hand side presumably involves a different quantity such as Rtot(t)-Rsys(t) or Rsys(t)-Rres(t); the authors should provide the correct equation and define all quantities appearing in it.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.2, Eq. (4.29)] The Laplace-transform definition in Eq. (4.29) contains notation errors: the second line writes eQ(z,s) on the left but averages over a on the right using eQ(a,t), and it should define eQ(z,t)=int_0^infty e^{-za}Q(a,t)da. Please correct the notation.
  2. [Section 5.1, Eq. (5.39)] There is a missing closing parenthesis in the denominator terms p_{sigma(t)}(X(t,t); these should read p_{sigma(t)}(X(t),t).
  3. [Section 6, Eq. (6.15b)] The right-hand side of Eq. (6.15b) contains the typo M 0)_k(t); this should be M_k^{(0)}(t).
  4. [Section 2, text near Eq. (2.10)] The text after Eq. (2.10) says 'in terms of the Poison process'; this should be 'Poisson process'.
  5. [Section 4.3] The sentence 'Performing the various steps outlined at the end of section 2, we obtain...' does not show the derivation; given that the resetting terms interact with the sticky boundary and the bound state, it would be clearer to display at least the SPDE or the key averaging step that produces Eqs. (4.32a)-(4.32c).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity; sticky-boundary section is conditional on an explicit boundary-layer ansatz, but no claim reduces to its input.

full rationale

The paper's main derivation chain is self-contained. The generalized Ito lemma (2.12) is applied to the empirical measure (2.14); averaging the resulting SPDE (2.19) with respect to the independent Poisson and Brownian noises gives the CK equation (2.22), with no fitted parameter or imported uniqueness theorem. The same scheme yields the resetting CK equation (3.13) and the population SPDE (6.8) directly from the stated jump SDEs. The sticky-boundary equations (4.13) and (4.27) are not circular in the score-defining sense: they are derived, conditionally, from the explicit boundary-layer ansatz (4.9)/(4.23), and the paper compares them with Ref. [15] only as a consistency check, not as the justifying evidence. The main limitation is that the ansatz itself is a modeling postulate: under SDE (4.2) a particle with X<0 has dX=0, so concentrating all layer mass at x=-epsilon is an extra choice, and a finite-width layer or a different epsilon-to-0 limit could give different boundary conditions; this overstates the claim of a first-principles derivation, but it is an unproven assumption rather than a circular reduction. External checks (Evans-Majumdar NESS in the Appendix, Paoluzzi et al. entropy rate in Sec. 5) are independent benchmarks, and the numerous self-citations are contextual or consistency checks, not load-bearing. A separate sign discrepancy between Eq. (4.24) and the delta source in (4.25c) is a correctness issue (canceling in the Laplace transform) and does not affect the circularity verdict. No fitted input is relabeled as a prediction, so the appropriate score is the non-circularity end of the scale.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The model relies on standard Ito calculus for Poisson processes and on substantive domain assumptions: independent Poisson switches and resets, the boundary-layer representation of sticky boundaries, and a shared global reset clock. No free parameters are fitted; all rates and constants are inputs. The only candidate for a newly postulated entity is the boundary layer, which is an auxiliary construction with no independent evidence.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Generalized Ito lemma for semimartingales driven by Brownian motion and Poisson processes, including the independence relation E[F(X(t-),sigma(t-))dN(t)] = E[F] alpha dt.
    Introduced in Section 2, Eqs. (2.11)-(2.13), and used throughout to convert pathwise dynamics to SPDEs for empirical measures.
  • domain assumption The velocity switching and resetting events are generated by independent Poisson processes with rates alpha and r.
    Specified in Sections 1-3; this is the model, not derived.
  • ad hoc to paper A sticky boundary can be modeled as a boundary layer of width epsilon with density decomposition (4.9)/(4.23), then taking epsilon to 0.
    Section 4.1, Eq. (4.9); the limiting boundary conditions depend on this representation and on the limit commuting with the Poisson expectation.
  • domain assumption In the encounter-based model, the absorption time is T = inf{t: A(t)>A_hat} for an independent random threshold A_hat with survival function Psi(a); marginal densities are given by (4.16).
    Section 4.2, Eqs. (4.15)-(4.16), inherited from the encounter-based literature and used to interpret the occupation-time propagator.
  • domain assumption For global resetting, all particles share a common Poisson process N(t) independent of individual Wiener and switching processes.
    Section 6, Eqs. (6.1)-(6.2); this common process is the source of the induced correlations.
  • domain assumption In the entropy calculations, switching between velocity states produces no environmental heat (detailed balance holds), and resetting is treated as an idealization with no heat dissipation.
    Section 5.2, paragraph before Eq. (5.48) and footnote 1; the interpretation of resetting entropy as thermodynamic entropy depends on this.
invented entities (1)
  • Boundary layer of width epsilon at x=0 representing the sticky state B0
    purpose: Allows a pathwise SDE description of a particle temporarily stuck at the wall; the particle is localized at x=-epsilon in the sigma=-1 state until tumbling back.
    This is an auxiliary mathematical device; it is removed by the limit epsilon to 0 and has no independent observable handle. The paper does not claim it as physical.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stochastic calculus of run-and-tumble motion: an applied perspective." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4OUNROTC

@misc{pith2026241115544,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stochastic calculus of run-and-tumble motion: an applied perspective},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4OUNROTC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15544}
}
read the original abstract

The run-and-tumble particle (RTP) is one of the simplest examples of an active particle in which the direction of constant motion randomly switches. In the one-dimensional (1D) case this means switching between rightward and leftward velocities. Most theoretical studies of RTPs are based on the analysis of the Chapman-Kolmogorov (CK) differential equation describing the evolution of the joint probability densities for particle position and velocity state. In this paper we develop an alternative, probabilistic framework of 1D RTP motion based on the stochastic calculus of Poisson and diffusion processes. In particular, we show how a generalisation of It\^o's lemma provides a direct link between sample paths of an RTP and the underlying CK equation. This allows us to incorporate various non-trivial extensions in a systematic fashion, including stochastic resetting and partially absorbing sticky boundaries. The velocity switching process and resetting process are represented by a pair of independent Poisson processes, whereas a sticky boundary is modelled using a boundary layer. We then use the probabilistic formulation to calculate stochastic entropy production along individual trajectories of an RTP, and show how the corresponding Gibbs-Shannon entropy is recovered by averaging over the ensemble of sample paths. Finally, we extend the probabilistic framework to a population of RTPs and use this to explore the effects of global resetting.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.15544 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. One path of a Poisson process N(t), illustrating that it is right-continuous. Jumps occur at the times Tℓ , ℓ ≥ 1. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Schematic representation of an RTP confined to the domain [0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) Sample trajectories of the position X(t) of an RTP with resetting. Here x0 = 0 and σ0 = 1. The switching rate and resetting rate are both taken to be 0.25 s −1 and v = 1µm s−1 . The notation “switch*” indicates two direction reversals that occur almost simultaneously. (b) Corresponding trajectory of the stochastic entropy S(X(t), σ(t). The terms multiplying the Poisson differentials dN(t) and dN(t) represent, re… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Same as Fig. 3 except that [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Sample plot of the zeroth moment Z0(t) = M (0) 1 (t) − M (0) −1 (t) satisfying equation (6.16) with 2α = 1, r = 1 and λ (0) − = 1. (b) Corresponding NESS q ∗ (z) given by equation (6.19) with 2α = 1 and λ (0) − = 1. (6.15a) become dWℓ(t) dt = ℓvZℓ−1(t) + ℓ(ℓ − 1)DW…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Mean first-passage time at the origin of a run-and-tumble particle with periodic forces

    cond-mat.stat-mech 2024-11 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    For a run-and-tumble particle on a half-line with a periodic, subcritical force, the paper derives the exit probability and conditional mean first-passage time to the origin, with an integral criterion J(a)≤0 for almo...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [15]

    2023 Encounter-based model of a run-and-tumble particle II: ab- sorption at sticky boundaries

    Bressloff PC. 2023 Encounter-based model of a run-and-tumble particle II: ab- sorption at sticky boundaries. J. Stat. Mech. 043208

    work page 2023

  2. [1]

    2010 The mechanics and statistics of active matter

    Ramaswamy S. 2010 The mechanics and statistics of active matter. Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 1, 323-345

    work page 2010

  3. [2]

    2010 Sedimentation and effec- tive temperature of active colloidal suspensions

    Palacci J, Cottin-Bizonne C, Ybert C, Bocquet L. 2010 Sedimentation and effec- tive temperature of active colloidal suspensions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 088304

    work page 2010

  4. [3]

    2012 Collective motion

    Vicsek T, Zafeiris A. 2012 Collective motion. Phys. Rep. 517, 71-140 (2012)

    work page 2012

  5. [4]

    2012 Active Brownian particles: From individual to collective stochastic dynamics.Eur

    Romanczuk R, Bar M, Ebeling W, Lindner B, Schimansky-Geier L. 2012 Active Brownian particles: From individual to collective stochastic dynamics.Eur. Phys. J. Special Topics 202, 1-162

    work page 2012

  6. [5]

    2013 Emergence of macroscopic directed motion in populations of motile colloids

    Bricard A, Caussin JB, Desreumaux N, Dauchot O, Bartolo D. 2013 Emergence of macroscopic directed motion in populations of motile colloids. Nature 503, 95

    work page 2013

  7. [6]

    2015 Active brownian particles and run-and- tumble particles: A comparative study

    Solon AP, Cates ME, Tailleur J. 2015 Active brownian particles and run-and- tumble particles: A comparative study. Eur. Phys. J. Special Topics 224, 1231- 1262

    work page 2015

  8. [7]

    2014 Information transfer and behavioural inertia in starling flocks

    Attanasi A et al. 2014 Information transfer and behavioural inertia in starling flocks. Nat. Phys. 10, 691

    work page 2014

Show all 42 references
  1. [8]

    2015 Motility-induced phase separation

    Cates ME, Tailleur J. 2015 Motility-induced phase separation. Annu. Rev. Con- dens. Matter Phys. 6, 219-244

    2015

  2. [9]

    2016 Active particles in complex and crowded environments

    Bechinger C, Di Leonardo R, Lowen H, Reichhardt C, Volpe G, Volpe G. 2016 Active particles in complex and crowded environments. Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 045006

    2016

  3. [10]

    Berg HC. 2004 E. Coli in Motion , New York, Springer

    2004

  4. [11]

    2015 Run-and-tumble particles, telegrapher’s equation and absorp- tion problems with partially reflecting boundaries J

    Angelani L. 2015 Run-and-tumble particles, telegrapher’s equation and absorp- tion problems with partially reflecting boundaries J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 48, 495003

    2015

  5. [12]

    2017 Confined run-and-tumble swimmers in one dimension

    Angelani L. 2017 Confined run-and-tumble swimmers in one dimension. J. Phys. A 50, 325601

    2017

  6. [13]

    2018 Steady state, relaxation and first-passage properties of a run-and-tumble particle in one-dimension, J

    Malakar K, Jemseena V, Kundu A, Vijay Kumar, Sabhapandit S, Majumdar SN, Redner S and Dhar A. 2018 Steady state, relaxation and first-passage properties of a run-and-tumble particle in one-dimension, J. Stat. Mech. 043215 38

    2018

  7. [14]

    2022 Encounter-based model of a run-and-tumble particle

    Bressloff PC. 2022 Encounter-based model of a run-and-tumble particle. J. Stat. Mech. 113206 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    2023 One-dimensional run-and-tumble motions with generic bound- ary conditions

    Angelani L. 2023 One-dimensional run-and-tumble motions with generic bound- ary conditions. J. Phys. A 56 ,455003

    2023

  9. [17]

    2018 Run and tumble particle under resetting: a renewal approach

    Evans MR, Majumdar SN. 2018 Run and tumble particle under resetting: a renewal approach. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 51 475003, (2018)

    2018

  10. [18]

    2020 Occupation time of a run-and-tumble particle with resetting

    Bressloff PC. 2020 Occupation time of a run-and-tumble particle with resetting. Phys. Rev. E 102 042135

    2020

  11. [19]

    Santra I, Basu U, Sabhapandit S¿ 2020 Run-and-tumble particles in two dimen- sions under stochastic resetting conditions J. Stat. Mech. 113206

    2020

  12. [20]

    2020 Paradigm shift in diffusion-mediated surface phenomena

    Grebenkov DS. 2020 Paradigm shift in diffusion-mediated surface phenomena. Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 078102

    2020

  13. [21]

    2022 An encounter-based approach for restricted diffusion with a gradient drift

    Grebenkov DS. 2022 An encounter-based approach for restricted diffusion with a gradient drift. J. Phys. A. 55 045203

    2022

  14. [22]

    2022 Diffusion-mediated absorption by partially reactive targets: Brownian functionals and generalised propagators

    Bressloff PC. 2022 Diffusion-mediated absorption by partially reactive targets: Brownian functionals and generalised propagators. J. Phys. A. 55 205001

    2022

  15. [23]

    Bressloff PC 2022 Spectral theory of diffusion in partially absorbing media. Proc. R. Soc. A 478, 20220319

    2022

  16. [24]

    2022 Diffusion-mediated surface reactions and stochastic resetting

    Bressloff PC. 2022 Diffusion-mediated surface reactions and stochastic resetting. J. Phys. A 55, 275002

    2022

  17. [25]

    2022 Diffusion in a partially absorbing medium with position and occupation time resetting

    Bressloff PC. 2022 Diffusion in a partially absorbing medium with position and occupation time resetting. J. Stat. Mech. 063207

    2022

  18. [26]

    2005 Entropy production along a stochastic trajectory and an integral fluctuation theorem

    Seifert U. 2005 Entropy production along a stochastic trajectory and an integral fluctuation theorem. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 040602

    2005

  19. [27]

    2010 Stochastic Energetics

    Sekimoto K. 2010 Stochastic Energetics. Lecture Notes in Physics, Springer

    2010

  20. [28]

    2012 Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation theorems and molecular machines

    Seifert U. 2012 Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation theorems and molecular machines. Rep. Prog. Phys. 75 ,126001 39

    2012

  21. [29]

    2020 Entropy production in exactly solvable systems

    Cocconi, L Garcia-Millan R, Zhen Z, Buturca B, Pruessner G. 2020 Entropy production in exactly solvable systems. Entropy 22, 1252

    2020

  22. [30]

    2021 Stochastic Thermodynamics

    Peliti L, Pigolotti S. 2021 Stochastic Thermodynamics . Princeton University Press, Princeton

    2021

  23. [31]

    2023 Mar- tingales for physicists: a treatise on stochastic thermodynamics and beyond Ad- vances in Physics 72, 2317494

    R´ oldan E, Neri I, Chetrite R, Pigolotti S, J¨ ulicher F, Sekimoto K. 2023 Mar- tingales for physicists: a treatise on stochastic thermodynamics and beyond Ad- vances in Physics 72, 2317494

    2023

  24. [32]

    2022 Intuitive view of entropy production of ideal run-and-tumble particles

    Frydel D. 2022 Intuitive view of entropy production of ideal run-and-tumble particles. Phys. Rev. E 105, 034113

    2022

  25. [33]

    2024 Entropy production of run-and-tumble particles

    Paoluzzi M, Puglisi A, Angelani L. 2024 Entropy production of run-and-tumble particles. Entropy 26, 443

    2024

  26. [34]

    Fuchs J, Goldt S, Seifert U. 2016. Stochastic thermodynamics of resetting Eu- rophys. Lett. 113, 60009

    2016

  27. [35]

    2023 Entropy production of resetting pro- cesses, Phys

    Mori F, Olsen KS, Krishnamurthy S. 2023 Entropy production of resetting pro- cesses, Phys. Rev. Res. , 5, 123103

    2023

  28. [36]

    2024 Global density equations for interacting particle systems with stochastic resetting: from overdamped Brownian motion to phase synchronization Chaos 34, 043101

    Bressloff PC. 2024 Global density equations for interacting particle systems with stochastic resetting: from overdamped Brownian motion to phase synchronization Chaos 34, 043101

    2024

  29. [37]

    2024 A generalised Dean-Kawasaki equation for an interacting Brownian gas in a partially absorbing medium

    Bressloff PC. 2024 A generalised Dean-Kawasaki equation for an interacting Brownian gas in a partially absorbing medium. Proc. Roy. Soc. 480, 20230915

    2024

  30. [38]

    2023 Stochastic resetting in interacting particle systems: a review’ J

    Nagar A, Gupta S. 2023 Stochastic resetting in interacting particle systems: a review’ J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 56, 283001

    2023

  31. [39]

    2020 Universal Survival Proba- bility for a d-Dimensional Run-and-Tumble Particle.Phys

    Mori F, Le Doussal P, Majumdar SN, Schehr G. 2020 Universal Survival Proba- bility for a d-Dimensional Run-and-Tumble Particle.Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 090603

    2020

  32. [40]

    2020 Run-and-tumble particles in two- dimensions: Marginal position distributions Phys

    Santra I, Basu U, Sabhapandit S. 2020 Run-and-tumble particles in two- dimensions: Marginal position distributions Phys. Rev. E 101 062120

    2020

  33. [41]

    2022 Exact position dis- tribution of a harmonically confined run-and-tumble particle in two dimensions Phys

    Smith NR, Le Doussal P, Majumdar, SN, Schehr G. 2022 Exact position dis- tribution of a harmonically confined run-and-tumble particle in two dimensions Phys. Rev. E 106, 054133

    2022

  34. [42]

    2023 Chiral run-and-tumble walker: Transport and opti- mizing search Physica A 622, 128821 40

    Mallikarjun R, Pal A. 2023 Chiral run-and-tumble walker: Transport and opti- mizing search Physica A 622, 128821 40

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.