Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 65 references

Quantum Walks for Chemical Reaction Networks

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Near a detailed-balance equilibrium, a perturbed chemical reaction network maps exactly onto an electrical network, and quantum walks on that network decide reachability, sample species, and estimate Gibbs dissipation.

desk verdict Reachability half is solid and worth publishing; the dissipation half has an internal normalization inconsistency and an uncharacterized rigidity condition, so the paper deserves review but needs heavy revision on Section IV. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.07890 v2 pith:CWCPDICJ submitted 2025-09-09 quant-ph physics.chem-ph

Seenivasan Hariharan , Sebastian Zur , Sachin Kinge , Lucas Visscher , Kareljan Schoutens , Stacey Jeffery This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phphysics.chem-ph MSC 81P6868Q12 PACS 03.67.Ac
keywords quantumwalkschemicalreactionnetworksmassactionkineticselectricalGibbsfree-energydissipationalternativeneighbourhoodseffectiveresistancedetailedbalance
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

The paper tries to show that, near a detailed-balance equilibrium, the perturbed mass-action dynamics of a chemical reaction network are not just analogous to but exactly equal to an electrical-flow problem on a bipartite species-reaction graph. This equivalence turns chemical quantities into circuit quantities: chemical potentials become electrical potentials, Onsager coefficients become edge conductances, and the instantaneous Gibbs free-energy consumption equals the energy of a flow. Because quantum walks can solve electrical-network problems faster than classical walks, the paper derives quantum algorithms for deciding species reachability, sampling reachable species, approximating individual reaction fluxes, and estimating total Gibbs dissipation, with up to a quadratic speedup in the adjacency-matrix access model. The catch is that the last two tasks require the network to be $\sigma$-$M$ rigid, a condition under which the chemical flow is forced to be the flow the quantum walk samples.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the mass action system graph (MASG), the weighted bipartite graph with species and oriented reactions as vertices; the load-bearing identity is eq. (25), $E(\theta)=\sum_r J_r^2/G_r=\Phi(c)$, which identifies the energy of the chemical flow with Gibbs free-energy consumption. The second mechanism is the alternative-neighbourhood construction from multidimensional quantum walks: starting from the desired MASG flow, the paper reverse-engineers extra star states at reaction vertices so that Alternative Kirchhoff's Law forces the unique flow to be the mass-action flow, provided the network is $\sigma$-$M$ rigid. This turns the quantum walk's sampled flow from the minimum-energy electrical flow into the physically correct chemical flow, making the flow-state preparation and dissipation estimate valid.

What would settle it

Construct the smallest reversible, particle-conserving, detailed-balance MAS with two parallel reactions connecting the same species pair, inject unit flux from one species to the other, and compute both the MASG flow energy $\Phi$ and the alternative effective resistance $R^{\mathrm{alt}}$ using the reaction-vertex ratio constraints of Section IV.B. The rigidity condition fails because two ratio vectors at the same reaction vertex can both satisfy the constraints; if $R^{\mathrm{alt}}<\Phi$, the alternative flow differs from the mass-action flow and the dissipation estimate of Corollary IV.8 is provably biased on a valid MAS.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is the map itself. Given a reversible, particle-conserving mass-action system with a detailed-balance equilibrium $c^*$, and a small injection $\eta$ with unit total source/sink, the paper constructs the mass action system graph (MASG): a weighted undirected bipartite graph whose species and oriented reactions are vertices, with edge weight $w_{s,r}=\nu_r|\nu_{r,s}|G_r$, where $G_r=K_r(c^*)/RT$ is the Onsager coefficient and $\nu_r$ is the total stoichiometric variation. The steady-state fluxes $J_r$ define a unit flow $\theta_{s,r}=\nu_{r,s}J_r$, and a direct calculation (eq. 25) gives $E(\theta)=\sum_r J_r^2/G_r=\Phi(c)$, the instantaneous Gibbs free-energy consumption. Thus every near-equilibrium perturbation is exactly a unit electrical flow on the MASG, and the circuit's dissipated energy is the chemistry's dissipation. The paper then invokes electrical-network quantum walks to decide whether a target set is reachable and to sample targets, and, by adding alternative neighbourhoods designed so that the MASG flow becomes the unique alternative electrical flow, approximates $\Phi$ and the per-reaction dissipation $J_r^2/G_r$.

Load-bearing premise

Everything about estimating Gibbs dissipation and preparing the chemical flow state depends on the MASG being $\sigma$-$M$ rigid: the stoichiometric ratios at every reaction vertex must single out exactly one unit flow, a graph condition the paper gives no practical way to recognize or test, and simple valid networks such as parallel reactions between one species pair fail it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Reachability after a species injection is decidable in cost $S+\sqrt{\Phi(c_{\sigma,M})\sum_r \nu_r^2 G_r}\,U^*$, compared with $\Omega(n^2)$ classically for $n$ species in the adjacency-matrix model.
  • A reachable target species can be returned in the same cost times $\log^3(|M|)$, and an approximation of the flow state recovers any per-reaction dissipation $J_r(c)^2/G_r$ to relative error $\epsilon$.
  • For $\sigma$-$M$ rigid networks, the total Gibbs dissipation $\Phi(c_{s,M})$ is $\epsilon$-multiplicatively estimable in cost $O((1/\epsilon)(S+(1/\epsilon)(ET^{\mathrm{alt}}+\log(\Phi w_s))U^{\mathrm{alt}}_*))$.
  • All algorithms use only the network structure, the equilibrium concentrations, and the injection; precomputed thermodynamic data stored in QRAM is enough to run them.
  • Dissipation-aware bounds become tighter than species-count bounds when the perturbation is concentrated, because the effective resistance and escape time are small.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An implication the paper does not draw: the map works in both directions, so any classical solver for electrical flows on bipartite graphs becomes a near-equilibrium CRN solver, and any chemical statement about dissipation can be read as an electrical statement.
  • The $\sigma$-$M$ rigidity condition is purely graph-theoretic, so a combinatorial characterization or an efficient algorithm for testing it would turn Corollaries IV.8 and IV.9 into a generally applicable tool; the paper leaves this open.
  • The alternative-neighbourhood trick, sampling a specified ratio-respecting flow rather than the minimum-energy flow, may apply to other network problems where a non-minimal flow is the physically relevant one, such as metabolic or transport networks.
  • Because the exactness of the map rests on the linearization $\delta\mu\approx RT\,\delta c/c^*$, an experimental measurement of dissipation in a slightly perturbed CRN could be compared with the predicted effective-resistance energy; a mismatch would delimit the linear regime.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper establishes a dictionary between mass-action chemical reaction networks (CRNs) near detailed-balance equilibrium and electrical networks on a bipartite species-reaction graph. The central claimed mapping is that, under reversibility, detailed balance, and particle conservation, the perturbed mass-action flux through each reaction defines a valid electrical flow whose energy equals the instantaneous Gibbs free-energy consumption Φ(c). On this basis the authors propose quantum-walk algorithms for species reachability, sampling reachable species, approximating individual reaction fluxes, and estimating the total Gibbs dissipation. The first three are derived from known electrical-flow quantum-walk theorems; the dissipation estimate is the novel part and relies on a new use of alternative neighbourhoods in multidimensional quantum walks, restricted to a class of networks called σ-M rigid. The paper also reports explicit complexity bounds in terms of Φ, the Onsager coefficients G_r, and the stoichiometric coefficients ν_{r,s}.

Significance. If the central mapping and the rigid-network construction are correct, the paper would supply a genuinely new bridge between CRN thermodynamics and quantum-walk algorithms, with the notable feature that the mass-action flow is not the minimum-energy electrical flow, so the alternative-neighbourhood technique is used in a nonstandard way. The clean parts of the paper are Lemma III.2 and Eq. (25), which correctly identify the MASG flow and its energy as Φ(c), and the direct use of Theorems II.9–II.12 for reachability, sampling, and flow approximation. The paper also gives explicit, parameter-free complexity statements rather than asymptotic-only claims. However, the dissipation and flux algorithms currently rest on a questionable projection formula and an uncharacterized rigidity condition, so the significance of the main new algorithmic contribution is not yet established.

major comments (3)
  1. [IV.B.2, Eq. (31)] Equation (31) is inconsistent with the flow-state definition (19). Using (19), (24), and w_{s,r}=ν_r|ν_{r,s}|G_r, the amplitudes of the MASG flow state on the edge space of reaction r are θ_{s,r}/√w_{s,r} ∝ sign(ν_{r,s})√|ν_{r,s}|, not ν_{r,s}. The correct normalized projection is therefore proportional to Σ_s sign(ν_{r,s})√|ν_{r,s}| |r,s>. Building alternative neighbourhoods from Eq. (31) forces θ_{r,s} ∝ ν_{r,s}√|ν_{r,s}| instead of θ_{r,s} ∝ ν_{r,s}, so the alternative electrical flow does not coincide with the MASG flow and Corollaries IV.8 and IV.9 do not estimate Φ(c_{s,M}). This is not a convention issue: the worked example in §IV.B.1 uses the alternative state (1/√2)(|r3,A>−|r3,B>) and a state proportional to (−1,−1,−√2), which is orthogonal to sign(ν)√|ν|=(−1,−1,√2) but not to (−1,−1,2); hence the example contradicts Eq. (31). The general construction must be corrected to use sign(ν)√|ν| in the projected flow state, and the example and corollaries must be re-derived consistently with (19).
  2. [Definition IV.6] The σ-M rigidity condition is the load-bearing premise for the dissipation and flux algorithms, but it is introduced without a characterization, a test, or a single realistic example. As stated, it excludes common networks: a catalyst species with ν_{r,s}=0 but y_s,y'_s>0 has an edge in the MASG yet violates the requirement ρ_b(a)≠0, and two parallel reactions between the same species pair make the uniqueness condition fail. The condition is essentially a full-column-rank requirement on the stoichiometric matrix restricted to reactions with nonzero ν, but this is not stated or proved. Since Corollaries IV.8 and IV.9 apply only under σ-M rigidity, the paper needs a precise algebraic characterization, a polynomial-time test, and examples showing that the condition is satisfied by a nonempty class of chemically relevant networks, or the scope of the dissipation claims must be correspondingly narrowed.
  3. [Corollary III.3 and abstract] The reachability claim is stronger than what Theorem II.9 actually provides. Theorem II.9 assumes the promise that either M is empty or there is a path from σ to M; under that promise the algorithm distinguishes the two cases. Corollary III.3 and the abstract state that the algorithm 'decides whether any of the target species in M is reachable from σ,' which suggests a full unreachability certificate. Without the promise, the effective resistance is not finite when no path exists, so the cost bound and the correctness argument do not cover unreachable nonempty M. The corollary should state the promise explicitly, and the text should not call this a decision procedure for unrestricted reachability.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (26)] The expression |ψ*(r)> = (1/√ν_r) Σ_s √ν_{r,s}|r,s> uses the square root of a stoichiometric coefficient that can be negative; please define it as √|ν_{r,s}| or introduce an explicit signed convention for star states at reaction vertices.
  2. [Theorem IV.7] The theorem statement says the algorithm 'ϵ-multiplicatively estimates R^alt_{s,M}', but the proof estimates the probability p' = (1±ϵ)/(R^alt_{s,M} w_s), and the cost expression contains log(R^alt_{s,M} w_s). The statement should read 'estimates R^alt_{s,M} w_s' to be consistent with the proof and with the division by w_s used in Corollary IV.8.
  3. [Definition III.1 and §IV.B.1] Definition III.1 fixes the directed edge set as ΔE = {(s,r)} for every edge, but the star states used in §IV.B.1 for reaction vertices carry explicit signs distinguishing reactants from products. Please clarify how the signed star states relate to the unsigned definition (15), or adjust the directed-edge convention so the two are consistent.
  4. [Lemma III.2] It would help to state explicitly that negative net fluxes J_r(c) are allowed and that the flow is antisymmetric by θ_{r,s}=-θ_{s,r}, so that the sign conventions in the MASG flow are unambiguous.
  5. [References] Theorem IV.7 combines results from [44] and [47]; the attribution 'Theorem IV.7([44])' should be adjusted to reflect that the alternative-neighbourhood version is proved in [47].

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity is present: the electrical-flow map is an exact identity, and the alternative-neighbourhood construction uses stoichiometry rather than the target dissipation.

full rationale

The central mapping is an exact algebraic identity rather than a fitted or renamed prediction: with the MASG edge flow defined as θ_{s,r} = ν_{r,s} J_r(c_{σ,M}) and edge weights w_{s,r} = ν_r |ν_{r,s}| G_r, the energy computation in Eq. (25) collapses term-by-term to Σ_r J_r(c)^2 / G_r, which is precisely the independently defined Gibbs dissipation Φ(c) in Eq. (12). The reachability and flux-sampling corollaries are standard electrical-flow quantum-walk reductions applied to that network, and they do not feed the target values back into the construction. The place where circularity could plausibly hide is the alternative-neighbourhood section, since the text says the authors 'reverse engineer' the neighbourhoods so that the MASG flow becomes the alternative electrical flow; however, the intended construction at reaction vertices uses only the stoichiometric ratios ν_{r,s} (Eq. 31), not the unknown steady fluxes J_r or the dissipation Φ, and the σ-M rigidity condition (Definition IV.6) is a uniqueness assumption on the input network rather than a fit to the output. Thus R^alt = E(θ) = Φ is a derived consequence of the rigidity premise, not an assumption of the quantity being estimated. The self-citations to [45] and [47], which share authors with the current paper, supply general multidimensional-quantum-walk and alternative-electrical-flow theorems; these are parameter-free results about quantum walks and do not presuppose the CRN dissipation result, so under the stated rules they do not raise the circularity score. Potential internal inconsistencies, such as the apparent mismatch between Eq. (31) and the flow-state definition in Eq. (19), are correctness or soundness concerns rather than instances of the derivation reducing to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to data: the Onsager coefficients G_r, stoichiometric coefficients nu_{r,s}, equilibrium concentrations, and injection profile eta are inputs inherited from the MAS and the problem instance. The essential axioms are the five listed: the cited quantum-walk theorems as black boxes, exactness of the linear-response equalities, the three structural CRN conditions (reversibility, detailed balance, particle conservation), sigma-M rigidity for the dissipation results, and precomputed QRAM storage of thermodynamic quantities. No new physical entities are postulated; the MASG and the alternative neighbourhoods are mathematical constructions derived from existing data.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math The published quantum-walk theorems II.9-II.12, IV.5, and IV.7 (from Belovs [43], Piddock [59], Apers-Piddock [44], Jeffery-Zur [45], Li-Zur [47]) are correct and apply as stated to the MASG.
    The algorithms are built on these black-box theorems; the paper verifies only the premises (connectedness, marked sets, alternative neighbourhood conditions).
  • domain assumption Linear-response equalities: delta_mu_s = RT delta_c_s / c*_s and J_r(c) = G_r Delta_mu_r(c) hold as equalities for the perturbation.
    Section II.C derives these by first-order Taylor expansion; exactness holds only as delta_c / c* -> 0, which the paper adopts as standard linear nonequilibrium thermodynamics.
  • domain assumption The MAS is reversible, admits a positive detailed-balance equilibrium c*, and every reaction is particle conserving.
    Section III.A requires these three conditions to build the electrical network; the paper itself notes combustion and metabolic models violate them.
  • ad hoc to paper The MASG is sigma-M rigid for stoichiometric ratio vectors (Definition IV.6): a unique sigma-M flow satisfies theta(b,a1)/nu_{b,a1} = theta(b,a2)/nu_{b,a2} at every reaction vertex b.
    Needed so the alternative electrical flow equals the MASG flow; uncharacterized and unverified beyond the toy network (29).
  • domain assumption All thermodynamic quantities (rate constants, equilibrium concentrations, Onsager coefficients) are precomputed classically and stored in readable QRAM, and the quantum states in (26) can be prepared efficiently.
    Section III.C; the query-complexity statements are relative to this access model.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum Walks for Chemical Reaction Networks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CWCPDICJ

@misc{pith2026250907890,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum Walks for Chemical Reaction Networks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CWCPDICJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.07890}
}
abstract

Near a detailed-balance equilibrium, the perturbed mass-action dynamics of a chemical reaction network (CRN) map exactly onto an electrical-flow problem on the bipartite species-reaction graph: chemical potentials become electrical potentials, Onsager coefficients become conductances, and the instantaneous Gibbs free-energy consumption equals the dissipated electrical energy. We exploit this map to design quantum walk algorithms that decide species reachability, sample reachable species, approximate any individual steady-state reaction flux, and estimate the total Gibbs dissipation. The first three follow from standard electrical-flow quantum walks; the last is non-trivial because the chemical flow is not the minimum-energy electrical flow on the same graph. We resolve this via a new use of alternative neighbourhoods in multidimensional quantum walks, which forces the walker onto the mass-action flow whenever the network is $\sigma-M$ rigid. In an adjacency-matrix QRAM access model the algorithms achieve up to a quadratic speedup over classical methods -- for example $\Omega(n^{3/2})$ vs $\Omega(n^2)$ for reachability -- and dissipation-aware bounds tighten this further when the perturbation is concentrated.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.07890 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Graph G with its s-t electrical flow θ and corresponding potential p at each vertex. The potential p induced by an σ-M electrical flow θ in Ohm’s Law is not unique. There￾fore, it is common practice to consider the potential p that assigns pu = 0 for every u ∈ M, in which case pu = σ(u)Ru,M for very u ∈ supp(σ), where Ru,M is the effective resistance between u and M. We provide an example graph to help make the abov… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The resulting MASG for the CRN in (22). We exhibit a σ-M flow θ on the MASG obtained from the MAS (S, C, R, k) and concentra￾tions vector cσ,M. This flow θ will hence have to satisfy Kirchoff’s Law (see Definition II.5), but it does not necessarily coincide with the actual σ-M electrical flow on the MASG, meaning it does not need to satisfy Ohm’s Law (see Definition II.6). Lemma III.2. For an MASG G = (V, E,w) obtai… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The resulting MASG for the CRN in (29). The left image shows the weight assignments of each (directed) edge, the right image shows the corresponding flow values for the MASG flow, where for notational clarity we have omitted the argument (cs,M) for each net flux Jr. which flows satisfy Alternative Kirchhoff’s Law, we start from the desired flow and reverse￾engineer the alternative neighbourhoods Ψ⋆ so that this flow… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The MASG flow for J1 = J2 = 1 2 is shown on the left and an A-C flow with lower energy (assuming all Gr = 1) is shown on the right, disproving the fact that our MASG flow matches the A-C electrical flow. Now suppose that we add an alternative neighbourhood to Ψ⋆(r3): Ψ…

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Feinberg ,\ @noop title Foundations of chemical reaction network theory \ ( publisher Springer ,\ year 2019 ) NoStop

    author author M. Feinberg ,\ @noop title Foundations of chemical reaction network theory \ ( publisher Springer ,\ year 2019 ) NoStop

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Steiner \ and\ author M

    author author M. Steiner \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Topics in Catalysis \ volume 65 ,\ pages 6 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Yang \ and\ author R

    author author J. Yang \ and\ author R. Hu ,\ @noop journal journal The Astrophysical Journal \ volume 966 ,\ pages 189 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Loskot , author K

    author author P. Loskot , author K. Atitey , \ and\ author L. Mihaylova ,\ @noop journal journal Frontiers in genetics \ volume 10 ,\ pages 549 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    author author J. P. \ Unsleber \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Annual review of physical chemistry \ volume 71 ,\ pages 121 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    author author P. L. \ T \"u rtscher \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling \ volume 63 ,\ pages 147 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Stocker , author G

    author author S. Stocker , author G. Csanyi , author K. Reuter , \ and\ author J. T. \ Margraf ,\ @noop journal journal Nature communications \ volume 11 ,\ pages 5505 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    author author J. P. \ Unsleber , author S. A. \ Grimmel , \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation \ volume 18 ,\ pages 5393 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    work page 2022

Show all 65 references
  1. [9]

    Wen , author E

    author author M. Wen , author E. W. C. \ Spotte-Smith , author S. M. \ Blau , author M. J. \ McDermott , author A. S. \ Krishnapriyan , \ and\ author K. A. \ Persson ,\ @noop journal journal Nature Computational Science \ volume 3 ,\ pages 12 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    2023

  2. [10]

    Liu , author Y

    author author Y. Liu , author Y. Mo , \ and\ author Y. Cheng ,\ @noop journal journal Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research \ volume 64 ,\ pages 5200 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

    2025

  3. [11]

    author author Z. G. \ Nicolaou , author S. B. \ Nicholson , author A. E. \ Motter , \ and\ author J. R. \ Green ,\ @noop journal journal The Journal of Chemical Physics \ volume 158 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    2023

  4. [12]

    Banaji , author B

    author author M. Banaji , author B. Boros , \ and\ author J. Hofbauer ,\ @noop journal journal Applied Mathematics and Computation \ volume 426 ,\ pages 127109 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    2022

  5. [13]

    Ismail , author R

    author author I. Ismail , author R. Chantreau Majerus , \ and\ author S. Habershon ,\ @noop journal journal The Journal of Physical Chemistry A \ volume 126 ,\ pages 7051 ( year 2022 a ) NoStop

    2022

  6. [14]

    author author M. P. \ Haag , author A. C. \ Vaucher , author M. Bosson , author S. Redon , \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal ChemPhysChem \ volume 15 ,\ pages 3301 ( year 2014 ) NoStop

    2014

  7. [15]

    Bergeler , author G

    author author M. Bergeler , author G. N. \ Simm , author J. Proppe , \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Journal of chemical theory and computation \ volume 11 ,\ pages 5712 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    2015

  8. [16]

    Proppe , author T

    author author J. Proppe , author T. Husch , author G. N. \ Simm , \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Faraday discussions \ volume 195 ,\ pages 497 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016

  9. [17]

    author author G. N. \ Simm \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Journal of chemical theory and computation \ volume 13 ,\ pages 6108 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    2017

  10. [18]

    author author G. N. \ Simm \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Journal of chemical theory and computation \ volume 14 ,\ pages 5238 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    2018

  11. [19]

    author author M. A. \ Heuer , author A. C. \ Vaucher , author M. P. \ Haag , \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Journal of chemical theory and computation \ volume 14 ,\ pages 2052 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    2018

  12. [20]

    author author G. N. \ Simm , author A. C. \ Vaucher , \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal The Journal of Physical Chemistry A \ volume 123 ,\ pages 385 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    2018

  13. [21]

    Proppe \ and\ author M

    author author J. Proppe \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation \ volume 15 ,\ pages 357 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    2018

  14. [22]

    Baiardi , author S

    author author A. Baiardi , author S. A. \ Grimmel , author M. Steiner , author P. L. \ T\"urtscher , author J. P. \ Unsleber , author T. Weymuth , \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Accounts of chemical research \ volume 55 ,\ pages 35 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    2021

  15. [23]

    Steiner \ and\ author M

    author author M. Steiner \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Nature Communications \ volume 15 ,\ pages 3680 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024

  16. [24]

    uller , author M. Steiner , author J. P. \ Unsleber , author T. Weymuth , author M. Bensberg , author K.-S. \ Csizi , author M. Mörchen , author P. L. \ T\

    author author C. H. \ M\"uller , author M. Steiner , author J. P. \ Unsleber , author T. Weymuth , author M. Bensberg , author K.-S. \ Csizi , author M. Mörchen , author P. L. \ T\"urtscher , \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal The Journal of Physical Chemistry A...

    2024

  17. [25]

    \ Csizi , author M

    author author K.-S. \ Csizi , author M. Steiner , \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal Nature Communications \ volume 15 ,\ pages 5320 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024

  18. [26]

    u rtscher , author M. Steiner , author J.-G. \ Sobez , author C. H. \ M \

    author author T. Weymuth , author J. P. \ Unsleber , author P. L. \ T \"u rtscher , author M. Steiner , author J.-G. \ Sobez , author C. H. \ M \"u ller , author M. M \"o rchen , author V. Klasovita , author S. A. \ Grimmel , author M. Eckhoff , et al. ,\ @noop journal journal...

    2024

  19. [27]

    Bensberg \ and\ author M

    author author M. Bensberg \ and\ author M. Reiher ,\ @noop journal journal The Journal of Physical Chemistry A \ ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024

  20. [28]

    Habershon ,\ @noop journal journal The Journal of chemical physics \ volume 143 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    author author S. Habershon ,\ @noop journal journal The Journal of chemical physics \ volume 143 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    2015

  21. [29]

    Habershon ,\ @noop journal journal Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation \ volume 12 ,\ pages 1786 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    author author S. Habershon ,\ @noop journal journal Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation \ volume 12 ,\ pages 1786 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016

  22. [30]

    Ismail , author H

    author author I. Ismail , author H. B. \ Stuttaford-Fowler , author C. Ochan Ashok , author C. Robertson , \ and\ author S. Habershon ,\ @noop journal journal The Journal of Physical Chemistry A \ volume 123 ,\ pages 3407 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    2019

  23. [31]

    Ismail , author C

    author author I. Ismail , author C. Robertson , \ and\ author S. Habershon ,\ @noop journal journal The Journal of Chemical Physics \ volume 157 ( year 2022 b ) NoStop

    2022

  24. [32]

    Robertson \ and\ author S

    author author C. Robertson \ and\ author S. Habershon ,\ @noop journal journal Catalysis Science & Technology \ volume 9 ,\ pages 6357 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    2019

  25. [33]

    Robertson , author I

    author author C. Robertson , author I. Ismail , \ and\ author S. Habershon ,\ @noop journal journal ChemSystemsChem \ volume 2 ,\ pages e1900047 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    2020

  26. [34]

    Fakhoury , author G

    author author Z. Fakhoury , author G. C. \ Sosso , \ and\ author S. Habershon ,\ @noop journal journal Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling \ volume 63 ,\ pages 2181 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    2023

  27. [35]

    Fakhoury , author G

    author author Z. Fakhoury , author G. C. \ Sosso , \ and\ author S. Habershon ,\ @noop journal journal Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation \ volume 20 ,\ pages 8340 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024

  28. [36]

    author author J. T. \ Margraf \ and\ author K. Reuter ,\ @noop journal journal ACS omega \ volume 4 ,\ pages 3370 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    2019

  29. [37]

    Doty \ and\ author S

    author author D. Doty \ and\ author S. Zhu ,\ @noop journal journal Natural Computing \ volume 17 ,\ pages 677 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    2018

  30. [38]

    Doty \ and\ author B

    author author D. Doty \ and\ author B. Heckmann ,\ @noop journal journal arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.08649 \ ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024

  31. [39]

    author author R. M. \ Alaniz , author J. Brunner , author M. Coulombe , author E. D. \ Demaine , author J. Diomidova , author R. Knobel , author T. Gomez , author E. Grizzell , author J. Lynch , author A. Rodriguez , et al. ,\ @noop journal journal arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.15...

    2023 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Einkemmer , author J

    author author L. Einkemmer , author J. Mangott , \ and\ author M. Prugger ,\ @noop journal journal Journal of Computational Physics \ volume 503 ,\ pages 112827 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024

  33. [41]

    author author A. S. \ Perelson \ and\ author G. F. \ Oster ,\ @noop journal journal Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis \ volume 57 ,\ pages 31 ( year 1974 ) NoStop

    1974

  34. [42]

    Avanzini , author N

    author author F. Avanzini , author N. Freitas , \ and\ author M. Esposito ,\ @noop journal journal Physical Review X \ volume 13 ,\ pages 021041 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    2023

  35. [43]

    Belovs ,\ @noop journal journal arXiv preprint arXiv:1302.3143 \ ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    author author A. Belovs ,\ @noop journal journal arXiv preprint arXiv:1302.3143 \ ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    2013 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Apers \ and\ author S

    author author S. Apers \ and\ author S. Piddock ,\ @noop journal journal arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.16379 \ ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    2022 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Jeffery \ and\ author S

    author author S. Jeffery \ and\ author S. Zur ,\ in\ @noop booktitle Proceedings of the 55th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing \ ( year 2023 )\ pp.\ pages 1125--1130 NoStop

    2023

  38. [46]

    Jeffery \ and\ author G

    author author S. Jeffery \ and\ author G. Pass ,\ in\ @noop booktitle 42nd International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2025) \ ( organization Schloss Dagstuhl--Leibniz-Zentrum f \"u r Informatik ,\ year 2025 )\ pp.\ pages 54--1 NoStop

    2025

  39. [47]

    Li \ and\ author S

    author author J. Li \ and\ author S. Zur ,\ @noop journal journal Quantum \ volume 9 ,\ pages 1733 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

    2025

  40. [48]

    D \"u rr , author M

    author author C. D \"u rr , author M. Heiligman , author P. HOyer , \ and\ author M. Mhalla ,\ @noop journal journal SIAM Journal on Computing \ volume 35 ,\ pages 1310 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    2006

  41. [49]

    author author G. A. \ Pavlopoulos , author P. I. \ Kontou , author A. Pavlopoulou , author C. Bouyioukos , author E. Markou , \ and\ author P. G. \ Bagos ,\ @noop journal journal GigaScience \ volume 7 ,\ pages giy014 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    2018

  42. [50]

    Cornish-Bowden ,\ @noop title Fundamentals of enzyme kinetics \ ( publisher John Wiley & Sons ,\ year 2013 ) NoStop

    author author A. Cornish-Bowden ,\ @noop title Fundamentals of enzyme kinetics \ ( publisher John Wiley & Sons ,\ year 2013 ) NoStop

    2013

  43. [51]

    author author L. A. \ Segel \ and\ author M. Slemrod ,\ @noop journal journal SIAM review \ volume 31 ,\ pages 446 ( year 1989 ) NoStop

    1989

  44. [52]

    Klipp , author W

    author author E. Klipp , author W. Liebermeister , author C. Wierling , \ and\ author A. Kowald ,\ @noop title Systems biology: a textbook \ ( publisher John Wiley & Sons ,\ year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016

  45. [53]

    author author S. R. \ De Groot \ and\ author P. Mazur ,\ @noop title Non-equilibrium thermodynamics \ ( publisher Courier Corporation ,\ year 2013 ) NoStop

    2013

  46. [54]

    Szegedy ,\ in\ @noop booktitle 45th Annual IEEE symposium on foundations of computer science \ ( organization IEEE ,\ year 2004 )\ pp.\ pages 32--41 NoStop

    author author M. Szegedy ,\ in\ @noop booktitle 45th Annual IEEE symposium on foundations of computer science \ ( organization IEEE ,\ year 2004 )\ pp.\ pages 32--41 NoStop

    2004

  47. [55]

    Magniez , author A

    author author F. Magniez , author A. Nayak , author J. Roland , \ and\ author M. Santha ,\ in\ @noop booktitle Proceedings of the thirty-ninth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing \ ( year 2007 )\ pp.\ pages 575--584 NoStop

    2007

  48. [56]

    Ambainis , author A

    author author A. Ambainis , author A. Gily \'e n , author S. Jeffery , \ and\ author M. Kokainis ,\ in\ @noop booktitle Proceedings of the 52nd annual ACM SIGACT symposium on theory of computing \ ( year 2020 )\ pp.\ pages 412--424 NoStop

    2020

  49. [57]

    Apers , author A

    author author S. Apers , author A. Gily \'e n , \ and\ author S. Jeffery \ ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    2019

  50. [58]

    author author A. M. \ Childs , author R. Cleve , author E. Deotto , author E. Farhi , author S. Gutmann , \ and\ author D. A. \ Spielman ,\ in\ @noop booktitle Proceedings of the thirty-fifth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing \ ( year 2003 )\ pp.\ pages 59--68 NoStop

    2003

  51. [59]

    Piddock ,\ @noop journal journal arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.04196 \ ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    author author S. Piddock ,\ @noop journal journal arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.04196 \ ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    1912 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Ito \ and\ author S

    author author T. Ito \ and\ author S. Jeffery ,\ @noop journal journal Algorithmica \ volume 81 ,\ pages 2158 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    2019

  53. [61]

    Jeffery , author S

    author author S. Jeffery , author S. Kimmel , \ and\ author A. Piedrafita ,\ in\ @noop booktitle 18th Conference on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication and Cryptography (TQC 2023) \ ( organization Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum f \"u r Informatik ,\ year 2023 ) NoStop

    2023

  54. [62]

    author author A. Y. \ Kitaev ,\ @noop journal journal ECCC \ volume TR96-003 ( year 1996 ) NoStop

    1996

  55. [63]

    Sakamoto , author H

    author author A. Sakamoto , author H. Kawakami , \ and\ author K. Yoshikawa ,\ @noop journal journal Chemical physics letters \ volume 146 ,\ pages 444 ( year 1988 ) NoStop

    1988

  56. [64]

    Brassard , author P

    author author G. Brassard , author P. H yer , author M. Mosca , \ and\ author A. Tapp ,\ @noop journal journal Contemporary Mathematics \ volume 305 ,\ pages 53 ( year 2002 ) NoStop

    2002

  57. [65]

    Fukuzawa , author C

    author author S. Fukuzawa , author C. Ho , author S. Irani , \ and\ author J. Zion ,\ in\ @noop booktitle 2023 proceedings of the symposium on algorithm engineering and experiments (ALENEX) \ ( organization SIAM ,\ year 2023 )\ pp.\ pages 135--147 NoStop

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.