Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 57 references

Active Brownian motion in a single-relaxation viscoelastic fluid

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read An active Brownian particle in a single-relaxation viscoelastic fluid behaves exactly like a self-propelled colloid inside a harmonic well whose center itself undergoes ordinary Brownian motion, with the full mean-square displacement…

desk verdict A clean analytic/simulation story about active Brownian motion in a single-relaxation viscoelastic fluid, with an experimental showcase whose validation is undercut by fitting all four parameters to the same MSD. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.07059 v1 pith:HTA3J3BH submitted 2026-08-07 cond-mat.soft cond-mat.stat-mech

Sanatan Halder , Manas Khan This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.softcond-mat.stat-mech
keywords ActiveBrownianparticleviscoelasticfluidMaxwell-Voigtmodelharmonicallyboundlong-timediffusiondynamicopticaltrapJanuscolloidtimescaleordering
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 shows that an active Brownian particle (ABP) swimming in a single-relaxation viscoelastic fluid moves precisely like a self-propelled particle trapped in a harmonic well whose center diffuses. This equivalence reduces the complicated fluid memory to a tractable stochastic model whose mean-square displacement is a sum of three terms: confined thermal motion, active propulsion, and long-time diffusion of the well. The ordering of three timescales—equilibration in the well, orientation persistence, and medium relaxation—selects the observable dynamical regimes, from superdiffusive runs through elastic plateaus to a final diffusive regime. The authors validate the model with numerical simulations across all timescale orderings and with experiments using a Pt-coated Janus colloid in a dynamically steered optical trap that mimics the viscoelastic medium. The practical payoff is a tunable, activity-independent viscoelastic environment for studying active motion in structured fluids.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Maxwell-Voigt (MV) model with a single spring stiffness $k$ shared by a Voigt element (spring in parallel with high-frequency dashpot $\gamma_s$) and a Maxwell element (spring in series with low-frequency dashpot $\gamma$). Its stochastic surrogate is a harmonic well of stiffness $k$ with solvent friction $\gamma_s$ whose center diffuses with friction $\gamma_{\mathrm{HW}}$, so the particle position splits into $x(t)=x_{\mathrm{HBABP}}(t)+x_{\mathrm{HW}}(t)$. The MSD formula (Eq. 2) adds the confined active contribution, the active propulsive contribution, and free diffusion of the well, with the three timescales $\tau_k=\gamma_s/k$, $\tau_R=1/D_R$, and $\lambda=\gamma_{\mathrm{HW}}/k$ controlling each regime.

What would settle it

Independently measure the trap stiffness $k$ (e.g., from the equipartition variance of a trapped passive bead), the imposed trap diffusivity $D_{\mathrm{HW}}$ (from the variance of the generated Brownian trajectory), and the propulsion speed $V$ (from the short-time ballistic slope of the MSD in a static trap), then compare these values with those obtained by fitting Eq. 2 to the active-particle MSD. If the fitted and independently measured values disagree beyond experimental uncertainty in either of the two reported regimes, the claimed quantitative validation would fail.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper contends that an active Brownian particle in a single-relaxation Maxwell-Voigt fluid is dynamically equivalent to a harmonically bound active Brownian particle whose confining well itself undergoes free diffusion. The particle coordinate separates into an HBABP part (position relative to the diffusing well) and the well-center displacement, so the total mean-square displacement is the sum of the static-well HBABP result and $4D_{\mathrm{HW}}\tau$, as given by Eq. 2. Because both the well equilibration time $\tau_k$ and the relaxation time $\lambda$ stem from the same spring stiffness $k$ but different friction coefficients, the relative ordering of $\tau_k$, $\tau_R$, and $\lambda$ fully determines the shape of the MSD. Simulations confirm the analytical MSD in all orderings, and experiments with a Pt-coated Janus colloid in a dynamic optical trap reproduce the persistence-dominated and confinement-dominated regimes quantitatively.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the four fitted parameters ($\tau_k$, $\tau_R$, $\lambda$, and $V$) extracted from the measured mean-square displacement correspond to the actual physical stiffness, diffusivity, and propulsion speed of the trap and particle, rather than being merely free fitting parameters.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the equivalence holds, the full mean-square displacement of an ABP in a single-relaxation VE fluid is known in closed form from four parameters, making active-probe microrheology a straightforward three-timescale analysis.
  • The ordering of $\tau_k$, $\tau_R$, and $\lambda$ dictates which dynamical regimes appear: persistence-dominated dynamics ($\tau_R < \tau_k$) shows superdiffusion followed by activity-enhanced diffusion and a plateau, while confinement-dominated dynamics ($\tau_k < \tau_R$) shows two plateaus; if the medium relaxes before reorientation ($\lambda < \tau_R$), activity signatures vanish entirely.
  • The dynamic optical trap provides a configurable VE medium whose rheological parameters ($\tau_k$ and $\lambda$) are set by trap stiffness and imposed trap diffusivity and are unaffected by the propulsion speed, enabling experiments in regimes that are inaccessible with real polymeric fluids.
  • In the limit $\lambda \to \infty$ the model reduces to the static-well HBABP, and in the passive limit $V=0$ it recovers the known HBBP with long-time diffusion, so the new result nests both existing cases as special limits.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the equivalence is quantitative, the same three-timescale competition should appear in real single-relaxation VE fluids such as wormlike micelles, so the HBABP-with-long-time-diffusion formula could be used to extract an active particle's persistence time from a single MSD measurement.
  • The model's linear single-relaxation restriction suggests a natural multi-mode extension: a superposition of independent diffusing wells would produce a generalized Maxwell fluid with multiple plateaus and memory-dependent diffusion.
  • Because the optical trap couples laser power to both stiffness and thermophoretic speed, the claim that propulsion speed is independent of the medium's rheology could be tested more cleanly with chemically powered Janus colloids, where the propulsion mechanism is decoupled from the trap parameters.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes that an active Brownian particle (ABP) in a single-relaxation Maxwell-Voigt fluid is equivalent to a harmonically bound ABP whose harmonic-well center undergoes free diffusion (HBABP with long-time diffusion). The authors derive the mean-square displacement as the sum of a static-well HBABP contribution and a free-diffusion term (Eq. 2, with the degenerate case Eq. 3), simulate the stochastic dynamics for five timescale orderings, and use a Pt-silica Janus colloid in a dynamic optical trap to test two of those orderings experimentally. They report quantitative agreement among theory, simulation, and experiment.

Significance. The theoretical framework is attractive: it reduces the three-timescale competition (equilibration time tau_k, persistence time tau_R, and viscoelastic relaxation time lambda) to a tractable stochastic model, and the dynamic-optical-trap realization offers a tunable experimental emulation whose viscoelastic response is not perturbed by activity. Strengths include the explicit analytic limits (V = 0 recovers HBBP with long-time diffusion; lambda -> infinity recovers static-well HBABP), the clearly specified simulation propagator, and the honest statement of limitations such as linear response and the coupling between laser power and propulsion speed. The main weakness is the experimental validation: all four parameters (tau_k, tau_R, lambda, V) are fitted to the same experimental MSD curve that Eq. 2 is supposed to predict, with no independent calibration of any of them. As a result, the reported agreement with experiment currently demonstrates the flexibility of a four-parameter fit rather than predictive validity of the model.

major comments (2)
  1. [Experimental section and Conclusions] The Methods paragraph states: "We compute the time-averaged MSD from the tracked trajectories and fit it to Eq. 2, obtaining tau_k, tau_R, lambda, and V with fitting uncertainties below 10%." The Conclusions, by contrast, claim "Experiment tests the case lambda > tau_k, tau_R, with lambda known from the trap rather than fitted." These statements are mutually inconsistent. All four model parameters are obtained from the same experimental MSD curve shown in Fig. 4b,c, and the paper reports no independent measurement of the trap stiffness k (hence tau_k), the imposed HW diffusivity D_HW (hence lambda), the propulsion speed V, or the orientational relaxation time tau_R. With four free parameters, a fit of Eq. 2 to an MSD of this functional form will reproduce the observed shape essentially by construction. The quantitative agreement in Fig. 4 therefore does not validate the model unless independent calibrations are supplied. I ask the authors to add, for each of the two regimes, independently measured values of k from a passive trapped bead at the same laser power, D_HW from the prescribed trap trajectory, V from a static-trap or free-propulsion assay, and tau_R from orientation tracking, and then to refit the MSD with at most one free parameter, or to re-scope the experimental portion as a parameterization study rather than a validation.
  2. [Model and simulation propagator (Eq. 1 and the paragraph after Eq. 4)] There is an inconsistency between the stochastic equations and the simulation update. Eq. (1a) for x_HBABP, described as "the ABP position relative to the HW," contains no coupling to the motion of the HW center. The simulation update, however, includes the term "-Delta x_HW,i" in the argument of the exponential, meaning the relative coordinate is driven by the trap-center displacement. For a particle in a moving harmonic well, the correct relative-coordinate equation is d x_HBABP/dt = -x_HBABP/tau_k - d x_HW/dt + V cos(phi) + noise, not Eq. (1a). These two systems have different MSDs: in the moving-well system, the contribution of the center diffusion is filtered through the trap relaxation and is not simply additive at all times. The authors should state which system Eq. (2) actually solves, add the missing -d x_HW/dt term to Eq. (1a), or explicitly identify the approximation (for instance lambda >> tau_k, so D_HW/D_s = tau_k/lambda is small) under which the additive form Eq. (2) is valid for the dynamic-trap experiment. As written, the simulation and the analytic model are not solving the same equations, and the numerical agreement with Eq. (2) is not a check of the model as stated.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eqs. (2) and (3)] The first term in Eqs. (2) and (3) is typeset as 4D_HBABP tau (1 - e^{-tau/tau_k}). If this is literal, it gives a vanishing short-time slope instead of the required 4D_HBABP tau and an unbounded long-time growth instead of the plateau 4D_HBABP tau_k. The correct prefactor should be 4D_HBABP tau_k; please check the typesetting and ensure the subscript is not lost.
  2. [Simulation results, Figs. 2 and 3] The captions say "solid lines denote fits from Eq. 2" even though the simulation parameters were set independently. Please clarify whether any parameter is free in these fits, and if so, report the fitted values; otherwise, replace "fits" with "Eq. 2" plotted with the input parameters.
  3. [Experimental results, Fig. 4] The fitted values of tau_k, tau_R, lambda, and V are never listed, despite the statement that fitting uncertainties are below 10%. Reporting the actual values, with confidence intervals, is necessary for the reader to judge whether the fitted parameters are physically plausible and consistent with the trap and particle properties.
  4. [Abstract and nomenclature] The abstract calls tau_k and lambda "the crossover and equilibration times of the VE fluid, tau_k and lambda, respectively." This is confusing because lambda is the relaxation time and tau_k is the equilibration time; consider using consistent terminology throughout.
  5. [Data availability] The data availability statement says the raw data are not public because of size. For a paper whose experimental claim rests on a four-parameter fit, it would be helpful to at least publish the fitted parameter values, the MSD data in tabular form, and the simulation code, so that the fit procedure and the agreement with Eq. 2 can be independently checked.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Experimental validation is underdetermined: all four model parameters are fitted to the same MSD curve, so the claimed quantitative agreement is a property of the fit rather than an independent prediction.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Experimental realization (p. 4), Fig. 4 discussion, and Conclusions (p. 5)]
    "We compute the time-averaged MSD from the tracked trajectories and fit it to Eq. 2, obtaining τk, τR, λ, and V with fitting uncertainties below 10%. ... Experiment tests the case λ > τk, τR, with λ known from the trap rather than fitted."

    The experimental MSD is the sole reported measurable, and Eq. 2 is fit to that same curve with all four parameters free. The Conclusions assert that λ is known from the trap rather than fitted, but the Methods state that λ is obtained from the fit. No independent calibration of k, DHW, V, or τR is reported. A four-parameter fit to a smooth MSD will necessarily reproduce the observed features in Fig. 4b,c, so the 'quantitative agreement' is forced by construction rather than serving as a predictive test. Without separate measurements, the experiment cannot distinguish the proposed model from any other four-parameter MSD ansatz with the same functional form.

full rationale

The analytical model, Eq. (2), is an honest closed-form consequence of the stated Langevin equations (1): the position separates into xHBABP + xHW, and the MSD adds the static-well HBABP result (cited from the authors' prior work) to free diffusion. Conditional on those equations, the derivation is legitimate, and the timescale-ordering regimes are substantive. The simulations integrate the same equations that produce Eq. (2), so the simulation/analytics agreement is an internal consistency check rather than independent confirmation. The circularity lies in the experimental 'validation': the Methods say the measured MSD is fit to Eq. 2 to obtain τk, τR, λ, and V, while the Conclusions claim λ is known from the trap rather than fitted. Fitting four parameters to one smooth MSD forces agreement, so Fig. 4b,c and the statement of quantitative agreement demonstrate fit expressiveness, not an out-of-sample prediction. The theoretical content and the passive/static limits are independent of this fitted experimental step, which is why the paper is partially rather than wholly circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the equivalence between a Maxwell-Voigt fluid and a diffusing harmonic well, on the additive decomposition of the MSD, and on the faithful emulation of the diffusing well by a steered optical trap. The experimental validation introduces four free parameters that are fitted to the same theoretical MSD, and the fitted values are not independently verified. No genuinely new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (4)
  • τk (equilibration time) = reported with <10% uncertainty, values not tabulated
    Fitted to the experimental MSD via Eq. 2 in the Active Janus colloid section; physically τk = γs/k, but not independently measured.
  • τR (persistence time) = reported with <10% uncertainty, values not tabulated
    Fitted to the experimental MSD; depends on particle size and fluid heating, not independently calibrated.
  • λ (VE relaxation time) = reported with <10% uncertainty, values not tabulated
    Fitted to the experimental MSD even though the conclusion states it is known from the trap; no independent measurement of γHW or DHW is reported.
  • V (propulsion speed) = reported with <10% uncertainty, values not tabulated
    Fitted to the experimental MSD; coupled to laser power P, so not independently varied from trap stiffness.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption An MV fluid with Voigt and Maxwell elements in series is equivalent to a harmonic well that diffuses with friction γHW (from refs. 34,35).
    This equivalence is the foundation of the model and is imported from the authors' prior work.
  • domain assumption The particle coordinate separates additively into a relative coordinate and the well center, with independent noises.
    Assumed from the series connection of the rheological elements; used to justify the MSD addition before Eq. 2.
  • ad hoc to paper A computer-steered optical trap whose center follows a Brownian trajectory faithfully reproduces the diffusing-harmonic-well dynamics for an active particle.
    Central premise of the experimental realization; no test against a real VE fluid is provided.
  • domain assumption The active self-propulsion (speed V and orientation diffusion DR) is independent of the trap stiffness and well diffusion, and the activity does not perturb the emulated medium.
    Standard ABP assumption; partially violated because laser power couples k and V, acknowledged in the limitations.
  • domain assumption Linear, single-relaxation-time viscoelasticity is sufficient to describe the regimes of interest.
    The paper restricts itself to this regime, as stated in the Conclusions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Active Brownian motion in a single-relaxation viscoelastic fluid." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HTA3J3BH

@misc{pith2026260807059,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Active Brownian motion in a single-relaxation viscoelastic fluid},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HTA3J3BH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.07059}
}
abstract

Active Brownian particles (ABPs) in viscoelastic (VE) media exhibit fascinating dynamical phenomena set by self-propulsion, thermal fluctuations, and fluid viscoelasticity. We extend our model, in which the Brownian dynamics within a slowly diffusing harmonic well emulates that in a single-relaxation VE fluid, to study active Brownian motion in such media. Consequently, the resultant dynamics is governed by the interplay of the characteristic timescales of the systems: the crossover and equilibration times of the VE fluid, $\tau_k$ and $\lambda$, respectively, and the persistence time of the ABP, $\tau_{\mathrm{R}}$. Following analytical predictions and simulations, we study two practically relevant regimes where the dynamics is dominated by the persistence of active motion and the elastic confinement of the VE fluid, with a phoretically active Pt-coated Janus colloid in a dynamic optical trap, and show quantitative agreement with the simulations. This approach provides a VE environment with tunable VE properties that remain unaffected by the strength of self-propulsion, allowing us to systematically investigate active Brownian motion in VE media in ways that are not otherwise possible with physical VE fluids.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.07059 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Rheological model of an active Brownian particle (ABP) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Numerically simulated trajectories and mean square displacements (MSDs) of an HBABP with long-time diffusion for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Numerically simulated MSDs of the HBABP with long-time diffusion for three additional timescale orderings. MSDs are [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Experimental realization of a phoretically active Pt-coated silica Janus colloid in a configurable single-relaxation VE [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Elgeti, R

    J. Elgeti, R. G. Winkler, and G. Gompper, Physics of microswimmers—single particle motion and collective be- havior: A review, Rep. Prog. Phys.78, 056601 (2015)

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    Bechinger, R

    C. Bechinger, R. Di Leonardo, H. L¨ owen, C. Reichhardt, G. Volpe, and G. Volpe, Active Particles in Complex and Crowded Environments, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 045006 (2016)

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Z¨ ottl and H

    A. Z¨ ottl and H. Stark, Emergent behavior in active col- loids, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter28, 253001 (2016)

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    G. Li, E. Lauga, and A. M. Ardekani, Microswimming in viscoelastic fluids, Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid Mechanics297, 104655 (2021)

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    A. E. Patteson, A. Gopinath, M. Goulian, and P. E. Arratia, Running and tumbling with E. coli in polymeric solutions, Sci Rep5, 15761 (2015)

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    V. A. Martinez, J. Schwarz-Linek, M. Reufer, L. G. Wil- son, A. N. Morozov, and W. C. K. Poon, Flagellated bacterial motility in polymer solutions, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.111, 17771 (2014)

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    Magariyama and S

    Y. Magariyama and S. Kudo, A Mathematical Explana- tion of an Increase in Bacterial Swimming Speed with Viscosity in Linear-Polymer Solutions, Biophysical Jour- nal83, 733 (2002)

    work page 2002

  8. [8]

    Houry, M

    A. Houry, M. Gohar, J. Deschamps, E. Tischenko, S. Aymerich, A. Gruss, and R. Briandet, Bacterial swim- mers that infiltrate and take over the biofilm matrix, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.109, 13088 (2012)

    work page 2012

Show all 57 references
  1. [9]

    L. J. Fauci and R. Dillon, BIOFLUIDMECHANICS OF REPRODUCTION, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.38, 371 (2006)

    2006

  2. [10]

    D. J. Smith, E. A. Gaffney, H. Gadˆ elha, N. Kapur, and J. C. Kirkman-Brown, Bend propagation in the flagella of migrating human sperm, and its modulation by viscosity, Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton66, 220 (2009)

    2009

  3. [11]

    J. P. Celliet al.,Helicobacter Pylorimoves through mucus by reducing mucin viscoelasticity, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.106, 14321 (2009)

    2009

  4. [12]

    S. A. Mirbagheri and H. C. Fu,Helicobacter PyloriCou- ples Motility and Diffusion to Actively Create a Hetero- geneous Complex Medium in Gastric Mucus, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 198101 (2016)

    2016

  5. [13]

    J. R. Gomez-Solano, A. Blokhuis, and C. Bechinger, Dy- namics of Self-Propelled Janus Particles in Viscoelastic Fluids, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 138301 (2016)

    2016

  6. [14]

    Lozano, J

    C. Lozano, J. R. Gomez-Solano, and C. Bechinger, Run- and-tumble-like motion of active colloids in viscoelastic media, New J. Phys.20, 015008 (2018)

    2018

  7. [15]

    Saito, R

    K. Saito, R. Kawano, C. Sadamatsu, Y. Iwashita, and Y. Kimura, Self-propelled motion of induced-charge elec- trophoretic Janus particles in viscoelastic fluids, Phys. Rev. E111, 045409 (2025)

    2025

  8. [16]

    Narinder, W.-j

    N. Narinder, W.-j. Zhu, and C. Bechinger, Active colloids under geometrical constraints in viscoelastic media, Eur. Phys. J. E44, 28 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    Narinder, J

    N. Narinder, J. R. Gomez-Solano, and C. Bechinger, Ac- tive particles in geometrically confined viscoelastic fluids, New J. Phys.21, 093058 (2019)

    2019

  10. [18]

    Narinder, S

    N. Narinder, S. Paul, and C. Bechinger, Work fluctuation relation of an active Brownian particle in a viscoelastic fluid, Phys. Rev. E104, 034605 (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    V. M. S. G. Tanuku, I. Malhotra, L. Caprini, H. L¨ owen, T. Palberg, and I. Buttinoni, Active Particles in Tunable Compressible Environments, Small Science6, e202500599 (2026)

    2026

  12. [20]

    Saad and G

    S. Saad and G. Natale, Diffusiophoresis of active colloids in viscoelastic media, Soft Matter15, 9909 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    A. R. Sprenger, C. Bair, and H. L¨ owen, Active Brown- ian motion with memory delay induced by a viscoelastic medium, Phys. Rev. E105, 044610 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    D. S. Quevedo, M. Conte, M. Dijkstra, and C. Morais Smith, Active Brownian particles in power-law viscoelastic media, Phys. Rev. E114, L013401 (2026)

    2026

  15. [23]

    Y. Du, H. Jiang, and Z. Hou, Study of active Brownian particle diffusion in polymer solutions, Soft Matter15, 2020 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    C. Yuan, A. Chen, B. Zhang, and N. Zhao, Activity– crowding coupling effect on the diffusion dynamics of a self-propelled particle in polymer solutions, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.21, 24112 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Kumar and R

    P. Kumar and R. Chakrabarti, Dynamics of self-propelled tracer particles inside a polymer network, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.25, 1937 (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    Teran, L

    J. Teran, L. Fauci, and M. Shelley, Viscoelastic Fluid Response Can Increase the Speed and Efficiency of a Free Swimmer, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 038101 (2010)

    2010

  19. [27]

    S. Joo, X. Durang, O.-c. Lee, and J.-H. Jeon, Anomalous diffusion of active Brownian particles cross-linked to a networked polymer: Langevin dynamics simulation and theory, Soft Matter16, 9188 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    M. E. Cates and S. J. Candau, Statics and dynamics of worm-like surfactant micelles, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2, 6869 (1990)

    1990

  21. [29]

    P. A. Hassan, K. Bhattacharya, S. K. Kulshreshtha, and S. R. Raghavan, Microrheology of Wormlike Micellar Flu- ids from the Diffusion of Colloidal Probes, J. Phys. Chem. B109, 8744 (2005)

    2005

  22. [30]

    J. H. Van Zanten and K. P. Rufener, Brownian motion in a single relaxation time Maxwell fluid, Phys. Rev. E62, 5389 (2000)

    2000

  23. [31]

    Grimm, S

    M. Grimm, S. Jeney, and T. Franosch, Brownian motion in a Maxwell fluid, Soft Matter7, 2076 (2011)

    2011

  24. [32]

    Yu. L. Raikher and V. V. Rusakov, Theory of Brownian motion in a Jeffreys fluid, J. Exp. Theor. Phys.111, 883 (2010)

    2010

  25. [33]

    Y. L. Raikher, V. V. Rusakov, and R. Perzynski, Brownian motion in a viscoelastic medium modelled by a Jeffreys fluid, Soft Matter9, 10857 (2013)

    2013

  26. [34]

    Khan and T

    M. Khan and T. G. Mason, Random walks of colloidal probes in viscoelastic materials, Phys. Rev. E89, 042309 (2014)

    2014

  27. [35]

    Halder and M

    S. Halder and M. Khan, Realizing microrheological re- sponse of configurable viscoelastic media with a dynamic optical trap, Soft Matter22, 4403 (2026)

    2026

  28. [36]

    Halder and M

    S. Halder and M. Khan, Interplay between timescales governs the residual activity of a harmonically bound active Brownian particle, arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.07265 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Halder and M

    S. Halder and M. Khan, Identifying the signatures of residual activity in harmonically bound active Brownian dynamics, arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.22222 (2026). 7

    2026 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Halder and M

    S. Halder and M. Khan, Dynamically Stable Optical Trap- ping of Thermophoretically Active Janus Colloids, ACS Photonics13, 757 (2026)

    2026

  31. [39]

    Doi and S

    M. Doi and S. F. Edwards,The Theory of Polymer Dy- namics, reprint ed., International Series of Monographs on Physics No. 73 (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2013)

    2013

  32. [40]

    Chandrasekhar, Stochastic Problems in Physics and Astronomy, Rev

    S. Chandrasekhar, Stochastic Problems in Physics and Astronomy, Rev. Mod. Phys.15, 1 (1943)

    1943

  33. [41]

    Calandrini, E

    V. Calandrini, E. Pellegrini, P. Calligari, K. Hinsen, and G. Kneller, nMoldyn - Interfacing spectroscopic experi- ments, molecular dynamics simulations and models for time correlation functions, JDN12, 201 (2011)

    2011

  34. [42]

    Jiang, N

    H.-R. Jiang, N. Yoshinaga, and M. Sano, Active Motion of a Janus Particle by Self-Thermophoresis in a Defocused Laser Beam, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 268302 (2010)

    2010

  35. [43]

    Bronte Cirizaet al., Optically Driven Janus Micro- engine with Full Orbital Motion Control, ACS Photonics 10, 3223 (2023)

    D. Bronte Cirizaet al., Optically Driven Janus Micro- engine with Full Orbital Motion Control, ACS Photonics 10, 3223 (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    W. S. M. Werner, K. Glantschnig, and C. Ambrosch-Draxl, Optical Constants and Inelastic Electron-Scattering Data for 17 Elemental Metals, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data38, 1013 (2009)

    2009

  37. [45]

    D. P. Kulikovaet al., Optical properties of tungsten trioxide, palladium, and platinum thin films for func- tional nanostructures engineering, Opt. Express28, 32049 (2020)

    2020

  38. [46]

    J. R. Howse, R. A. L. Jones, A. J. Ryan, T. Gough, R. Vafabakhsh, and R. Golestanian, Self-Motile Colloidal Particles: From Directed Propulsion to Random Walk, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 048102 (2007)

    2007

  39. [47]

    F¨ allman and O

    E. F¨ allman and O. Axner, Design for fully steerable dual- trap optical tweezers, Appl. Opt.36, 2107 (1997)

    1997

  40. [48]

    Halder, D

    S. Halder, D. Chanda, D. Mondal, S. Kundu, and M. Khan, Optical Micromanipulation of Soft Materials: Applications in Devices and Technologies, inAdvanced Structured Materials(Springer Nature Singapore, Singa- pore, 2024) pp. 415–469

    2024

  41. [49]

    Ershovet al., TrackMate 7: Integrating state-of-the- art segmentation algorithms into tracking pipelines, Nat Methods19, 829 (2022)

    D. Ershovet al., TrackMate 7: Integrating state-of-the- art segmentation algorithms into tracking pipelines, Nat Methods19, 829 (2022)

    2022

  42. [50]

    M. Khan, K. Regan, and R. M. Robertson-Anderson, Optical Tweezers Microrheology Maps the Dynamics of Strain-Induced Local Inhomogeneities in Entangled Poly- mers, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 038001 (2019)

    2019

  43. [51]

    C. Datt, L. Zhu, G. J. Elfring, and O. S. Pak, Squirming through shear-thinning fluids, J. Fluid Mech.784, R1 (2015)

    2015

  44. [52]

    Khan and T

    M. Khan and T. G. Mason, Trajectories of probe spheres in generalized linear viscoelastic complex fluids, Soft Mat- ter10, 9073 (2014)

    2014

  45. [53]

    Gompperet al., The 2020 motile active matter roadmap, J

    G. Gompperet al., The 2020 motile active matter roadmap, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter32, 193001 (2020)

    2020

  46. [54]

    T. M. Squires and T. G. Mason, Fluid Mechanics of Microrheology, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.42, 413 (2010)

    2010

  47. [55]

    E. M. Furst and T. M. Squires,Microrheology(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2017)

    2017

  48. [56]

    Sch¨ uttler, R

    J. Sch¨ uttler, R. Garcia-Millan, M. E. Cates, and S. A. M. Loos, Active particles in moving traps: Minimum work protocols and information efficiency of work extraction, Phys. Rev. E112, 024119 (2025)

    2025

  49. [57]

    Darabi, B

    F. Darabi, B. R. Ferrer, and J. R. Gomez-Solano, Stochas- tic energetics of a colloidal particle trapped in a viscoelas- tic bath, New J. Phys.25, 103021 (2023)

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.