Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 33 references

Non-reciprocity drives a Brownian dimer out of equilibrium

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that a two-monomer Brownian dimer with a non-reciprocal harmonic spring—different stiffness on each monomer—reaches a genuinely non-equilibrium steady state with a non-zero probability current for any k1≠k2, even in a sing

desk verdict The exact l=0 result is correct and worth knowing; the finite-rest-length section needs substantial cleanup before this is publishable. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.27740 v1 pith:UKR5KVQU submitted 2026-07-30 cond-mat.stat-mech

Suman Pramanik , Soham Dutta , Arnab Saha This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mech PACS 05.40.-a05.70.Ln
keywords Non-reciprocalinteractionsBrowniandimerNon-equilibriumsteadystateProbabilitycurrentVorticitygyrationOverdampedLangevindynamicsLyapunovequation
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 claims that a minimal overdamped Brownian dimer—two monomers in a common isotropic harmonic trap, linked by a harmonic spring whose stiffness differs for each monomer, and sharing one thermal bath—settles into a non-equilibrium steady state with a persistent probability current whenever the two stiffnesses differ. For the exactly solvable zero-rest-length limit, the stationary distribution is Gaussian and the current is proportional to k2−k1, so any imbalance, however small, drives autonomous gyration with no temperature gradient, external force, or time-dependent drive. This matters because it identifies non-reciprocity of inter-particle forces as a standalone mechanism for generating non-equilibrium currents, unifying it with the physics of the Brownian gyrator. The finite-rest-length case, treated numerically, shows the current gaining a translational component and the vorticity developing additional vortex-antivortex pairs.

What carries the argument

The central object is the stationary Lyapunov equation for a multivariate Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process, AC + CAᵀ = 2D, whose solution fixes the Gaussian covariance C and hence the probability current through Q = D C⁻¹ − A. The current is controlled by the antisymmetric part of QC, whose single independent component is w = kB(k2T1 − k1T2)/Σ; this scalar w is the pivot on which all non-equilibrium behavior hangs.

What would settle it

Measure the steady-state current in a realization of the model at k1=k2 and confirm it is exactly zero; then vary k2−k1 and check that the current magnitude scales linearly with |k2−k1| and its direction reverses with the sign, as Eq. (12) predicts. For the finite-rest-length claims, repeat the Langevin integration with decreasing timestep and increasing ensemble size: the additional vortex-antivortex pairs in Fig. 8 must persist under convergence, or they are numerical artifacts.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For a dimer governed by the overdamped Langevin equations with drift matrix A = [[k0+k1, -k1],[-k2, k0+k2]] and a single-temperature bath, the steady-state covariance solves the Lyapunov equation AC + CAᵀ = 2kBT I, giving an exact Gaussian distribution. The stationary probability current is J = Q z P with Q = kBT C⁻¹ − A, and its overall prefactor is w = kBT(k2−k1)/Σ, where Σ = 2k0+k1+k2. Consequently, a non-zero current exists for every k1≠k2, vanishing only for the reciprocal case; the vorticity has a positive central core surrounded by a negative ring (a vortex-antivortex pair). The same algebra with two bath temperatures T1,T2 replaces w by kB(k2T1 − k1T2)/Σ, unifying the non-reciprocal

Load-bearing premise

The finite-rest-length (l>0) results—the translational current component and the additional vortex-antivortex pairs—rest entirely on numerical simulations described only in figure captions, with no timestep, ensemble size, integration time, or convergence analysis given; if those simulations are unreliable, the mechanism is rigorously established only for the zero-rest-length linear spring.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Non-reciprocal coupling alone is sufficient to generate a non-equilibrium steady state in a passive, time-independent, single-bath system.
  • The direction of the gyration current is set by the sign of k2−k1, and its magnitude scales linearly with the stiffness difference, so even an arbitrarily small asymmetry yields a measurable current.
  • The exact l=0 solution provides a benchmark for designing experiments or simulations that probe non-reciprocal forces in colloidal or active-matter settings.
  • Coupling the monomers to two different temperatures yields a unified current prefactor, showing that mechanical asymmetry and thermal asymmetry are interchangeable and can be tuned to cancel exactly.
  • For finite rest length, the numerical results predict a translational current component and additional vortex-antivortex pairs, qualitatively extending the mechanism beyond linear couplings.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the finite-rest-length predictions survive careful numerical scrutiny, a direct experimental test could be built: measuring the steady-state current while sweeping k2−k1 and checking the predicted linear dependence and sign reversal.
  • The exact solvability at l=0 hints that any two-degree-of-freedom linear system with asymmetric drift and isotropic diffusion will display a current proportional to the antisymmetric part of the drift; the mechanism may extend to larger non-reciprocal networks.
  • The cancellation condition k1/k2 = T1/T2 suggests a zero-current 'effective equilibrium' surface in parameter space; an editor's extrapolation is that an entropy-production or fluctuation-dissipation characterization could be formulated along that surface.
  • The unquantified numerics for l>0 (no timestep, ensemble size, or convergence analysis) leave the translational current and extra vortex pairs as provisional; they require independent confirmation before being treated as established.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies a two-dimensional Brownian dimer made of two overdamped monomers in a common isotropic harmonic trap, coupled by a non-reciprocal harmonic spring and in contact with a single thermal bath. For zero rest length l=0, the dynamics is a linear multivariate Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process. The authors derive the exact stationary Gaussian distribution, the stationary Fokker-Planck current J = Q z P(z), with prefactor w = k_B T (k_2 - k_1)/Σ (Eq. (12)), and the vorticity field with a central vortex core surrounded by an antivortex ring (Eq. (14)). They then map this system to the Brownian gyrator, identifying non-reciprocity and temperature gradient as two independent symmetry-breaking mechanisms, and unify them in a two-temperature generalization with w = k_B(k_2 T_1 - k_1 T_2)/Σ (Eq. (21)). For finite rest length l>0, the equations are nonlinear; the paper reports numerical Langevin simulations showing a translational current component and additional vortex-antivortex pairs. The central claim is that non-reciprocity alone, without any temperature gradient, external drive, or explicit time dependence, drives the system into a nonequilibrium steady state with non-zero current.

Significance. If the results are correct, the l=0 solution is a clean, minimal demonstration that non-reciprocal linear coupling suffices to produce a nonzero stationary probability current in an otherwise equilibrium single-bath system. The exact Gaussian steady state, current, and vorticity are derived in closed form with no fitted parameters, and the two-temperature formula (Eq. (21)) provides an elegant interpolation between the non-reciprocal and thermal-gradient mechanisms. The analytic l=0 part is strong and, as the reader's report confirms, algebraically sound. However, the paper's broader claims about finite rest length — the appearance of a translational current and additional vortex-antivortex pairs — rest entirely on numerical simulations whose protocol and convergence are not documented. The l=0 exact result already establishes the core mechanism, but the finite-l section needs substantial strengthening before the general conclusion is fully supported.

major comments (3)
  1. [§VI, Figs. 7 and 8] The finite-rest-length claims are unsupported by the numerical evidence as presented. The text reports qualitatively new behavior for l>0 — a translational current component and an increased number of vortex-antivortex pairs — but the Langevin simulations are described only by figure captions. No timestep, integration scheme, ensemble size, integration time, steady-state convergence criterion, or error estimates are given. Since the nonlinear equations for l>0 have no closed-form solution, these claims rest entirely on those simulations. Please provide the full numerical protocol and show convergence tests (e.g., current/vorticity profiles at increasing resolution and simulation time), or explicitly restrict the claims to l=0 and mark the finite-l results as preliminary.
  2. [§II and §VI, Eqs. (1)-(2)] For l>0, the force term (|s|-l) s/|s| is multivalued at s = r1 - r2 = 0, making the drift not Lipschitz at that point. The numerical integration therefore requires a regularization or a well-defined limiting convention. The manuscript does not state how this singularity was handled. If no regularization was used, the finite-l simulations may be ill-defined for trajectories that pass through s=0; if a regularization was used, it should be specified and its influence on the reported current/vorticity should be assessed. This is a technical load-bearing issue for §VI.
  3. [§VIII, concluding remarks] The statement that non-reciprocity alone can drive the system 'arbitrarily far from equilibrium' is supported by the l=0 exact result in the sense of a nonzero stationary current for any k1≠k2, but the paper does not quantify 'far from equilibrium' via, for example, entropy production rate. More importantly, the concluding sentence extends the claim to the finite-l case: 'For l≠0, all these quantities are calculated numerically.' Since the numerical details are absent, the general conclusion is stronger than the evidence currently supports. Please either supply the missing numerical substantiation or soften the finite-l part of the conclusion.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§V, Eq. (14)] The symbol Q is used both for the current matrix Q in Eq. (9) and for the quadratic form Q(x1,x2) in Eq. (14). This is confusing. Please rename the quadratic form, e.g., R(x1,x2) or G(x1,x2).
  2. [§VI and figure captions] The figure captions for Figs. 7 and 8 state 'The parameter values used in simulation are kept the same as before,' but the earlier figures refer to l=0. For finite-l runs, the values of l are listed in the captions, but no other numerical parameters (e.g., k0, T, γ) are restated. Please make each caption self-contained and report the simulation parameters and any requested accuracy.
  3. [Supplementary Material, S2] The sentence 'We verified Eqs. (S8)-(S10) ... from numerical simulations (Fig. 1,3 of the main text)' reads as a self-check. While it is fine to mention consistency with the main-text figures, the analytical derivation is itself sufficient; consider clarifying that the figures are illustrative comparisons rather than independent verification.
  4. [Throughout] There are minor typographical issues, such as inconsistent spacing around the '≠' symbol and occasional missing spaces after commas. A careful proofread is recommended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: exact l=0 results are derived self-containedly; finite-length numerics are an independent check, not a fitted input.

full rationale

The paper's central exact results (Eqs. 6–15) follow directly from the stated linear Langevin model (Eq. 4), the Lyapunov equation (Eq. 5), and the Fokker-Planck current formula (Eq. 9). No parameter is fitted to the predicted current; the prefactor w = kBT(k2−k1)/Σ is obtained by algebraic solution, not assumed. The mapping to Brownian gyration is a structural comparison, not a renaming of a prior result as a new prediction. The only self-citation (Ref. [11], by two of the authors) is used in the introduction as an example of another gyration mechanism and is not load-bearing. The finite-rest-length section (Sec. VI) relies on numerical simulations whose parameters, timestep, ensemble size, and convergence checks are not reported; this is a reproducibility/validation limitation, not circularity, because the numerics are not used to infer the l=0 analytical results. No step reduces by definition or self-citation to its own input, so the circularity score is 0.

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

The derivation rests entirely on standard OU theory plus the physical premise that a non-reciprocal spring is a realizable effective interaction; the l>0 results additionally assume the unshown convergence of the numerical integration. No parameters are fitted to any data, and no entities are invented to explain the results.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math For a linear Langevin system ẋ = -(A/γ)x + ξ/γ with ⟨ξξ^T⟩ = 2kBT I, the stationary density is Gaussian ∝ exp(-½ x^T C^{-1} x) with AC + CA^T = 2kBT I, and the stationary current is J = (kBT C^{-1} − A)xP/γ.
    Invoked in Sec. III and Supplement S1–S2; textbook multivariate Ornstein-Uhlenbeck theory, cited as [31].
  • domain assumption The non-reciprocal spring (k1 ≠ k2 forces on the two monomers) is a legitimate effective interaction, physically realizable via feedback control or active mechanisms.
    The entire model rests on this realizability; refs [29,30] support the concept, but no experimental implementation is given.
  • domain assumption Noise is additive, white, Gaussian, position-independent, with both monomers in a common bath (Eq. 3).
    Standard overdamped Langevin model; the single-bath isotropy is exactly what makes the NESS attributable to non-reciprocity.
  • domain assumption For l>0, the numerical Langevin integration converges to the true steady state and the reported current/vorticity fields are converged.
    Sec. VI: no timestep, ensemble size, or convergence test is reported; the qualitative claims for l>0 depend on this unverified convergence.
  • domain assumption The shape-plane Fokker-Planck current (in (x1,x2)) is the operative definition of 'microscopic gyration', equivalent to the Brownian gyrator's real-space rotation.
    Sec. V argues the two are the same class of OU NESS; the real-space monomer currents vanish identically (Fig. 3), so this equivalence is a framing choice about which subspace's current constitutes gyration, not a mathematical input to the derivations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Non-reciprocity drives a Brownian dimer out of equilibrium." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UKR5KVQU

@misc{pith2026260727740,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Non-reciprocity drives a Brownian dimer out of equilibrium},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UKR5KVQU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.27740}
}
read the original abstract

We consider the minimal model of a two dimensional Brownian dimer consisting of two overdamped monomers, trapped in an isotropic harmonic potential and mutually coupled by a non-reciprocal harmonic spring that violates Newton's action-reaction principle. We have shown that the non-reciprocal interaction alone can drive the system far from equilibrium, in the absence of any external time dependent drive and being in contact with a single thermal bath. The exact steady state probability distribution and current are explicitly calculated for the zero-rest-length limit of the spring, which eventually maps our model to another non-equilibrium phenomenon, called Brownian gyration. For a spring with finite rest length, these quantities are calculated numerically.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.27740 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Heatmap of the joint probability distribution of two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Analytical counterpart of Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. Analytical counterpart of the top panel of Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Analytical local vorticity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Heatmap of the vorticity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Heatmap of the magnitude of current of two variates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Heatmap of the vorticity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [30]

    Statistical mechanics where newton’s third law is broken.Physical Review X, 5(1):011035, 2015

    Alexei V Ivlev, J¨ org Bartnick, Marco Heinen, C-R Du, V Nosenko, and Hartmut L¨ owen. Statistical mechanics where newton’s third law is broken.Physical Review X, 5(1):011035, 2015

    2015

  2. [1]

    Oxford University Press, 2003

    Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar.Newton ’s Principia for the common reader. Oxford University Press, 2003

    2003

  3. [2]

    Classical mechanics, volume 2

    Herbert Goldstein, Charles P Poole, John Safko, et al. Classical mechanics, volume 2. Addison-wesley Reading, MA, 1950

    1950

  4. [3]

    Hydrodynamics of soft active matter.Reviews of modern physics, 85(3):1143– 1189, 2013

    M Cristina Marchetti, Jean-Fran¸ cois Joanny, Sriram Ramaswamy, Tanniemola B Liverpool, Jacques Prost, Madan Rao, and R Aditi Simha. Hydrodynamics of soft active matter.Reviews of modern physics, 85(3):1143– 1189, 2013

    2013

  5. [4]

    Active particles in complex and crowded environ- ments.Reviews of modern physics, 88(4):045006, 2016

    Clemens Bechinger, Roberto Di Leonardo, Hartmut L¨ owen, Charles Reichhardt, Giorgio Volpe, and Giovanni Volpe. Active particles in complex and crowded environ- ments.Reviews of modern physics, 88(4):045006, 2016

    2016

  6. [5]

    Large-scale pat- terns in a minimal cognitive flocking model: Incidental leaders, nematic patterns, and aggregates.Physical Re- view Letters, 117(24):248001, 2016

    Lucas Barberis and Fernando Peruani. Large-scale pat- terns in a minimal cognitive flocking model: Incidental leaders, nematic patterns, and aggregates.Physical Re- view Letters, 117(24):248001, 2016

    2016

  7. [6]

    Intermittent collective motion in sheep results from al- ternating the role of leader and follower.Nature Physics, 18(12):1494–1501, 2022

    Luis G´ omez-Nava, Richard Bon, and Fernando Peruani. Intermittent collective motion in sheep results from al- ternating the role of leader and follower.Nature Physics, 18(12):1494–1501, 2022

    2022

  8. [7]

    Non-reciprocal phase transitions.Na- ture, 592(7854):363–369, 2021

    Michel Fruchart, Ryo Hanai, Peter B Littlewood, and Vincenzo Vitelli. Non-reciprocal phase transitions.Na- ture, 592(7854):363–369, 2021

    2021

Show all 33 references
  1. [8]

    Cooperative dynamics in two-component out-of-equilibrium systems: molecular ‘spinning tops’

    Victor S Dotsenko, Pascal Viot, Alberto Imparato, and Gleb Oshanin. Cooperative dynamics in two-component out-of-equilibrium systems: molecular ‘spinning tops’. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experi- ment, 2022(12):123211, 2022

    2022

  2. [9]

    Brownian gyrator: A minimal heat engine on the nanoscale.Physical review letters, 99(23):230602, 2007

    Roger Filliger and Peter Reimann. Brownian gyrator: A minimal heat engine on the nanoscale.Physical review letters, 99(23):230602, 2007

    2007

  3. [10]

    Two-temperature brownian dynamics of a particle in a confining potential.Physical Review E, 97(5):052121, 2018

    Vincent Mancois, Bruno Marcos, Pascal Viot, and David Wilkowski. Two-temperature brownian dynamics of a particle in a confining potential.Physical Review E, 97(5):052121, 2018

    2018

  4. [11]

    Microscopic gyration of a brownian ellipsoid.Proceedings of the Royal Soci- ety A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Science, 482(2331):20250754, 2026

    Soham Dutta and Arnab Saha. Microscopic gyration of a brownian ellipsoid.Proceedings of the Royal Soci- ety A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Science, 482(2331):20250754, 2026

    2026

  5. [12]

    Odd transport in a two-temperature brownian dimer.arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.27012, 2026

    Iman Abdoli and Hartmut L¨ owen. Odd transport in a two-temperature brownian dimer.arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.27012, 2026

    2026 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Elec- trical autonomous brownian gyrator.Physical Review E, 96(3):032123, 2017

    K-H Chiang, C-L Lee, P-Y Lai, and Y-F Chen. Elec- trical autonomous brownian gyrator.Physical Review E, 96(3):032123, 2017

    2017

  7. [14]

    Quadrupolar gyration of a brownian particle in a confining ring.npj Soft Matter, 2(1):5, 2026

    Iman Abdoli and Hartmut L¨ owen. Quadrupolar gyration of a brownian particle in a confining ring.npj Soft Matter, 2(1):5, 2026

    2026

  8. [15]

    Inertial effects on the brownian gyrator

    Youngkyoung Bae, Sangyun Lee, Juin Kim, and Ha- woong Jeong. Inertial effects on the brownian gyrator. Physical Review E, 103(3):032148, 2021

    2021

  9. [16]

    Asymmetry relations and effective tem- peratures for biased brownian gyrators.Physical Review E, 98(4):042149, 2018

    Sara Cerasoli, Victor Dotsenko, Gleb Oshanin, and Lam- berto Rondoni. Asymmetry relations and effective tem- peratures for biased brownian gyrators.Physical Review E, 98(4):042149, 2018

    2018

  10. [17]

    Inferring entropy production in anhar- monic brownian gyrators.Physical Review Research, 4(4):043080, 2022

    Biswajit Das, Sreekanth K Manikandan, and Ayan Banerjee. Inferring entropy production in anhar- monic brownian gyrators.Physical Review Research, 4(4):043080, 2022

    2022

  11. [18]

    Autonomous brownian gyrators: A study on gy- rating characteristics.arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.02599, 2020

    Hsin Chang, Chi-Lun Lee, Pik-Yin Lai, and Yung-Fu Chen. Autonomous brownian gyrators: A study on gy- rating characteristics.arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.02599, 2020

    2011 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Active elastic dimers: Self-propulsion and current rever- sal on a featureless track.Physical Review E—Statistical, 9 Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, 77(2):020102, 2008

    K Vijay Kumar, Sriram Ramaswamy, and Madan Rao. Active elastic dimers: Self-propulsion and current rever- sal on a featureless track.Physical Review E—Statistical, 9 Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, 77(2):020102, 2008

    2008

  13. [20]

    Exact solution of a brownian inchworm model for self- propulsion.Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2008(11):P11008, 2008

    Adrian Baule, K Vijay Kumar, and Sriram Ramaswamy. Exact solution of a brownian inchworm model for self- propulsion.Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2008(11):P11008, 2008

    2008

  14. [21]

    Structure-based model of the stepping motor of pcra helicase.Biophysical journal, 91(6):2097–2114, 2006

    Jin Yu, Taekjip Ha, and Klaus Schulten. Structure-based model of the stepping motor of pcra helicase.Biophysical journal, 91(6):2097–2114, 2006

  15. [22]

    Self-polarization and directional motility of cytoplasm.Current Biology, 9(1):S1, 1999

    Alexander B Verkhovsky, Tatyana M Svitkina, and Gary G Borisy. Self-polarization and directional motility of cytoplasm.Current Biology, 9(1):S1, 1999

    1999

  16. [23]

    Chromatin remodelers as active brownian dimers.Journal of Physics A: Mathe- matical and Theoretical, 52(8):085601, 2019

    R Blossey and H Schiessel. Chromatin remodelers as active brownian dimers.Journal of Physics A: Mathe- matical and Theoretical, 52(8):085601, 2019

    2019

  17. [24]

    monomers

    and more generally, the walking of processive molec- ular motors on microtubules [25]. Furthermore, a Brow- nian dimer has also been used to model enzyme and en- zymatic reactions [26], where non-reciprocal interactions can be present as well [27, 28]. Autonomous microscopic g...

    2024

  18. [25]

    The mechanism of myosin vi translocation and its load- induced anchoring.Cell, 116(5):737–749, 2004

    David Altman, H Lee Sweeney, and James A Spudich. The mechanism of myosin vi translocation and its load- induced anchoring.Cell, 116(5):737–749, 2004

    2004

  19. [26]

    The way things move: looking under the hood of molecular motor pro- teins.Science, 288(5463):88–95, 2000

    Ronald D Vale and Ronald A Milligan. The way things move: looking under the hood of molecular motor pro- teins.Science, 288(5463):88–95, 2000

    2000

  20. [27]

    Shear viscosity of two-state enzyme solutions.Physical Review E, 101(1):012610, 2020

    Yuto Hosaka, Shigeyuki Komura, and David Andelman. Shear viscosity of two-state enzyme solutions.Physical Review E, 101(1):012610, 2020

    2020

  21. [28]

    A molecular origin of non-reciprocal interactions between interacting active catalysts.Chem, 10(4):1147– 1159, 2024

    Niladri Sekhar Mandal, Ayusman Sen, and R Dean As- tumian. A molecular origin of non-reciprocal interactions between interacting active catalysts.Chem, 10(4):1147– 1159, 2024

    2024

  22. [29]

    Non-reciprocal chemotactic movement in enzyme cascade under flow-free conditions.Cell Reports Physical Science, 6(7), 2025

    Aditya Sapre, Xiaotian Lu, Yu-Ching Tseng, Mariam Mansour, Niladri Sekhar Mandal, and Ayusman Sen. Non-reciprocal chemotactic movement in enzyme cascade under flow-free conditions.Cell Reports Physical Science, 6(7), 2025

    2025

  23. [31]

    Irreversibility, heat and information flows induced by non-reciprocal in- teractions.New Journal of Physics, 22(12):123051, 2020

    Sarah AM Loos and Sabine HL Klapp. Irreversibility, heat and information flows induced by non-reciprocal in- teractions.New Journal of Physics, 22(12):123051, 2020

    2020

  24. [32]

    Courier Corporation, 2008

    Zoran Gajic and Muhammad Tahir Javed Qureshi.Lya- punov matrix equation in system stability and control. Courier Corporation, 2008

    2008

  25. [33]

    Ex- perimental realization of a minimal microscopic heat en- gine.Physical Review E, 96(5):052106, 2017

    Aykut Argun, Jalpa Soni, Lennart Dabelow, Stefano Bo, Giuseppe Pesce, Ralf Eichhorn, and Giovanni Volpe. Ex- perimental realization of a minimal microscopic heat en- gine.Physical Review E, 96(5):052106, 2017. SUPPLEMENT AR Y MA TERIAL — DET AILS OF SOME NON-TRIVIAL CALCULA TI...

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.