From 56aff936312fad29bff8d435d3e02fe597299aa8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "W. Trevor King" Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 14:39:25 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] sawsim/discussion.tex: Remove double integral Kramers' testing I don't have enough detail/support here to let it stand. --- src/sawsim/discussion.tex | 14 -------------- 1 file changed, 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/sawsim/discussion.tex b/src/sawsim/discussion.tex index bea8c66..ec9d006 100644 --- a/src/sawsim/discussion.tex +++ b/src/sawsim/discussion.tex @@ -743,20 +743,6 @@ $l_{ts}$ is the characteristic length of the transition state. \citet{evans97} solved this unfolding rate for both inverse power law potentials and cusp potentials. -\subsubsection{Double-integral Kramers' theory} - -The double-integral form of overdamped Kramers' theory may be too -complex for analytical predictions of unfolding-force histograms. -Rather than testing the entire \sawsim\ simulation (\cref{sec:sawsim}), -we will focus on demonstrating that the Kramers' $k(F)$ evaluations -are working properly. If the Bell modeled histograms check out, that -gives reasonable support for the $k(F) \rightarrow \text{histogram}$ -portion of the simulation. - -Looking for analytic solutions to Kramers' $k(F)$, we find that there -are not many available in a closed form. However, we do have analytic -solutions for unforced $k$ for cusp-like and quartic potentials. - \section{Review of current research} There is a long history of protein unfolding and unbinding -- 2.26.2