this is for holding javascript data
Tonnam Balankura edited Using_the_framework_of_transition__.tex
almost 9 years ago
Commit id: 2f17922aa6aaa1e1c97c8db3e71d295b27bf03a0
deletions | additions
diff --git a/Using_the_framework_of_transition__.tex b/Using_the_framework_of_transition__.tex
index e3ebea7..e1e4583 100644
--- a/Using_the_framework_of_transition__.tex
+++ b/Using_the_framework_of_transition__.tex
...
For our model, the dividing hypersurface is at the energy barrier, state $\textbf{A}$ is the local basin on the right side of the energy barrier, state $\textbf{B}$ is the energy minimum on the left side of the energy barrier, $\textbf{x}$ is the reaction coordinate, $m$ is the mass of one Ag atom, and $V$ is the potential of mean force. The domain space of state $A$ is the region within one $k_B T$ from the local basin. We calculated the rate constant of atom flux towards Ag111 and Ag100 to be 25.5 ns^{-1} and 12.2 ns^{-1}, respectively. From the rate constants calculate, the ratio $\frac{k_{111}}{k_{100}}$ is 2.10.
The atom flux calculated by transition-state theory is one order-of-magnitude larger than the atom flux calculated by \textit{in-silico} deposition. This is likely to be a consequence from the neglecting recrossings, which causes the over-estimation of the atom flux by the transition state theory. The ratio of
Studies have found that the transmission coefficient can be recrossings to successful crossings as
low high as
0.1 10 has been shown in the literature \cite{Pritchard_2005},
especially which is possible for our system where the energy barrier is only
$2$ 2 to
$4 k_B 4 $k_B T$.
The We focus more on the accuracy of the relative flux $\frac{F_{111}}{F_{100}}$
is more important by sufficient sampling of the domain space because it can be used to define the
kinetic Wulff shape of the grown NCs.
To calculate the relative flux $\frac{F_{111}}{F_{100}}$, we also need to
calculate obtain the ratio of trapping
coefficent coefficient $\frac{P_{111}}{P_{100}}$.
This feature can be observed from comparing PMF profile for Ag100 and Ag111 surfaces, where the PMF Higher mean fluffiness of
Ag100 the PVP layer adsorbed on the Ag111 surface
reachs plateau at a shorter associates with higher trapping coefficient, which is reflected by the further distance
than for the PMF
of Ag111 surface. to reach the maxima plateau. We use
the absorbing
Markov's Markov chain
\cite{kemeny1976finite} to model
how the
trapping effect difference in PVP layer fluffiness affects the ratio of
trapping coefficient. The length from the top PVP
on layer to the
Ag atom. bulk solution is divided into discrete Markov states. The absorbing states are
when the Ag atom is bound by at the
top PVP
chain layer and
when at the
Ag atom is in bulk solution. The
absorbing Markov's difference in PVP layer fluffiness is reflected by a longer Markov chain for the Ag100 system
is longer than
for the Ag111 system, distance difference of $2.81 \dot A$ is determined by the difference distance between the descending point of the PMF profile. The exact location of the descending point is obtained from the first maxima from the bulk solution of the first derivative of the PMF profile. The distance between the absorbing states is determined from the atom deposition simulation, which is the distance from the PVP monolayer to the position that was defined to be the bulk solution. This distance defined to be $13.0 \dot A$ from the Ag111
surface. system. We
obtained calculate the
ratio of trapping
coefficent coefficient $\frac{P_{111}}{P_{100}}$ to be 1.21 from our
absorbing Markov's Markov chain model of the PMF profile. The relative flux $\frac{F_{111}}{F_{100}}$
is obtained from $\frac{k_{111}}{k_{100}} \times \frac{P_{111}}{P_{100}}$
to be $2.541$. Using Fig. \ref{fig:kinetic-wulff}, our calculations indicate is 2.541, which predicts that
cubes will be form from this relative flux of deposition. the kinetic Wulff shape is a cube as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:kinetic-wulff}. Slight discrepancy from the relative flux calculated by
the atom \textit{in-silico} deposition
simulation is likely
to be due to the difference in a consequence of recrossing frequency
difference for the Ag100 and Ag111 surface because the smaller energy barrier permits more recrossing possibilities.