Skip to main content
. 2007 May 24;8:175. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-8-175

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Comparison of relaxation times of the fast network in network (A1). Evolution of the slow-scale propensity, a3¯ MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaafiart1ev1aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacH8akY=wiFfYdH8Gipec8Eeeu0xXdbba9frFj0=OqFfea0dXdd9vqai=hGuQ8kuc9pgc9s8qqaq=dirpe0xb9q8qiLsFr0=vr0=vr0dc8meaabaqaciaacaGaaeqabaqabeGadaaakeaadaqdaaqaaGqaaiab=fgaHnaaBaaaleaacqaIZaWmaeqaaaaaaaa@2F2D@, of reaction 3 in network (Al) before the occurrence of the first slow event B → C, using the MSMC (dotted line) and the HyMSMC (solid line) methods. The horizontal dashed line shows the slow-scale propensity estimated via an analytical description (binomial PDF) of the QE. A magnified view of the initial period is shown in the inset to highlight the rapid convergence of the slow-scale propensity using the hybrid solver of the HyMSMC method. The parameters are those of Figure 3.