Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Aug 13.
Published in final edited form as: Comput Biol Chem. 2009 Dec 6;34(1):19–33. doi: 10.1016/j.compbiolchem.2009.11.002

Table 1.

The comparison between the estimated parameters and error by the DLS, quasi-Newton and SA methods.

Mode1/pCa Kb Kt K1 K2 Error (× 10−5) Parameters
pCa 4.6
 DLS 5.2717 0.1024 2.592 184.46 3.8896 4
 Qnewton 5.7725 0.1002 2.567 190.00 3.8878 4
 SIMMAN 5.5881 0.1233 2.561 148.49 3.8903 4
 DLS 7.0705 0.1142 2.500 167.83 3.9026 3
 Qnewton 7.1043 0.1129 2.500 170.00 3.9026 3
 SIMMAN 7.0945 0.1136 2.500 168.62 3.9039 3
 DLS 7.1064 0.1129 2.500 170.00 3.9830 2
 Qnewton 5.7516 0.1237 2.500 170.00 3.9516 2
 SIMMAN 7.1079 0.1129 2.500 170.00 3.9976 2
pCa 8.9
 DLS 0.2738 0.0836 1.6801 204.88 2.8671 4
 Qnewton 0.3428 0.0887 1.3884 400.00 2.4059 4
 SIMMAN 0.3433 0.0882 1.3876 403.73 2.4057 4
 DLS 0.2085 0.0343 2.5000 163.74 6.2195 3
 Qnewton 0.2077 0.0351 2.5000 159.68 6.2075 3
 SIMMAN 0.2197 0.0392 2.5000 118.80 6.1475 3
 DLS 0.2062 0.0341 2.5000 170.00 6.2322 2
 Qnewton 0.2038 0.0349 2.5000 170.00 6.2049 2
 SIMMAN 0.2061 0.0341 2.5000 170.00 6.3820 2