Selecting methods to solve multi-well master equations

There are several competing methods commonly used to solve energy grained master equations describing gas-phase reactive systems. When it comes to selecting an appropriate method for any particular problem, there is little guidance in the literature. In this paper we directly compare several variants of spectral and numerical integration methods from the point of view of computer time required to calculate the solution and the range of temperature and pressure conditions under which the methods are successful. The test case used in the comparison is an important reaction in combustion chemistry and incorporates reversible and irreversible bimolecular reaction steps as well as isomerizations between multiple unimolecular species. While the numerical integration of the ODE with a stiff ODE integrator is not the fastest method overall, it is the fastest method applicable to all conditions.

A comparison of two methods for the calculation of accumulated oxygen deficit

The aim of this study was to compare accumulated oxygen deficit data derived using two different exercise protocols with the aim of producing a less time-consuming test specifically for use with athletes. Six road and four track male endurance cyclists performed two series of cycle ergometer tests. The first series involved five 10 min sub-maximal cycle exercise bouts, a (V) over dotO(2peak) test and a 115% (V) over dotO(2peak) test. Data from these tests were used to estimate the accumulated oxygen deficit according to the calculations of Medbo et al. (1988). In the second series of tests, participants performed a 15 min incremental cycle ergometer test followed, 2 min later, by a 2 min variable resistance test in which they completed as much work as possible while pedalling at a constant rate. Analysis revealed that the accumulated oxygen deficit calculated from the first series of tests was higher (P< 0.02) than that calculated from the second series: 52.3 +/- 11.7 and 43.9 +/- 6.4 ml . kg(-1), respectively (mean +/- s). Other significant differences between the two protocols were observed for (V) over dot O-2peak, total work and maximal heart rate; all were higher during the modified protocol (P