Subject randomization kinetics

We consider the situation in which a number of similar (but not necessarily identical) experiments are performed on a number of different subjects randomly selected from a larger population of individuals. Examples include a metabolic study in which isotopically labeled lipoprotein turnover is measured in a number of patients with heart disease, a nutritional study in which vitamin turnovers are examined in some randomly selected graduate students, or an agricultural study in which calcium kinetics are studied in a few dairy cattle randomly selected from a school s experimental herd. In... 

The fiindamental problem of understanding phase separation kinetics is then posed as finding the nature of late-time solutions of detemiinistic equations such as (A3.3.57) subject to random initial conditions. 

Singapore) was obtained for estimates Vmax and Km of free lipase reaction and and K p and for immobilised lipase reaction. Hanes-Woolf and Simplex methods were used for the evaluation of kinetic parameters owing to their strength in error handling when experimental data are subject to random errors.5... 

All the transport properties derive from the thermal agitation of species at the atomic scale. In this respect, the simplest phenomenon is the diffusion process. In fact, as a consequence of thermal kinetic energy, all particles are subjected to a perfectly random movement, the velocity vector having exactly the same probability as orientation in any direction of the space. In these conditions, the net flux of matter in the direction of the concentration gradient is due only to the gradient of the population density. 

Most researchers attribute slow kinetics to some sort of diffusion limitation (e.g., diffusion is random movement under the influence of a concentration gradient [193]), because sorbing molecules are subject to diffusive constraints throughout almost the entire sorption/desorption time course due to the porous nature of particles. Particles are porous by virtue of their aggregated nature and because the lattice of individual grains in the aggregate may be fractured. 

The above considerations relied on a site exchange describable by simple chemical kinetics and a random walk behavior over large distances in a homogeneous medium subject to a small driving force. In the following we will briefly consider some of the most important complications to this picture. 

In writing these expressions, it is implicitly assumed that the observations ctij are subject to random errors and that the reaction times (/y—t,o) are free from random errors. The assumption that the random errors occur solely in a is reasonable since, in the majority of kinetic studies, time can be measured with much greater precision than concentration. When the random errors in the determination of time are commensurate with the random errors in the determination of concentration, the above equations are no longer valid we shall not discuss this situation in view of the difficulties which arise but would suggest that, if possible, every effort should be made to avoid it by redesigning the experimental procedure. 

The uncertainty concept is directed toward the end user (clinician) of the result, who is concerned about the total error possible, and who is not particularly interested in the question whether the errors are systematic or random. In the outiine of the uncertainty concept it is assumed that any known systematic error components of a measurement method have been corrected, and the specified uncertainty includes the uncertainty associated with correction of the systematic error(s). Although this appears logical, a problem may be that some routine methods have systematic errors dependent on the patient category from which the sample originates. For example, kinetic Jaffe methods for creatinine are subject to positive interference by alpha-keto compounds and to negative interference by bilirubin and its metabolites, which means that the direction of systematic error will be patient dependent and not generally predictable. 

The dehydration of kaolinite has been the subject of several kinetic studies and Brett et al. [1] summarize the salient features of the mechanisms proposed for the sequence of reactions by which kaolinite is converted to mullite (920 to 1370 K). The first step, water loss, is most satisfactorily described by a two-dimensional diffusion equation. Brindley et al. [57] proposed this model from isothermal kinetic measurements (670 to 810 K) and reported a marked increase of in a maintained pressure of water vapour. Anthony and Gam [58] concluded that random nucleation is rate limiting at low pressures of water vapour and that this accounts for reports of first-order kinetic behaviour. Increase in the rate of nucleation, as the (HjO) is increased, is ascribed to a proton transfer mechanism, and acceleration of the growth process may result from contributions due to the onset of the reverse reaction. 

LIQUIDS OR SOLIDS IN MANY WAYS. MOLECULAR MOTION IN GASES IS TOTALLY RANDOM, AND THE FORCES OF ATTRACTION BETWEEN GAS MOLECULES ARE SO SMALL THAT EACH MOLECULE MOVES EREELY AND ESSENTIALLY INDEPENDENTLY OF OTHER MOLECULES. SUBJECTED TO CHANGES IN TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE, GASES BEHAVE MUCH MORE PREDICTABLY THAN DO SOLIDS AND LIQUIDS. ThE LAWS THAT GOVERN THIS BEHAVIOR HAVE PLAYED AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ATOMIC THEORY OF MATTER AND THE KINETIC MOLECULAR THEORY OF GASES. 

---