Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: chemists have recently constructed various synthetic molecular systems ( see e.g. @xcite and a review @xcite ) which can move on surfaces and tracks . one class of such objects aptly named spiders @xcite consists of relatively small molecules with legs which are short single - stranded segments of dna . these spiders can move on a surface covered with single - stranded dna segments , called substrates . the substrate dna is complementary to the leg dna . the motion proceeds as legs bind to the surface dna through the watson - crick mechanism , then dissociate , then rebind again , etc . more precisely , a bond on the substrate with an attached leg is first cleaved @xcite , and the leg then dissociates from the affected substrate ( which is called product @xcite ) . after that the leg can rebind to the new substrate or to the product . the rate of attachment of a leg of a spider to the substrate and the rate of detachment from the substrate are different from the corresponding rates involving the product . therefore for the proper description of the motion of a single spider one must keep track of its entire trajectory . this memory requirement makes the problem non - markovian @xcite . such problems tend to be intractable , though in one dimension non - markovian problems are occasionally solvable , see e.g. @xcite . in this paper we continue the investigation of molecular spiders that move along one - dimensional tracks @xcite . the goal is to study the interplay between the spiders and their environment which has been ignored in ref . we shall assume that each leg of a spider steps independently and symmetrically to neighboring empty sites at rates 1 from revisited sites and at rates @xmath0 from sites visited for the first time . for molecular spiders @xmath1 since legs are bound more firmly to new sites . two types of spiders were introduced in @xcite which differ in the type of constraint that keeps the legs close to each other . for * local spiders * or centipedes , the distance between _ adjacent _ legs is @xmath2 ; for * global spiders * , the distance between _ any _ two legs is @xmath3 . without memory ( @xmath4 ) , spiders with local constraint can be mapped onto exclusion processes with open boundaries , while spiders with global constraint map to the simple exclusion process with periodic boundary conditions @xcite . these mappings simplify the computations of the diffusion coefficient and , e.g. , they allow to determine the diffusion coefficient for general global spiders with an arbitrary number of legs @xmath5 and an arbitrary maximal distance @xmath6 , and for local @xmath5-leg spiders with @xmath7 .    the non - markovian character does not make the problem hopeless since the visited area is very simple , namely the visited sites ( product ) form an island in the sea of unvisited sites . ( this happens only in one dimension , and the two - dimensional problem appears intractable . ) graphically , we display a leg of the spider by @xmath8 , an empty sites as @xmath9 , and we put a hat at sites which have never been visited earlier , i.e.  where the dna substrate is still un - cleaved . a typical configuration for a bipedal spider then looks like @xmath10    the memory solely acts through the slowdown of legs on newly visited sites . for a one - leg spider , which is merely a random walk , memory does not affect the asymptotic behavior of the number of visited sites and other quantities . on the other hand , the slowdown generates an effective bias of multi - pedal spiders . this bias always points outward . remarkably , the slowdown effectively speeds the spider up , that is , it leads to the increase of the diffusion coefficient and the number of visited sites .    to mimic the effective bias of the spiders , we investigate a random walk which jumps asymmetrically from newly visited sites this model is similar to the so - called exited walk which has been actively investigated in recent years in the mathematics literature , see e.g. @xcite and references therein . the outline of this paper is as follows . in sec . [ 1leg ] , we analyze a random walk with memory . first we analyze the symmetric random walk that slows down on the new sites , and then we obtain exact results for the exited walk which additionally takes into account a bias on the new sites . in sec . [ 2legs ] , we discuss the behavior of the bipedal spiders with maximal leg distance @xmath7 . some of the properties of these spiders are exactly computed , while others are established via the analogy with the excited random walk . in sec . [ multi ] , we generalize these results to global spiders with @xmath11 . we draw conclusions in sec .  [ conc ] . finally , in an appendix , some of the details required for calculations of sec . [ 1leg ] are presented . in this section we consider the case of a one - leg spider . we shall begin with a nearest - neighbor symmetric random walk on the one - dimensional lattice . by definition , if the walker occupies a site for the first time , the hopping rate to each of its nearest neighbors is @xmath0 ; if the walker has already visited this site in the past , it hops at rates 1 to the left and to the right . a quantity which is most readily computable is the average time @xmath13 for the random walk to cover @xmath12 sites . the total number of distinct sites visited by the random walk grows with time , and let @xmath14 be the time when the number of distinct sites first reaches @xmath15 ( here @xmath12 is the size of the island and the @xmath16 accounts for the site with the random walker on it ) . graphically , @xmath17 the walk starts at some site and hence @xmath18 ; all the following times @xmath19 are random quantities . we shall actually compute the first two moments of @xmath14 . the first moment ( the average ) is @xmath20    to derive we first recall how to compute the mean exit time from the interval @xmath21 for the random walker hopping at unit rates to the right and to the left . by definition , the exit time @xmath22 is the time for the random walker to reach any of the two boundaries , @xmath23 or @xmath24 , given that the walker starts at site @xmath25 . the procedure ( explained e.g. in @xcite ) is to analyze changes in an infinitesimal time interval @xmath26 . one writes @xmath27 and making the averaging one arrives at @xmath28 \end{aligned}\ ] ] for the mean exit time , which simplifies to @xmath29 solving this equation subject to the boundary conditions @xmath30 we obtain @xmath31    returning to our problem , let us compute the time interval @xmath32 during which the number of visited sites jumps from @xmath15 to @xmath33 . without loss of generality we can assume that at @xmath14 the visited sites are @xmath34 , and the random walk is at site @xmath15 . similarly to we write an equation for the mean duration @xmath35 the factor @xmath12 in the middle term on the right - hand side was derived by taking into account that if the random walker hops to the left to site @xmath12 , the number of distinct sites will increase when the random walk reaches either site @xmath23 or @xmath33 . this latter problem is equivalent to the above exit problem after identifying @xmath36 and @xmath37 , and shows that the mean exit time is @xmath12 . from eq . we obtain @xmath38 using @xmath39 in conjunction with we arrive at . if the hopping rates were equal to unity everywhere ( no difference between the substrate and the product ) , we would have @xmath40 instead of . comparing these two results we see that only the sub - leading corrections ( linear in @xmath12 ) are different . hence the non - markovian nature has an asymptotically negligible influence on @xmath13 for the random walk . other calculations have led to the same conclusion . for instance , we have computed @xmath41 and we found @xmath42 for @xmath4 ( no memory ) equation becomes @xmath43 i.e. it has the same leading behavior .    in the @xmath44 limit , memory is very important in the earlier stage ; the crossover time @xmath45 after which memory becomes irrelevant is estimated by equating the linear and quadratic ( in @xmath12 ) terms in . this gives @xmath46 thus the memory does not affect the asymptotic behavior of @xmath47 for the nearest - neighbor random walk . this conclusion may be affected by the gait of the walk . unfortunately , even for the random walk it is hard to probe complicated gates when we take memory into account . for instance , if the random walk makes @xmath48 hops , say all at the same rates , the problem seems intractable . the above approach allows to compute @xmath13 only when the random walk hops to nearest - neighbor sites or gets back to its original site . for such gait we found @xmath49 hence the influence of memory on @xmath13 for this random walk with modified gait is again asymptotically irrelevant . we now turn to a more general excited walk ; we shall use these results for the bipedal spider in sec . [ 2legarea ] . an excited walk is defined as follows : when the walker leaves a particular site for the first time it jumps at rate @xmath50 forward ( to unvisited sites ) and at rate @xmath51 backward ( to revisit sites ) . when the walk jumps from a site it had already visited earlier , it jumps at rates one in both directions . for concreteness we define its first ever jump from the origin to the right at rate @xmath50 and to the left at rate @xmath51 . this special rule , however , is irrelevant in the long time limit which is our main focus . the above definition slightly differs from the definition of the excited random walk studied in refs . @xcite where it is a discrete time process , and where the excited walker is biased always into one specific direction ( say always to the right ) .    on the already visited sites , the walker performs a simple symmetric random walk . in the following analysis , we will need certain results for the simple random walk . particularly , for the walker on the interval @xmath52 $ ] we will need the exit probability density @xmath53 that the walker which starts at site @xmath54 inside the interval , @xmath55 , exits at any of the two end sites of the interval during the time interval @xmath56 . an elementary derivation of this probability density ( more precisely , of its laplace transform ) is given in appendix [ exit ] . one can try to repeat the calculation of @xmath13 in this more general situation . instead , we consider a dual quantity , namely we shall compute how the average number of visited sites increases with time . suppose that exited walk had already visited @xmath57 sites and it has just jumped to a new site . let the already visited sites be @xmath58 , and let the random walker be currently at @xmath59 . ( the latter assumption is acceptable since the rules are symmetric . this is not true for the excited random walk of refs . @xcite . ) the probability density that the walker will visit the next new site ( either site 0 or site @xmath60 ) exactly @xmath61 times later is @xmath62 the first term in this expression accounts for a direct jump forward from site @xmath63 to @xmath60 , since the walk stays at its original position @xmath63 for time @xmath61 with probability @xmath64 $ ] . the second term describes the walk stepping backwards to site @xmath57 after time @xmath65 , doing a symmetric walk on sites @xmath66 , and exiting this interval at either ends at time @xmath61 with probability density @xmath67 . the laplace transform of is @xmath68 [ the laplace transform of the general exit probability density @xmath69 is given by . ] the above argument works also for the first ever step of the walk with our definition . if we prefer the assumption of hopping at rate @xmath50 in both directions for the first time , we have to use @xmath70 . this , however , does not affect the long time behavior . the probability density that the walk visits the @xmath71 new site at time @xmath61 is @xmath72 where @xmath73 . the laplace transform of the convolution is @xmath74    one anticipates that the main contribution in the long time limit comes from terms with @xmath75 . this suggests to take the @xmath76 limit while keeping @xmath77 finite . in this limit @xmath78 is given by and hence becomes @xmath79 where we have used the shorthand notation @xmath80 note that @xmath81 and consequently the whole distribution @xmath82 only depends on the ratio @xmath83 of the hopping rates . the no bias case corresponds to @xmath84 , which coincides with any symmetric hopping @xmath85 . this has an interesting consequence  if the walk is only slowed down at new sites ( but not biased ) , then it has no effect on its long time behavior , in agreement with the conclusions of the previous subsection [ tn ] . note also that @xmath86 . now we return to the calculation of @xmath82 . the product in can be re - written as @xmath87 in the @xmath76 limit we use to obtain @xmath88 in the same limit the sum becomes an integral @xmath89 and hence @xmath90    at this point we recognize that this generating function is identical ( up to a change in notation ) to the one obtained in @xcite for a discrete time excited walk on the half infinite line . this allows us to use the results of ref . @xcite .    note that @xmath91 since the walk will cover any number of sites with probability one . the cumulants @xcite can be directly obtained from the generating function @xmath82 to yield @xmath92 with @xmath93 for example , @xmath94 , @xmath95 , @xmath96 . the average time to cover @xmath97 sites , and its fluctuation , are @xmath98 note that these exact expressions have been already derived and given by equations and in the symmetric @xmath84 case . the distribution @xmath99 attains a scaling form @xmath100 in the scaling limit @xmath101 with the scaling variable @xmath102 kept finite . the scaled distribution @xmath103 has been computed in ref . @xcite , which in the present notation reads @xmath104    the average number of visited sites at time @xmath61 is @xmath105 with @xmath106 where we have integrated term by term , and used the duplication formula for gamma functions . note that @xmath107 is a monotonically decreasing function for @xmath108 . ( this can be proved e.g. by differentiating @xmath109 and using the properties of the di - gamma function . )    in the no - bias case ( @xmath84 ) , equation reduces to the well known result @xcite for the amplitude @xmath110 . in the limits of strong forward and backward biases , the amplitude behaves as @xmath111 note that the naive inversion of the average time would result in the incorrect @xmath112 . here we compute various characteristics of the simplest bipedal spider with @xmath7 . we shall see that memory affects the leading behaviors , and we will explain these findings by showing that the slowdown of legs on new sites leads to effective outward bias when the spider is at the boundary of the island of visited sites . since the spider configuration is @xmath113 when a new site is first visited , it is convenient to start from the same type of configuration @xmath114 this assumption simplifies the calculation , but does not alter the asymptotic behavior . denote by @xmath32 the time interval during which the number of visited sites jumps from @xmath115 to @xmath116 ; then the number of visited sites first reaches @xmath115 at the moment @xmath117 . we can assume that at @xmath14 the visited sites are @xmath118 , the spider s legs are at sites @xmath15 and @xmath115 . thus the configuration at time @xmath14 is @xmath119 similarly to we write @xmath120\langle \tau_n\rangle + rdt\,\frac{3(2n+1)}{2}\nonumber\\   & + & dt\,\langle \widehat{\tau}_n\rangle+dt\end{aligned}\ ] ] for the mean duration . the second term on the right - hand side accounts for the right leg of the spider hopping from site @xmath115 to @xmath33 . the site @xmath115 turns from the substrate into the product and the configuration becomes @xmath121 we term the mean position of the legs as the `` center of mass '' of the spider . note that the center of mass of the spider is at position @xmath122 and it makes @xmath123 hops with unit rates . the visit of sites @xmath16 or @xmath115 by the center of mass corresponds to visiting sites @xmath23 or @xmath116 by the spider . the mapping to the random walk allows us to use with @xmath124 and @xmath125 to yield @xmath126 for the average time .    the third term on the right - hand side of eq . accounts for the left leg of the spider hopping from site @xmath15 to @xmath33 . starting from this position , the mean duration time @xmath127 before a new site is visited is found by writing an equation similar to eq . @xmath128\langle \widehat{\tau}_n\rangle +   dt\,\langle \tau_n\rangle+dt\ ] ] simplifying eqs .  we obtain    @xmath129    from which we find @xmath130 plugging into the sum we obtain @xmath131    if there is no difference between the substrate and the product and the hopping rates are equal to @xmath0 everywhere , the average time is equal to @xmath132 hence memory is important for spiders as it affects the leading asymptotic behavior of @xmath13 . we now argue that a slowdown at new sites leads to an effective bias for bipedal spiders . imagine that the spider is in configuration . analyzing various routes , we obtain that the right leg first hops to the left with probability @xmath133 and otherwise it hops to right with probability @xmath134 . an explanation of is as follows . the first term on the right - hand side describes the probability that the first leg which is going to hop will be the right leg  this happens with probability @xmath135 and the leg ought to hop to the left . if the first leg to hop is the left leg  this happens with probability @xmath136  it then has to hop back ( the probability is again @xmath136 ) and then we are back to the initial configuration thereby providing us with factor @xmath137 . solving we find @xmath138    the probabilities @xmath139 and @xmath137 are somewhat misleading , e.g. if the right leg first hops to the left , the spider configurations are different  in the starting one @xmath140 the legs are separated , while in the final configuration @xmath141 the legs are in adjacent sites . it is easier to appreciate the probabilities @xmath142 and @xmath143 that the spider first moves forward and backward , respectively , while the configuration remains the same . let us rephrase this definition . first note that knowing the position @xmath25 of the center of mass fully determines the position of both legs of the bipedal spider with @xmath7 . we assign @xmath144 to the initial configuration . the jump of any leg changes the position of the center of mass by @xmath123 , hence @xmath25 takes half - integer values . we are interested in the probability @xmath142 that the center of mass moves forward by one lattice site to @xmath145 first , and in the probability @xmath146 that it moves backward to @xmath147 first . we already know the probabilities of the first jump of the right leg . with probability @xmath139 the right leg jumps to the right first , and the spider is already at @xmath145 . on the other hand , the right leg jumps to the left first with probability @xmath137 , which puts the spider at @xmath148 . the spider then performs a simple random walk on the half integers , and reaches @xmath145 first with probability @xmath149 . collecting these terms we arrive at @xmath150 and @xmath146 . thus the spider moves symmetrically when @xmath4 ( no memory ) , and as @xmath0 decreases , the bias _ forward _ increases monotonically . the bias is the strongest in the @xmath151 limit when @xmath152 and @xmath153 . we now apply the above results to the bipedal spider . we approximate our spider by an effective walker that steps from already visited sites at rate one to both directions . the step length of this effective particle is @xmath154 . therefore it visits only half as many sites of the original lattice as a particle whose step length is one . thus @xmath155 with @xmath156 without memory we have @xmath157 .    from a new site , the effective particle hops predominantly in the forward direction . we approximate the ratio of the forward and backward rates of the effective particle by the ratio of the forward and backward probabilities , @xmath158 . using we conclude that parameter @xmath81 , see , becomes @xmath159 using and  we arrive at the prediction for the average number of visited sites at time @xmath61 : @xmath160 the amplitude @xmath161 depends only weakly on @xmath0 in the @xmath162 region . as @xmath0 increases from 0 to 1 , @xmath161 decreases monotonically from @xmath163 to @xmath164 . [ fig : amp ] shows an excellent ( perhaps exact ) agreement between the above theory and simulation results .     in the growth law @xmath165 as a function of @xmath0 . for the bipedal @xmath166 spider with maximal leg distance @xmath7 , simulations are in excellent agreement with the theoretical prediction . the same is also valid for the @xmath167 spider with @xmath168 , where the theoretical prediction is given by . ]     for the bipedal @xmath166 spider with maximal leg distance @xmath169 , and for the @xmath167 spider with @xmath168 . the dashed lines are the approximation . ]      up to now we have probed the spider s motion through the trace it leaves  the number of visited sites . this is the quantity which is measured in experiments @xcite . interestingly , a direct analysis of the spider motion is much more challenging both experimentally and theoretically . one can of course proceed numerically . according to simulations , the position of the spider ( averaged over many runs ) follows a gaussian distribution in the large time limit . this is somewhat counterintuitive since the spider slows down at the extreme positions . overall this is a greatly simplifying feature since if the position is ( asymptotically ) gaussian , we can characterize the spider s motion solely by its diffusion coefficient @xmath170 . since the gaussian distribution gives the position of the spider in the large time limit , one might try to approximate its diffusion coefficient through the relation @xmath171 which is valid for simple random walks . this leads to @xmath172 for @xmath4 ( no memory ) , the relation @xmath173 is exact . for @xmath1 , however , it underestimates the spider s diffusion coefficient , see fig . [ fig : diff ] . spiders with an arbitrary number of legs @xmath5 are difficult to analyze . here we consider global spiders which ( by definition ) satisfy the following constraint  the distance between any two legs is @xmath3 . since the site can not accommodate more than one leg @xmath174 , and the spiders with @xmath175 are immobile , so the first interesting case corresponds to @xmath176 . these global spiders include the bipedal spiders studied in sec . [ 2legs ] . we now show that these global spiders can be analyzed generalizing the approach of sec . [ 2legs ] . first we notice that knowing the center of mass position of a spider with @xmath176 we can read off the position of all its legs . hence as for the @xmath166 case we can replace the spider by an effective particle whose position coincides with the center of mass of the spider . the step length of this effective particle is @xmath177 . consider a configuration @xmath178 where the right leg has just stepped to a new site . we are interested in the first passage probability @xmath142 for the effective particle to move one whole lattice spacing ( @xmath5 steps ) to the right before moving one lattice spacing to the left . denote again by @xmath137 the probability that the rightmost leg will first jump to the left . repeating an argument that led us to , we arrive at @xmath179 here @xmath180 is the probability that after the right jump of the second leg from the right , the spider returns to the initial configuration without ever moving the rightmost leg . this simple first passage problem can be solved , see e.g. @xcite , to obtain . form , the probability that the rightmost leg first jumps to the left is @xmath181 the probability that the rightmost leg first jumps to the right is @xmath134 . following the same reasoning as in the @xmath166 case , we finally arrive at @xmath182}\ ] ] and @xmath146 . as @xmath0 increases from 0 to @xmath183 , the bias to the right @xmath142 decreases monotonically , and the motion is unbiased @xmath184 for the neutral @xmath4 case . hence , a slowdown at new sites ( @xmath1 ) leads to the outward bias for arbitrary @xmath5 . it is also clear from that the bias is weaker for larger spiders .    to calculate the number of visited sites we first obtain @xmath185 from . recalling and taking into account the normalization @xmath186 we find the amplitude @xmath187 in the growth law @xmath188 . an agreement between theory and simulations is excellent , see fig . [ fig : amp ] . equation shows that @xmath189 is an increasing function of both @xmath0 and @xmath5 . since @xmath190 is a decreasing function of @xmath81 , we conclude that for @xmath11 global spiders the number of visited sites decreases as @xmath0 or @xmath5 grows . we believe that this is generally true for arbitrary spiders , i.e. @xmath191 decreases as @xmath0 or @xmath5 grows . intuitively it is easy to understand the monotonic @xmath5 dependence , as an additional leg only blocks the motion of the others . the @xmath0 dependence of @xmath191 is more intriguing , since slowing down the spider actually results in more visited sites . one could argue that the slowdown at the boundary keeps the spider around the unvisited sites , hence it visits more of them . this argument , however , is flawed since the slowdown does not effect the behavior of a random walk as we saw it in sec .  [ 1leg ] . here is an argument that supports the above conjecture . when the rightmost leg steps to a new site it has to stretch out a bit . if legs slow down on new sites , it gives other legs time to catch up , which leads to the outward bias . another argument is that the when the rightmost leg stays longer at the new site , the second leg has more chance to step next to it , hence forcing the rightmost leg to the right . on the other hand , when the rightmost leg steps to a new site , the spider is a bit stretched out and possibly can not step further due to some constraint ( e.g. local or global ) . when the rightmost leg stays in place longer , it gives more time to the other legs to step closer , allowing the rightmost leg to step to the right , hence it leads again to a bias to the right . in experimental realizations @xcite , spiders affect the environment which in turn affects their motion . more precisely , the state of any site on a surface changes irreversibly after the first visit of a leg of a spider and then it remains the same . during the subsequent visits legs are bound less firmly to previously visited sites , and we model this feature by prescribing different hopping rates from sites visited in the past and sites visited for the first time . namely a leg slows down on new sites while the spider remains agile inside a previously visited region . thus the knowledge of the spider s entire trajectory is required to describe its motion . first , we considered a random walk ( a one - leg spider ) that slows down on the new sites . we calculated first two moments , @xmath13 and @xmath41 , of the time @xmath14 to cover @xmath12 sites , and also the dual quantity @xmath192 , that is the average number of sites visited until time @xmath193 . all these quantities exhibit the same _ leading _ asymptotic behavior as in the case of a simple random walk without slowing down . these concrete results clearly reveal the general truth , namely that the non - markovian nature of the problem affects only sub - leading behaviors of the random walk with slowing down . all exact calculations support this conjecture , and we think that it is valid even in two dimensions . heuristically , the above hypothesis relies on the crucial feature of a random walk in one and two dimensions  the random walk keeps visiting the same sites again and again ( the average number of visits diverges with time ) , and therefore the slowing down on new sites becomes asymptotically less and less important . the above argument seemingly applies to spiders as well , so it was surprising that the computation of the average time @xmath13 to cover @xmath12 sites for the simplest bipedal spider with @xmath7 gave a result that differs from the corresponding result for the same bipedal spider without slowdown . thus , the slowdown affects the behavior even in the leading order . the especially striking feature is that the spider is effectively more agile , that is , the number of covered sites grows faster than for the same spider without slowdown . the mechanism leading to this acceleration is an effective bias towards unvisited sites . this bias is not apparent since legs hop _ symmetrically_. yet once the front leg steps onto a new site , it slows down and the hind leg hops to the neighboring site thereby effectively pushing ( due to exclusion ) the front leg further into the unvisited region . this argument does not fully explain the bias as the hopping processes are stochastic , but it does make the bias plausible . for the bipedal sider with @xmath7 , and more generally for the class of multi - pedal spiders with the maximal span equal to the number of legs ( @xmath176 ) , we computed the bias analytically . we believe that the bias exists for all spiders ; numerically we confirmed this belief in all cases we looked at , but this is still a conjecture which may be very difficult to prove . the bias explains the qualitative behavior of the average time @xmath13 , and it suggests that the dual quantity @xmath194 , that is , the average number of sites visited by time @xmath61 , also grows faster than for spiders without slowdown on the new sites . this quantity is important as it is directly measured in experiments @xcite . we computed @xmath194 by replacing the spider by an excited walk , that is a walk that hops symmetrically from previously visited sites but biased towards the unvisited region when hopping from new sites . for this excited walk we calculated not only the average , but the whole probability distribution of the number of visited sites . the replacement of the spider by an excited walk is , however , not rigorous , but presumably exact due to the perfect agreement with simulations of the spiders . apart from @xmath13 and @xmath194 , we tried to compute the diffusion coefficient . numerically we observed that the probability distribution of the spider position approaches a gaussian distribution in the long time limit , and therefore the diffusion coefficient fully characterizes the probability distribution of the spider position . we neither proved that the probability distribution is ( asymptotically ) gaussian nor computed the diffusion coefficient . this is an interesting challenge for future work . finally we note that models of synthetic molecular spiders are closely related to models of natural molecular motors @xcite . memory effects can occur when motors change their environment , which then affects the motors motion . ( this happens e.g. for the collagenase which moves along collagen fibrils @xcite . ) the non - markovian nature of these situations makes these problems challenging , nevertheless , some problems have been analyzed @xcite . it should be possible to employ the methods developed here in the context of molecular spiders , and to imply them to the behavior of molecular motors in situations when memory effects are important . we have a random walk on the integers which hops at rate one to the left , and at rate one to the right . the walk starts at time @xmath195 from site @xmath54 , where @xmath196 , and site @xmath23 and @xmath60 are absorbing . we are interested in the first passage probability distribution to reach either site @xmath23 or @xmath60 for the first time . the position of the walk on the infinite lattice at time @xmath61 is given by @xcite @xmath197 we then do a mirror trick . we start infinitely many walkers at time @xmath195 from positions @xmath198 , and negative walkers from @xmath199 , where @xmath81 runs over all integers . now their superposition gives the probability distribution of the walker in the interval @xmath200\ ] ] since , from symmetry reasons , @xmath201 for all time . the laplace transform of the position distribution @xmath202 is @xmath203 where we have used shorthand notation @xmath204 hence we have to sum up a geometric series to obtain the laplace transform of @xmath205 the first passage probability to site @xmath23 and site @xmath60 is simply @xmath206 respectively , and the probability to leave the interval at either end is @xmath207 . we are interested in the @xmath76 , @xmath208 limit , with @xmath209 and @xmath54 being constants . noting that in this limit @xmath210 we establish the expansions @xmath211 therefore the exit at either side of the interval becomes @xmath212 this asymptotic has been used in subsection [ 1legarea ] . m. perman and w. werner , probab . theory related fields * 108 * , 357383 ( 1997 ) ; b. davis , probab .  theory related fields * 113 * , 501518 ( 1999 ) ; r. dickman and d. ben - avraham , phys .  rev . e * 64 * 020102(r ) ( 2001 ) ; i. benjamini and d. b. wilson , elect . probab . * 8 * , 8692 ( 2003 ) . j.  mai , i.  m.  sokolov , and a.  blumen , phys . rev . e * 64 * , 011102 ( 2001 ) ; t.  antal and p.  l.  krapivsky , phys .  rev . e * 72 * , 046104 ( 2005 ) ; a.  yu . morozov , e.  pronina , a.  b.  kolomeisky , and m.  n.  artyomov , phys . e * 75 * , 031910 ( 2007 ) .
Abstract:

Answer: synthetic bio - molecular spiders with `` legs '' made of single - stranded segments of dna can move on a surface which is also covered by single - stranded segments of dna complementary to the leg dna . in experimental realizations , when a leg detaches from a segment of the surface for the first time it alters that segment , and legs subsequently bound to these altered segments more weakly . inspired by these experiments we investigate spiders moving along a one - dimensional substrate , whose legs leave newly visited sites at a slower rate than revisited sites . for a random walk ( one - leg spider ) the slowdown does not effect the long time behavior . for a bipedal spider , however , the slowdown generates an effective bias towards unvisited sites , and the spider behaves similarly to the excited walk . surprisingly , the slowing down of the spider at new sites increases the diffusion coefficient and accelerates the growth of the number of visited sites .


Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: tissot ( 1881 ) indicatrices have been very useful for providing a visual presentation of local distortions in map projections in a simple and compelling fashion . a small circle of tiny radius ( say 0.1 degree of arc in radius ) is constructed at a given location , and then enlarged and projected on the map at that location . this always produces an ellipse . usually one favors conformal map projections that minimize the changes in scale factor , or equal area projections that minimize anisotropy , or recently , map projections that are neither conformal nor equal area , but which have a judicious combination of minimizing both scale and isotropy errors ( like the winkel - tripel used by the national geographic society for world maps ) . the tissot ellipse at a given location is specified by three parameters , the major axis , the minor axis , and the orientation angle @xmath0 of the major axis of the ellipse . geometrically , from differential geometry ( and general relativity ) we know that the measurement of local distances is measured by the metric tensor @xmath1 , where a and b can each take the values x or y , yielding three independent components . locally for two nearby points separated by infinitesimal map coordinate differences dx and dy , the true distance between these two points on the globe is given by : @xmath2 the tissot ellipse ( major axis , minor axis , and orientation angle , @xmath0 ) can be calculated from the three components of the metric tensor . thus , the tissot ellipse essentially carries the information on the metric tensor for the map . it tells us how local infinitesimal distances on the map correlate with local infinitesimal distances on the globe .    as we will see , however , the tissot ellipse does not carry all of the information related to distortions , which has been noted previously . others ( stewart 1943 ; peters 1975 , 1978 ; albinus 1981 ; canters 1989 , 2002 ; laskowski 1997ab ) have noted that there are finite distortions apart from those of the tissot ellipse . previous authors have previously depicted finite size distortions by several methods , including showing faces on a globe ( reeves 1910 ; gedymin 1946 ) , 30 degree x 30 degree equiangular quadralaterals ( chamberlin 1947 ) , a net of twenty spherical triangles , in an icosahedral arrangement ( fisher & miller 1944 ) , 150 degree great circle arcs , and circles of 15 degrees radius tobler ( 1964 ) .    in the oxford hammond atlas of the world ( 1993 ) , new conformal map projections ( `` hammond optimal conformal projections '' ) were designed for the continents . following the chebyshev criterion ( snyder 1993 ) , the rms scale factor errors were minimized by producing a constant scale factor along the boundary of the continent . ( for a circular region this conformal map would be a stereographic projection . ) by tailoring the boundary to the shape of each continent , the errors could be reduced relative to those in a simple stereographic projection . in touting the advantages of their projection the hammond atlas did the following experiment . following reeves ( reeves 1910 ) , they constructed a face on the globe with a triangular nose , a straight ( geodesic ) mouth , and eyes that were pairs of concentric circles on the globe . they then showed this face with various map projections . in the gnomonic , the mouth was straight , but the eye circles were not circular and were not concentric ( what we would call skewness ) . the mercator projection had the mouth smiling ( what we would call flexion ) and although the eyes were circular they were not concentric . the hammond optimal conformal projections did a bit better on these qualities because the gradients of the scale factor changes were small so the flexion and skewness were small , although of course not zero .    in sec . [ sec : flexion ] we introduce the concept of `` flexion '' , by which a map projection can cause artificial bending of large structures . in sec . [ sec : skewness ] , we show another distortion : skewness , which represents lopsidedness and an asymmetric stretching of large structures . we show a simple way to visualize these distortions in sec . [ sec : gg ] , in which we introduce the `` goldberg - gott indicatrices . '' in sec . [ sec : geometry ] we derive a differential geometry approach to measuring flexion and skewness . while readers interested in computing flexion and skewness on projections not included in this paper should refer to sec . [ sec : geometry ] , it is highly technical , and those interested in seeing results may skip directly to sec . [ sec : discussion ] , in which we discuss monte carlo estimates of the distortions for a number of projections , a ranking of map projections , and our conclusions . the local effects shown by the tissot ellipse are not the only distortions present in maps . there are also `` flexion '' ( or bending ) and `` skewness '' ( or lopsidedness ; discussed in the next section ) , which describe curvature distortions visible on world maps ( the terminology stems from a similar effect in gravitational lensing ; goldberg & bacon 2005 ) .    one can think about flexion in the following way . imagine a truck going along a geodesic of the globe at unit angular speed ( say one radian per day ) . now imagine the image of that truck on the map , moving along . if the map were perfect , if it had zero flexion and zero skewness , then that truck would move in a straight line on the map with constant speed . its velocity vector on the map : @xmath3 would be a constant , where @xmath4 is the angle of arclength in radians traveled by the truck along the geodesic on the globe . its acceleration : @xmath5 would be zero . of course , this can not be true for a general geodesic . in the general case , the image of the truck suffers an acceleration as it moves along . the acceleration vector , @xmath6 , in the two - dimensional map has two independent components : @xmath7 ( which is perpendicular to the truck s velocity vector at that point ) , and @xmath8 ( which is parallel to its velocity vector at that point ) . the perpendicular acceleration , @xmath7 , causes the truck to turn without changing its speed on the map . this causes flexion , or bending , of geodesics . we define the flexion along a given geodesic at a given point to be : @xmath9 or , more usefully : @xmath10 in this form , we may define : @xmath11 where @xmath12 is the angle of rotation suffered by the velocity vector . remember , if @xmath7 is the only acceleration present , then the velocity vector of the truck on the map does not change in magnitude , but just rotates in angle . thus @xmath13 , and represents the angular rate at which the velocity vector rotates divided by the angular rate at which the truck moves on the globe . skewness and flexion only express themselves on large scales . they are not noticeable on infinitesimal scales where the metric contains all the information one needs , but become noticeable on finite scales , with their importance growing with the size of the area being examined . flexion and skewness are thus important on continental scales and larger in a world map . it is possible to design a map projection that has zero flexion : the gnomonic projection shows all great circles as straight lines . however it does exhibit anisotropy , scale changes , and skewness , and at best can show only one hemisphere of the globe .      as an example , consider a truck traveling on the equator as seen by in the polar stereographic projection ( see fig  [ fg : stereographic ] ) . in the stereographic projection , the north pole is in the center of the map and the equator is a circle around it . as the truck circles the equator ( the equator is a geodesic - so the truck drives straight ahead on the globe ) , it travels around a circle on the map . by azimuthal symmetry , the truck circles the equatorial circle on the map at a uniform rate . the velocity vector of the truck on the map rotates a complete @xmath14 ( @xmath15 radians ) , as the truck circles the equator , traversing @xmath14 of arc on the globe . so the flexion is f = 1 , for a point on the equator , for a geodesic pointing in the direction of the equator . the flexion is defined at a point , and for a specific geodesic traveling through that point .    for an arbitrary point on the equator in the stereographic projection and a geodesic pointing in the direction of a meridian of longitude ( also a geodesic ) the flexion is zero , because these geodesics are shown as radial straight lines in the polar stereographic projection , and the velocity vector of the truck does not turn as it travels north . the stereographic projection has the property that every great circle ( geodesic ) on the globe is shown as a circle on the map , except for a set of measure zero that pass through the north pole ( i.e. the meridians of longitude ) . thus by the argument given above , the average flexion integrated around a random great circle must be @xmath16 , because the truck s velocity vector on a random great circle must rotate by @xmath14 as it circles the @xmath14 of arc completing that great circle on the globe . the magnitude of the velocity vector of the truck on the map is larger the further from the north pole it is and so its rotation per angle of arc of truck travel on the globe is larger there as well , and so the flexion along that random geodesic is larger the further away from the pole one is , with the integrated average value along the whole great circle being @xmath17 .      the mercator projection ( see fig  [ fg : mercator ] ) is conformal and so only the scale factor changes as a function of position on the map ( i.e. @xmath18 , and @xmath19 and the tissot ellipses are all circles with radii proportional to 1/@xmath20 ) . but there is bending . the northern boundary between the continental united states and canada at the @xmath21 parallel of latitude is shown as a straight line in the mercator map , but really it is a small circle that is concave to the north . if one drove a truck down that border from west to east , one would have to turn the steering wheel slightly to the left so that one was continually changing direction . the great circle route ( the straightest route ) connecting the washington state and minnesota ( both at the 49th parallel ) is a straight line which goes entirely through canada . this straight line on the globe when extended , passes south of the northern part of maine , so the continental united states is bend downward like a frown in the mercator map . ( see figure  [ fg : us_mercator ] and  [ fg : us_oblique_mercator ] ) . likewise , maine on a mercator map maine sags below the line connecting washington state and minnesota , while on the globe this is not true .    in the mercator projection , the flexion along the equator is zero , also along all meridians of longitude , but these are a set of measure zero . a random geodesic is a great circle that is inclined at some angle between @xmath22 and @xmath23 with respect to the equator . on the mercator map this is a wavy line that bends downward in the northern hemisphere , and by symmetry , upward in the southern . since the curvatures are equal and opposite in the two hemispheres , the average flexion @xmath24 , but this is misleading because the flexion at each point off the equator is not zero . so if we are rating map projections by the amount of flexion they contain we should use the absolute value of the flexion instead : @xmath25 . in a region where the flexion does not change sign ( such as the northern hemisphere in the mercator projection or the entire stereographic map ) the total bending of a geodesic segment will be the integral of the flexion @xmath25 over that segment . in fact , in section [ sec : numerical ] we will evaluate the overall flexion on a map by simply picking random points on the sphere and random directions for geodesics going through them , and then calculating the absolute value for the flexion for all random points on the globe and random directions through them . we can calculate the flexion for any point in the mercator ( or any other ) projection through any geodesic using spherical trigonometry . as a reminder to the reader , the mercator projection uses the mapping : @xmath26\right)\\\end{aligned}\ ] ] where here and throughout , @xmath27 is the longitude expressed in radians , and @xmath28 is the latitude expressed in radians .    on the map , the angle rotation along the geodesic with an azimuth , @xmath0 , is calculated by constructing thin spherical triangle with side - angle - side given by @xmath29 . @xmath30 because the geodesic intersects the north - south meridian ( a vertical line in the mercator ) at an angle of @xmath0 initially , and at an angle @xmath31 at the other end , where @xmath32 is the angle in the spherical triangle at the other end of the @xmath33 side . solving for @xmath34 using spherical trigonometry in the limit as @xmath33 goes to zero , we find that @xmath35    thus , for @xmath36 , an east - west geodesic , we find that @xmath37 so that in the northern hemisphere , traveling east one s geodesic is bending clockwise with @xmath38 . therefore , the east - west geodesic bends downward . for , @xmath39 , a north - south geodesic , the flexion is zero , as we expect , since the meridians of longitude are straight in the mercator map . if we average over all azimuths at a given point , we find : @xmath40    now we can integrate this over all points on the sphere to produce the average flexion over the whole sphere f. taking advantage of the symmetry between the northern and southern hemisphere we can integrate only over the northern hemisphere ( where @xmath41 ) , yielding : @xmath42    the flexion is less than that of the stereographic because of the @xmath43 boundary cut along the longitude line at the international date line . a geodesic is a great circle on the globe , and if this is shown as a closed curve on the map that is always concave inward ( the best possible case ) it will always have a total rotation of the velocity vector of @xmath14 and so will have an average integrated flexion of 1 . if there is a boundary cut , the great circle does not have to close on the map ( it has two loose ends at the boundary cut ) and so need not completely rotate by @xmath14 . acceleration in the direction parallel to the velocity vector of the truck @xmath8 , causes the truck to increase its speed along the geodesic curve without causing any rotation . this causes skewness , because as the truck accelerates , it covers more distance on the map on one side of a point than on the other , so the point in question will not be at the center of the line segment of arc centered on that point on the sphere . consider a segment of a meridian of longitude on the globe centered at @xmath44 north latitude . going from south to north along that geodesic in the mercator map the truck is accelerating with @xmath45 , because the scale factor is getting larger and larger the further north one goes , so as the truck continues to cover equal arc length on the globe it covers larger and larger distances on the map . thus , the center of the segment ( at @xmath44 latitude ) is not centered on the segment on the map . we define the skewness : @xmath46    taking the explicit case of the mercator projection , we find : @xmath47 and thus : @xmath48 so the skewness ( for a vector pointed n - s ) is simply : @xmath49    the skewness at @xmath44 is 1 , showing a lopsidedness toward the north . given this relation , the skewness is positive ( northward lopsidedness ) in the northern hemisphere and negative ( southward lopsidedness ) in the southern hemisphere . consider a geodesic through a point in the northern hemisphere tipped at an azimuth angle of @xmath0 with respect to north . the only thing increasing the speed of the truck is the gradient of the scale factor as one moves northward , so the amplitude of the parallel acceleration is equal to the maximum acceleration ( obtained going straight north ) times cos @xmath0 . to get the average of the absolute value of the skewness for all geodesics through that point at all random angles @xmath0 , one simply integrates over @xmath0 : @xmath50 as with the flexion , we can integrate this over all points on the sphere to produce the average skewness over the whole sphere s. similarly , we find : @xmath51    notice that this is exactly the same value as the average flexion , @xmath52 , for the mercator . we will find that for conformal projections , the average absolute value of the skewness and flexion at a given point and over the whole globe are always equal . ( this is only true for conformal projections , for general projections the skewness and flexion can be different , as illustrated by the gnomonic projection which has zero flexion but non - zero skewness . )    in the mercator projection , at the equator , the skewness is zero , as we would expect from symmetry considerations . indeed , because any geodesic crossing equator has a symmetric shape in the northern and southern hemisphere , the skewness s = 0 for any geodesic line evaluated at a point on the equator . likewise , the flexion is zero for any geodesic line evaluated at a point on the equator . so the mercator map has perfect local shapes along the equator , uniform scale along the equator ( tissot ellipses all equal size circles ) and zero flexion and skewness along geodesics in any direction from points on the equator . while much of the analysis in this work specifically addresses distortions in maps of the earth , these effects must also be taken into account in other maps as well . one of us ( jrg ) has recently produced a conformal `` map of the universe '' ( gott et al . 2005 ) based on the logarithm map of the complex plane . the horizontal coordinate is the celestial longitude in radians , yielding a @xmath14 panorama from left to right . the vertical coordinate is : @xmath53 where @xmath54 is the distance , and @xmath55 is the radius of the earth . the distance scale goes inversely as the distance , allowing us to plot everything from satellites in low earth orbit to stars and galaxies , to the cosmic microwave background on one map . the map is conformal , having perfect local shapes . however , it does have flexion and skewness . circles of constant radius from the earth are bent into straight lines for example , and a rocket going out from the earth at constant speed would be slowing down on the map . in figure  [ fg : us_mercator ] , note that the continental united states also appears lopsided on the mercator map . the geographical center of the continental united states ( which is in kansas ) appears in the lower half of the continental united states on the mercator map because the scale factor on the map gets larger and larger the further north one goes on the map . thus , the continental united states is lopsided toward the north in the mercator map . flexion or bending is manifest on the map as a bending of geodesics on the map , and skewness or lopsidedness is manifest on the map as the midpoint of a geodesic line segment on the map not being at the midpoint of that geodesic arc as shown on the map . we began this discussion with the virtues of the tissot indicatrices . likewise , we have produced a simple indicatrix to show the flexion and skewness in a map as well as the isotropy and area properties indicated by the tissot indicatrices . we will refer to them as  goldberg - gott " indicatrices . these are constructed as follows . at a specific point on the map draw a circle on the globe of radius @xmath56 , and then plot it on the map . inside this circle , plot the north - south , and east - west geodesics through the central point on the map . this leaves a @xmath57 symbol on the map . if the map were perfect , this would be a perfect circle and the cross arms would be perfectly straight , with their intersection at the center of the circle . we have produced such a goldberg - gott indicatrix located at the geographic center of the continental united states for using a mercator projection in figure  [ fg : us_mercator ] . we note that our technique is similar to that of tobler ( 1964 ) , who projected circles of 15 degrees in radius on to maps . however , it differs in that tobler s circles do not have their centers marked nor perpendicular geodesics drawn from their centers like our indicatrices , and so do not convey the information on flexion and skewness . but they do show the finite shape distortions of the circles themselves which our indicatrices also cover . tobler includes tables showing for particular locations on the sinusoidal projection , the maximum and minimum scale radius and maximum difference of radial directions for circles of various radii on the sphere ( which address the tissot issues of size and isotropy on finite circles but not flexion and skewness ) . tobler also calculated errors in miles and angular errors for 300 random triangles within spherical circles of various radii in different map projections , and considered area errors for such random triangles within land areas in various world map projections . using our indicatrices , one can see in fig . [ fg : us_mercator ] that the north - south geodesic is straight , but that the east - west geodesic is bent downward . this shows dramatically the flexion in this region of the mercator map . one can even read off the average value of the flexion by hand . take a protractor and measure the tangent to the east - west geodesic at the two ends of the cross bar . measure the difference in the angle orientation of the two . that gives the integrated flexion along @xmath58 of the globe . divide that angle difference by @xmath58 and you will have the average value of the flexion along that curve .    the skewness is also visible in that the center of the cross is below the center of the circle , showing the lopsidedness to the north . in fact , one can observe the skewness in any direction from the center by seeing how far off center the center of the cross is with respect to the center of the circle in different directions . for comparison , we have in figure  [ fg : us_oblique_mercator ] shown the continental united states in a oblique mercator projection where the east - west geodesic through the geographic center of the continental united states is now the equator of the mercator projection . the flexion and skewness along the equator of a mercator map are indeed zero , so the arms of the cross are now straight , and the circle is now nearly a perfect circle centered on the center of the cross . this gives a `` straight on '' view of the continental united states , that more accurately portrays its appearance on the globe . one can place the goldberg - gott indicatrices every @xmath59 in longitude and every @xmath60 in latitude on the globe to show how the flexion and skewness vary over the map . in figs . [ fg : indmap_first]-  [ fg : indmap_last ] , we provide g - g indicatrix maps for a number of well - known projections .    in fact , the goldberg - gott almost indicatrices can just replace the tissot indicatrices because the shape and size of the oval in the goldberg - gott indicatrix is approximately the size and shape of the tissot ellipse . the tissot ellipse shows the [ magnified ] shape and size of an infinitesimal circle on the globe , the oval in the goldberg - gott indicatrix @xmath57 shows the shape and size of a finite circle ( radius @xmath56 ) on the map itself at correct scale . thus , if the map is equal area , the goldberg - gott indicatrices , will all have equal area on the map . if the map is conformal the goldberg - gott indicatrices will all be nearly perfectly circular . if there is a 2:1 anisotropy in the tissot ellipses in a given region the goldberg - gott indicatrices ovals will have that same 2:1 axis ratio . thus far , we have defined the general properties of skewness and flexion , given a few analytic results for particular map projections , and given a graphic approach for describing and interpreting flexion and skewness on maps . in this section , we approach the matter somewhat differently , and produce general analytic results for all projections as well as a prescription for measuring the flexion and skewness analytically . let s consider a spherical globe with coordinates : @xmath61 note that here and throughout , we will use @xmath62 to refer to coordinates in the globe frame , and @xmath63 to refer to coordinates in the map frame .    on the globe , the metric is : @xmath64 such that , as always , the distance between two points can be expressed as : @xmath65    now , consider an arbitrary 2-d coordinate transformation : @xmath66 of course , from this definition , we may easily compute a local transformation matrix : @xmath67    the inverse matrix is @xmath68 . the metric in the map frame is : @xmath69 from this , we may then compute the christoffel symbols of general relativity : @xmath70 where standard convention tells us to sum over identical indices in the upper and lower positions , and where a comma indicates a partial derivative with respect to a coordinate .    in practice , actually computing the christoffel symbols for an arbitrary projection is not simple . to do this analytically requires that we have an analytic form for the map inversion . however , we make available a numerical code to compute the christoffel symbols for all map projections discussed in this work on our projections website ( see below ) . the whole point of computing the christoffel symbols is that we want to address a very simple question : how are large structures distorted when projected onto a map ? clearly to an observer on the globe , a straight line is easy to generate . point in a particular direction , and start driving ( assuming your car can drive on the ocean ) with the steering wheel set straight ahead . drive for a fixed distance in units of angles or radian . record all points along the way . geometers , of course , know this route as a geodesic , and if we consider @xmath4 to represent a physical distance on the surface of the earth , then the geodesic equation may be expressed as : @xmath71 where @xmath72    equation  ( [ eq : geodesic ] ) describes the bending of straight lines on a particular map projection , and thus , if all of the christoffel symbols could vanish , we would clearly have a perfect cartesian map . not possible , of course . but what is the physical significance of the christoffel symbols ? since the lower indices are symmetric by inspection , there are 6 unique symbols . what do they mean ? we define a vector oriented in a particular direction : @xmath73 in reality , this is _ not _ the unit vector , since : @xmath74 of course , we _ could _ define a true unit unit vector : @xmath75 where @xmath76 is the `` length '' in grid coordinates of the unit vector . this has a value of : @xmath77 of course , it is clear that at any point on the map , the set of all @xmath78 represents an ellipse  the tissot ellipse . we define the flexion in the following manner : follow a particular geodesic a distance , @xmath33 ( measured in , for example , radians ) . on the map , the geodesic will change direction by an angle @xmath79 . the ratio : @xmath80 is the flexion . note that for all polar projections , the equator will have a flexion of 1 .    in terms of the geodesic equation , the flexion can be expressed as : @xmath81 where @xmath82 denotes a vector . some light can be shed on equation  ( [ eq : flexion ] ) if we expand the expression explicitly into trigonometric functions : @xmath83 \label{eq : flexion2}\end{aligned}\ ] ] this immediately reveals an important idea . if : @xmath84 then @xmath85 in all directions will be zero . that is , all geodesics will be straight lines in this projection . as we will see , this is true for the gnomonic projection . inspection of equation  ( [ eq : flexion2 ] ) shows it is clearly anti - symmetric about exchanges of @xmath0 and @xmath86 , since @xmath0 is _ not _ the normal vector to the geodesic , but rather runs along it . essentially , a skewness means that if you walk ( initially ) north ( for example ) for 1000 miles , or walk south for 1000 miles , you will cover different amounts of map coordinate . the skewness along a geodesic can be defined similarly to the flexion : @xmath87 as with the flexion , we may expand these out explicitly : @xmath88\end{aligned}\ ] ] a map with no skewness will have : @xmath89    unlike the flexion , we know of no projections with zero skewness everywhere . the gnomonic projection is particularly interesting . it has a coordinate transformation : @xmath90 which is directly invertible to yield : @xmath91    the coordinate transformation is thus : @xmath92    we thus have the map metric : @xmath93    we can compute the christoffel symbols in the normal way . we find : @xmath94 this clearly satisfies the requirements of equations  ( [ eq : straight ] ) , but not ( [ eq : unskewed ] ) , and thus , the gnomonic projection produces straight , but skewed geodesics .      the stereographic projection is conformal , and thus , all of the tissot ellipses are circles . does this mean there is no skewness in the projection ? no , as we ve already seen . the stereographic projection has the coordinate transformation : @xmath95 which , again , is directly invertible to yield : @xmath96    the coordinate transformation is : @xmath97    this can be used to compute the metric on the map : @xmath98 this clearly indicates that all tissot ellipses will be circular .    from these , of course , we can compute the christoffel symbols : @xmath99 it is clear from inspection that geodesics are generally neither straight nor unskewed . moreover , it is clear that @xmath100 is independent of orientation since the map is conformal . in general it can be shown to be : @xmath101 in the stereographic projection , a circle of radius @xmath56 on the globe is a perfect circle on the map but the center of the circle on the globe is not at the center of the circle on the globe ( see figure  [ fg : stereographic ] ) , and thus , there is skewness . not all projections produce such simple results . thus , in general , we will want to compute the local flexion and skewness numerically . our approach is as follows : for each projection we chose 30,000 points selected randomly on the surface of a globe . for each of these points , we chose a random direction to start a geodesic . we follow that geodesic using small steps ( @xmath102 rad ) numerically , and use standard difference methods to compute the map velocity and acceleration along the geodesic . we are thus able to compute the metric and the christoffel symbols ( and thus the flexion and skewness ) directly . we make our idl ( interactive data language ) code available to the interested reader at our projection webpage ( see below ) . likewise , we also do a distance test , in which pairs of points , ( i , j ) , are chosen at random and the distance is measured both on the globe and on the map . this is a somewhat different perspective than simply inspecting the goldberg - gott indicatrices at a few locations , since we are now doing a uniform sample over the surface of the globe , rather than a uniform sampling over the _ map_. when looking at the indicatrix map we can occasionally get a distorted view as to the quality of a particular projection . some ( like the mercator ) have relatively good fits over most of the globe , but the high latitudes can , in principle , be projected to infinite areas , and thus , the reader may erroneously think the mercator infinitely bad . by sampling uniformly over the globe , we get a fair assessment of the overall quality of a particular projection . we define a number of fit parameters : i , corresponding to errors in the local isotropy ( zero for conformal projections ) , a , corresponding to errors in the area ( zero for equal area projections ) , f , corresponding to flexion ( defined in the discussion of flexion , above ) , s , corresponding to skewness ( also defined above ) , d , corresponding to distance errors , and b , corresponding to the average number of map boundary cuts crossed by the shortest geodesic connecting a random pair of points . @xmath103 where @xmath104 and @xmath105 are the major and minor axes of the local tissot ellipses of random point , @xmath106 , @xmath107 indicates the mean of property , x , and @xmath108 is the total length of the boundary cuts . logarithmic errors have been used before by kavrayskiy ( 1958 ) . bugayevskiy and snyder ( 1995 ) adopted schemes that weighted isotropy errors , @xmath109 , and area errors , @xmath110 , according to one s interest in isotropy and area . airy ( 1861 ) had just given these terms equal weight . .the errors in isotropy , area , flexion , skewness , distances , and boundary cuts for some standard projections . [ cols="<,^,^,^,^,^,^",options="header " , ]     [ tab : global ]    in table  [ tab : global ] we compare a these measures for a number of standard projections , which , for fairness of comparison we divide into a number of categories . the gott - elliptical , the gott - mugnolo elliptical , and the gott - mugnolo azimuthal have been discussed in gott , mugnolo & colley ( 2007 ) and gott , et al . ( 2007 ) , where they have been applied to the earth , mars , the moon , and the cosmic microwave all sky map . first , we show projections which represent the complete globe without interrupts . these projections are azimuthal and the average flexion over these maps is 1 . second , we show the set of whole earth projections with one @xmath43 interrupt . these include rectangular and elliptical projections . note that among all of the complete projections with 0 or 1 @xmath43 interrupt , there are a number of `` winners '' with regards to performance for flexion and skewness . the lagrange has the smallest flexion . the winkel - tripel has the smallest skewness . for all conformal projections , the skewness is equal to the flexion .    of all of the whole earth projections , the most accurate for distance measure between points is the gott - mugnolo azimuthal , followed very closely by the lambert azimuthal ( gott , mugnolo & colley 2007 ) .    in the third and fourth groups , we show 2-hemisphere and other multiple cut projections , respectively .    in the final group , we have a projection with multiple interrupts , the gnomonic cube , which is defined piecemeal . this is a particularly interesting projection since the gnomonic is locally flexion - free , but it is clear that geodesics will _ not _ trace out straight lines in the gnomonic cube cube map because they bend when they cross an edge between faces . the gnomonic cube is presented as a cross , so 5 edges are included in the map proper . geodesics bend when they cross an edge in this laid out cross configuration . the above comparisons do not depend on how important each of the criteria are ( i.e. what weighting to give each measure ) . laskowski ( 1997ab ) suggested a means of ranking very disparate maps . though his weighting scheme is not unique , as a simple illustration of how this can be done , we will minimize the sum of the squares of all 6 parameters , normalized to their values in the equirectangular projection : @xmath111 following laskowksi ( 1997ab ) we set the normalization constants equal to the values of these errors in the equirectangular projection ( @xmath112 , @xmath113 ) : @xmath114 , @xmath115 , @xmath116 , @xmath117 , @xmath118 , @xmath119 . the projections with the lowest values of @xmath120 are :    1 . winkel - tripel ( 4.5629 ) 2 . winkel - tripel ( times atlas ) ( 4.5687 ) 3 . kavrayskiy vii ( 4.8390 ) 4 . gall stereographic ( 5.7582 ) 5 . hammer - wagner ( 5.7847 ) 6 . eckert iv ( 5.8519 )    this approach is certainly not unique . one may take issue with the weighting of the individual parameters , the domain over which they are applied ( the whole earth , as opposed to continents only , for example ) , or even how the parameters are computed , we present it as a simple example of how our results may be combined with previous studies of map projections . it is interesting that the `` best '' map , as selected by this criterion is the one already used by the national geographic for it s whole world projection . it is also interesting to note that the winkel - tripel has especially low skewness . another nice property of this weighting scheme is that it gives a low score to pathological projections . for example , a series of n gores ( made using the polyconic projection ) arranged in a sunflower pattern would approximate the azimuthal equidistant projection in distance errors as n became large but would have arbitrarily low values of i , a , f , and s. but if a boundary cut term b is included this term would blow up and save us from picking the bad subdivided map as better than the more visually pleasing projections described above . stretching individual pixels at the edges of the gores to fill the gaps between them would eliminate the boundary cuts . however , it would also cause the skewness to blow up , preventing us from giving a good score to a bad projection . interested readers may visit www.physics.drexel.edu/@xmath121goldberg/projections/ to download a free idl code to measure the flexion , area , and other measures discussed in this paper . we have not done all known projections , but have covered ones that have available mathematical formulas and we thought likely to do well . we have developed two new measures of curvature distortions found in maps of the earth . the skewness and the flexion can be used to identify particularly warped sections of a map , or to identify features ( such as the u.s . canada border ) , which appear as a straight line on some map projections but do not , in fact , follow geodesics . we have developed a new graphical tool , called the goldberg - gott indicatrices , which can be used to show these distortions , along with those in area and shape , at many points in a map , and have produced indicatrix maps for a number of popular projections . finally , we have used these measures to produce global distortion measures for different projections . we have found that the winkel - tripel produces low distortion on most measures , and , in particular , has the lowest skewness of all projections in our sample with a @xmath43 boundary cut . jrg is supported by national science foundation grant ast04 - 06713 . dmg is supported by a nasa astrophysics theory grant . we thank wes colley for useful discussions , as well as the helpful comments made by the anonymous referees . kavrayskiy , v. v. , ( 1958 ) , izbrannye trudy , vol . ii : mathematicheskaja kartografija , part 1 : obscaja teorija kartograficheskih projekcij , izdaniye nachalnika upraveleniya , gidrograficheskoy sluzhby voyenno - morskoy akademii . tobler , w.r . ( 1964 ) , geographical coordinate computations , part ii , finite map projection distortions , technical report no . 3 , onr task no . 389 - 137 , university of michigan , department of geography , ann arbor .
Abstract:

Answer: tissot indicatrices have provided visual measures of local area and isotropy distortions . here we show how large scale distortions of flexion ( bending ) and skewness ( lopsidedness ) can be measured . area and isotropy distortions depend on the map projection metric , flexion and skewness , which manifest themselves on continental scales , depend on the first derivatives of the metric . we introduce new indicatrices that show not only area and isotropy distortions but flexion and skewness as well . we present a table showing error measures for area , isotropy , flexion , skewness , distances , and boundary cuts allowing us to compare different world map projections . we find that the winkel - tripel projection ( already adopted for world maps by the national geographic ) , has low distortion on most measures and excellent quality overall . * keywords : * maps , earth , projection , curvature