Figures and show that GaMD-WE is faster than WE at converging to the reference rate constants between the folded and unfolded regions. GaMD-WE is significantly better at obtaining the rate constants from unfolded to folded since GaMD-WE had closer to actual probabilities for the unfolded region with reweighting. Without reweighting, WE takes a significantly longer time to converge to the reference rate constants. Figures , and 5d also show similar results that highlight GaMD-WE converging faster to the reference rate constants, especially for rate constants that go from either intermediate I or II region to the folded region. Performance for GaMD-WE is only slightly better than WE in obtaining the rate constants between the intermediate I region and the intermediate II region, however, as seen in Figures and. The two regions are close to each other, making sampling between these two regions and converging to the actual rate constants easier than the other cases.