 to mode coupling behavior, identified with the onset of non-activated motions[@stevenson.2006]. Reconfiguration events of the more extended type are more susceptible to fluctuations in the local driving force, even away from the crossover. These ramified or “stringy” reconfiguration events thus dominate the low barrier tail of the activation energy distribution.

When the shape distribution of reconfiguration processes is accounted for, a simple statistical computation shows that a two peaked distribution of barriers can arise. This calculation motivates a more explicit but approximate theory that gives analytical expressions for the distribution of relaxation times in the tail. In keeping with experiment, the theory predicts the secondary relaxation motions are actually most numerous near the crossover, but of course, merge in frequency with the main relaxation peak in time scale also at that crossover. Furthermore the relaxation time distribution for secondary relaxations is predicted to be described by an asymptotic power law. The theory is easily extended to the aging regime where these secondary relaxations can dominate the rearranging motions.

In RFOT theory, above the glass transition temperature, the entropic advantage of exploring phase space, manifested as a driving force for reconfiguration, is balanced by a mismatch energy at the interface between adjacent metastable states. For a flat interface in the deeply supercooled regime the mismatch energy can be described as a surface tension that can be estimated from the entropy cost of localizing a bead[@kirkpatrick.1989; @xia.2000], giving a surface tension $\sigma_0 = (3/4) k_B T r_0^{-2} \ln [1/(d_L^2 \pi e)]$ where $d_L$ is the Lindemann length, the magnitude of particle fluctuations necessary to break up a solid structure, and is nearly universally a tenth of the inter-particle spacing, ($d_L = 0.1 r_0$). The free energy profile for reconfiguration events resembles nucleation theory at first order transitions but is conceptually quite distinct. Following Stevenson-Schmalian-Wolynes (SSW)[@stevenson.2006] the free energy cost of an $N$ particle cluster with surface area $\Sigma$ making a structural transition to a new metastable state may be written

$$F(N, \Sigma ) = \Sigma \sigma_0 - N k_B T s_c  - k_B T 
  \ln \Omega(N, \Sigma) - \sum_{\textrm{particles}} \!\!\! \delta
to mode coupling behavior, identified with the onset of non - activated motions[@stevenson.2006 ]. Reconfiguration event of the more extensive type are more susceptible to fluctuations in the local driving violence, even away from the crossover. These complexify or “ stringy ” reconfiguration events therefore predominate the low barrier stern of the activation energy distribution. 

 When the supreme headquarters allied powers europe distribution of reconfiguration processes is report for, a simple statistical computation read that a two peaked distribution of barriers can arise. This calculation motivate a more explicit but approximate theory that give analytic expressions for the distribution of rest times in the tail. In keeping with experiment, the hypothesis predicts the secondary relaxation motions are actually most numerous near the crossover, but of course, merge in frequency with the main relaxation peak in time scale also at that crossover. Furthermore the relaxation time distribution for junior-grade relaxation is predicted to be identify by an asymptotic exponent law. The theory is easily offer to the aging regime where these secondary relaxations can predominate the rearranging motions. 

 In RFOT theory, above the glass transition temperature, the entropic advantage of exploring phase distance, manifested as a driving force for reconfiguration, is balanced by a mismatch department of energy at the interface between adjacent metastable states. For a bland interface in the profoundly supercooled government the mismatch energy can be described as a surface latent hostility that can be estimated from the entropy cost of localizing a bead[@kirkpatrick.1989; @xia.2000 ], giving a surface tension $ \sigma_0 = (3/4) k_B T r_0^{-2 } \ln [ 1/(d_L^2 \pi e)]$ where $ d_L$ is the Lindemann length, the magnitude of atom fluctuations necessary to break up a solid structure, and is nearly universally a one-tenth of the inter - particle spacing, ($ d_L = 0.1 r_0 $). The free energy profile for reconfiguration events resemble nucleation theory at first decree transitions but is conceptually quite distinct. trace Stevenson - Schmalian - Wolynes (SSW)[@stevenson.2006 ] the free department of energy cost of an $ N$ particle cluster with airfoil area $ \Sigma$ making a structural transition to a new metastable state of matter may be written 

 $ $ F(N, \Sigma) = \Sigma \sigma_0 - N k_B T s_c   - k_B T 
   \ln \Omega(N, \Sigma) - \sum_{\textrm{particles } } \!\!\! \delta
 to mode coupling behavior, ldentified with jhw onsev of noh-activatdd motions[@stevenson.2006]. Reconfignratuon ecents of the more extevded type are morw suwxeptible to fluctuations ln thz oocal driving norce, even dway from the wrusdover. These ramified or “stringy” recjnfigurstlon events thuf dokynats the low barrier tail of the actibation tnergy distributiom.

When the shape distributiln ov reconfiguration orocesses iw acsiunted for, a simple statistical cojputation shows that a two peakdd dixtribution od bwtriers can acise. Tris calculatlpn mothvates s more explicib but approximate theory that gives analytical gxpressionv yor the distribution if relafatimn tknes in tie fail. Ij kxeping with experiment, the theory predictx eye secondary delaxaeijn motions are actually most numerous ntar tge crossover, but of couese, merge in frequenci with the main relaxation peak in time scale also at that wrosskxer. Fmrthdemlre the relaxation time distribution for secogsaty relaxations if predicted tl ng described by an asvjpfotic power law. Thf theori is eqsily exttnded to the aging regime where rhese secondcry relaxations can dlminate the reatrangimg motions.

In RFOT theorv, abovs the glass transitikv temperature, thd ektrmpic advantage of explorind phase s'ace, kanifesged ss a dwiving forfe fov reconfiguration, id balcnced by a mismwtch energy at the interface bevxeen adjacent matavtable scates. Nor a flat intewface in the dgeply supzrcooldd regime nhe mismavch energy cwn be describaf as a surfare tensiog thqt cqn be ergimated from tne entropj eost of licalizing a bead[@kivkpattidk.1989; @xia.2000], giving a sutdace tension $\sogmx_0 = (3/4) k_H V r_0^{-2} \lg [1/(d_L^2 \pi e)]$ whese $d_U$ ir the Uindemann lcnggh, tne magnitude of parthcle fluctuations necexswry to bteak up a solid structire, and is nearly knivecsally a temth of the inter-particle spacing, ($s_L = 0.1 r_0$). Thf fvee energy prjfilc fot reconfiguxation events resembles nucleation theorb at first order transirions but is concepjuakly quite dmstince. Followitg Stevenson-Schmaliab-Wolynes (SSW)[@stevekson.2006] the free energy ckst of an $N$ particle cluster with surface area $\Sigma$ making a structural transition ro a nxw metastable staye maj bz wxitten

$$F(G, \Sijme ) = \Sigma \sigma_0 - M k_B T s_c  - k_B T 
  \ln \Omega(N, \Sijma) - \sum_{\teftxm{particles}} \!\!\! \delta
to mode coupling behavior, identified with the non-activated Reconfiguration events the more extended fluctuations the local driving even away from crossover. These ramified or “stringy” reconfiguration thus dominate the low barrier tail of the activation energy distribution. When the distribution of reconfiguration processes is accounted for, a simple statistical computation shows that two distribution barriers arise. This calculation motivates a more explicit but approximate theory that gives analytical expressions for the of relaxation times in the tail. In keeping experiment, the theory predicts secondary relaxation motions are actually numerous the crossover, of merge frequency with the relaxation peak in time scale also at that crossover. Furthermore the relaxation time distribution for secondary relaxations predicted to by an power The is easily extended aging regime where these secondary relaxations rearranging motions. In RFOT theory, above the glass temperature, the advantage of exploring phase space, manifested a driving force for reconfiguration, is balanced by mismatch energy at the interface between adjacent metastable states. For a flat interface in the regime the mismatch energy be described as surface that be from the cost of localizing a bead[@kirkpatrick.1989; @xia.2000], giving a surface tension $\sigma_0 (3/4) k_B T r_0^{-2} \ln [1/(d_L^2 \pi e)]$ where $d_L$ Lindemann the magnitude of fluctuations necessary to break a structure, and is nearly tenth the = r_0$). free energy profile for events resembles nucleation theory at order transitions but is (SSW)[@stevenson.2006] the free energy cost of an $N$ cluster with surface area $\Sigma$ making a transition to a new metastable state may be written $$F(N, \Sigma ) \Sigma \sigma_0 k_B T s_c - k_B T \ln \Omega(N, - \sum_{\textrm{particles}} \!\!\! \delta
 to mode coupling behavior, ideNtified witH the oNseT of NoN-actIvatEd motions[@steveNSon.2006]. REconfiguration events of The moRe EXtenDEd Type aRe more sUScEPTibLe To FluCtUAtIons iN thE local dRiving forcE, evEn Away from the cROsSover. These RamIfied or “strinGy” rEconfiGuRatIOn eveNts Thus dOminatE The low Barrier taIl OF the acTIvation ENErGy diStribution.

When the SHaPE distribution oF reconFiGUrATIon ProCesses is acCoUnted FOr, a simpLE sTATIstICal computatioN shows that a TWo pEaked dIsTriBUtion oF barrIeRS caN arise. This cAlcuLation motIvates A More expLIcit but ApproxImaTe tHeorY ThAt GivEs ANalYTiCal EXprEssions fOr ThE distRibuTION Of reLaxAtioN timeS in the tail. In kEepIng wITh eXperiMent, tHe thEoRy preDicts tHe secOnDary relaxation mOtioNs are actuAllY mOst NuMerouS Near thE crOssOver, but Of coursE, MerGe IN FReQuency with the main rElAXAtIon peak iN time sCAlE aLSo at that CrOssOver. fURtherMore THe RelaxatiOn time DIsTrIbution FoR seconDaRy rElaXatioNS is pRedictEd to be deScribED by an asymptotiC Power law. The thEOrY IS eASily ExtEnded to the aGing REgimE wheRE tHesE SeconDary rElAXaTIons can dominate the rEaRrangiNg motIons.

In RFOT theOry, above thE GLAss transItioN TeMPerature, the entRopic Advantage oF ExplorinG phasE space, maNifested aS A Driving fOrcE foR reConFIGuRation, is balanCED by a MiSmatch eNerGy at the IntErfAce BetWeEn adjacenT metastaBlE sTaTeS. FoR a flaT InterfacE iN thE dEepLy supERcooleD regiMe thE mIsMAtcH energy CAn BE DescRiBeD as a SurFaCe tenSion THat Can be esTimated frOm tHE entRoPy Cost of lOcalizing a beaD[@kIrkpatrick.1989; @XiA.2000], giVing a sURFace tensIon $\sigma_0 = (3/4) k_B T r_0^{-2} \ln [1/(d_L^2 \pi e)]$ wherE $D_L$ is the linDemanN lenGth, the magNitUde of pArtICle fluCtuatiOns neCeSsaRY To breAK Up A soLiD structure, AND is NearlY uNiveRsally a Tenth of the inter-parTIclE spacing, ($d_L = 0.1 r_0$). ThE frEe enERGy ProFIlE For ReCOnfIGUration events reSembles nucLeATiOn theory at FIrsT oRder traNsitionS but iS ConceptUally quitE distinct. foLlowING StEvenson-SchMalian-WoLynes (SSW)[@sTEvensON.2006] tHe freE enErgy coSt Of aN $N$ parTicle cLUstEr witH surfaCe Area $\SiGma$ maKiNg a strucTural transition to a new meTastabLe staTe mAy be writtEn

$$F(n, \sigMa ) = \Sigma \siGma_0 - N K_B T s_c  - k_B T 
  \ln \omeGa(N, \sigma) - \Sum_{\TExtrm{PartIClEs}} \!\!\! \dELta
 to mode coupling behavior , identifi ed wi ththe  o nset  ofnon-activatedm otio ns[@stevenson.2006]. R econf ig u rati o nevent s of th e  m o r e e xt en ded  t y pe  aremor e susce ptible toflu ct uations in t h elocal driv ing  force, even  aw ay fro mthe cross ove r. Th ese ra m ifiedor “strin gy ”  recon f igurati o n  e vent s thus dominate t h el ow barrier tai l of t he ac t i vat ion  energy di st ribut i on.

Wh e nt h e  sh a pe distributi on of recon f igu ration  p roc e sses i s acc ou n ted  for, a sim plestatistic al com p utation shows t hat atwo  pe aked di st rib ut i ono fbar r ier s can ar is e.  This  cal c u l a tion  mo tiva tes a  more explici t b ut a p pro ximat e the oryth at gi ves an alyti ca l expressions f or t he distri but io n o frelax a tion t ime s i n the t ail. In kee pi n g wi th experiment, the  t h e or y predic ts the se co n dary rel ax ati on m o t ionsarea ct ually mo st num e ro us  near t he  cross ov er,  bu t ofc ours e, mer ge in fr equen c y with the mai n  relaxation p e ak i nt imesca le also atthat cros sove r .Fur t hermo re th er el a xation time distrib ut ion fo r sec ondary relaxa tions is p r e d icted to  bed es c ribed by an as ympto tic powerl aw. Thetheor y is eas ily exten d e d to the  ag ing  re gim e wh ere these sec o n dary  r elaxati ons  can do min ate  th e r ea rrangingmotions. 
In  R FO T t heory ,  above t he  gl as s t ransi t ion te mpera ture ,th e  en tropica dv a n tage  o fexpl ori ng  phas e sp a ce,  manife sted as a  dr i ving  f or ce forreconfigurati on , is balan ce d b y a mi s m atch ene rgy at the interface be t ween ad jac ent m etas table sta tes . Fora f l at int erface  in t he  de e p ly su p e rc ool ed  regime th e mis match  e nerg y can b e described as a s u rfa ce tension th atcanb e  e sti m at e d f ro m  th e entropy cost of  localizin ga  b ead[@kirkp a tri ck .1989;@xia.20 00],g iving a  surfacetension $ \s igma _ 0  =(3/4) k_BT r_0^{- 2} \ln [1 / (d_L^ 2  \ pi e) ]$where$d _L$  is t he Lin d ema nn le ngth,th e magn itude  o f partic le fluctuations necessa ry tobreak  up  a solidstr u ctu re, and i s ne arly unive rsa lly  a te nth of th e in t er -pa r ticle  spa c ing, ($d_ L  =  0. 1 r_ 0$). The fr e e ene rgy p rof i le for  rec onfiguration even t s resembles nu clea t i onthe o ry a tfirst order tr ans it i o ns but i sconceptuall y quitedi s tinct . Foll owingStevens o n -S c hmalia n-Wo lyn es (SSW)[ @st ev e nson.20 06 ]t he fre e en er gy cos t of a n  $N$ p article clusterwiths u rface are a $\S ig ma$ mak i ng a  structura l transitio n to a  new  meta stablest ate ma y b ewritten

$ $ F(N, \Sig ma )= \Sigm a\sig ma_ 0 - Nk_BT s_c - k_ BT   \ln \Om e g a( N ,\S i gma ) -\sum_ {\ text rm{partic l es}} \!\ !\! \delta
 to_mode coupling_behavior, identified with the_onset of_non-activated_motions[@stevenson.2006]. Reconfiguration_events_of the more_extended type are_more susceptible to fluctuations_in the local_driving_force, even away from the crossover. These ramified or “stringy” reconfiguration events thus dominate_the_low barrier_tail_of_the activation energy distribution.

When the_shape distribution of reconfiguration processes_is accounted_for, a simple statistical computation shows that a_two_peaked distribution of_barriers can arise. This calculation motivates a more explicit_but approximate theory that gives analytical_expressions for the_distribution_of_relaxation times in the_tail. In keeping with experiment, the_theory predicts the secondary relaxation motions_are actually most numerous near the crossover,_but of course, merge in frequency_with the main relaxation peak_in time_scale also at that crossover._Furthermore the relaxation_time distribution_for secondary relaxations_is predicted to be described by_an asymptotic power_law. The theory is easily extended_to_the aging regime_where_these_secondary relaxations_can dominate the_rearranging_motions.

In RFOT_theory,_above the glass transition temperature, the_entropic_advantage of exploring phase space, manifested as_a driving force for_reconfiguration,_is balanced by a_mismatch energy at the interface_between adjacent metastable states. For a_flat interface_in the_deeply supercooled regime the mismatch energy can be described as a_surface tension that can be estimated_from the entropy cost_of localizing_a_bead[@kirkpatrick.1989; @xia.2000], giving_a_surface tension_$\sigma_0 = (3/4) k_B T r_0^{-2} \ln_[1/(d_L^2 \pi_e)]$ where $d_L$ is the Lindemann_length, the magnitude of_particle_fluctuations necessary to break up a_solid structure, and is nearly universally_a tenth of the inter-particle_spacing,_($d_L_= 0.1 r_0$). The free_energy profile for reconfiguration events resembles_nucleation theory at_first order transitions but is conceptually quite_distinct._Following Stevenson-Schmalian-Wolynes (SSW)[@stevenson.2006] the free energy_cost_of an $N$ particle cluster with_surface_area_$\Sigma$ making a structural transition_to a new metastable state may_be written

$$F(N, \Sigma ) = \Sigma \sigma_0 - N_k_B T s_c_ - k_B T 
__\ln_\Omega(N, \Sigma) - \sum_{\textrm{particles}} \!\!\! \delta