“…In contrast to the dynamic models referred to above, this approach is based upon the modeling of the trajectories of each individual molecule, requires extremely powerful computers in order to compute the motion of a statistically significant number of molecules and is not further considered in this review. Other theoretical work absent from this review includes (i) a stochastic model describing the consequences of wall adsorption in CE [84], (ii) the temperature-dependent interconversion models of dynamic electrophoresis [85][86][87][88], (iii) the simulation model for electroinjection analysis and electrophoretically mediated microanalysis [89], (iv) the affinity electrophoresis models of Andreev et al [90] and Fang and Chen [91][92][93][94], which describe affinity interactions in CE under simplified electromigration conditions, (v) the models of Cann and coworkers describing interacting systems in ZE [95], MBE [96] and IEF [97][98][99], (vi) the models predicting analyte separation in CEC [100][101][102][103][104], (vii) all multi-dimensional models that describe electrokinetically driven mass transport and separations in microfabricated chip devices, such as those of Ermakov et al [105], Bianchi et al [106], Chatterjee [107], Sounart and Baygents [108], Datta and Ghosal [109] and Hirokawa et al [110], (viii) the model of electrokinetic sample injection for capillary CZE with consideration of the electrode configuration [111], (ix) the models that predict sample zone formation, distortion and solute separation in continuous flow electrophoresis [112,113] and recycling electrophoresis [114][115][116], (x) the models describing off-gel electrophores...…”