我们提出了一种图随机游走（GRW）方法，用于研究时间飞行（time-of-flight）范围内复杂分子材料的电荷传输特性。构成材料的分子被表示为有向加权图的顶点，而电荷载流子则被视为随机游走者。边的权重代表电荷载流子沿边跳跃的基本过程速率，由涉及顶点的能量和相互作用强度的组合决定。为了考虑泡利不相容原理，我们在随机游走中引入了排斥机制。在飞行时间实验中，电荷载流子被注入到材料中，并记录其到达收集电极所需的时间。我们的方法允许通过稀疏线性系统直接评估收集节点的预期击中时间，避免了基于高维主方程显式时间演化或从动力学蒙特卡洛（KMC）方法求解的数值繁琐且可能波动的方法。我们通过使用代理晶格模型对真实材料的单个和多个载流子在扩散和漂移-扩散区域内的电荷动力学进行数值研究来验证GRW方法的有效性，该代理晶格模型是在结合量子力学和分子力学方法的多尺度模型框架内模拟的。代理模型允许从基准线调整不同类型和强度的能量无序。与主方程的结果比较证实了两种方法在数值实现中的理论等价性。此外，我们进一步表明，由于采样不足，KMC结果显示出显著偏差。总的来说，我们发现GRW方法为常用的电荷传输模拟方法提供了一种强大的替代方案，且不存在采样问题，并充分利用了稀疏矩阵方法的优势。

We present a graph random walk (GRW) method for the study of charge transport properties of complex molecular materials in the time-of-flight regime. The molecules forming the material are represented by the vertices of a directed weighted graph, and the charge carriers are random walkers. The edge weights are rates for elementary jumping processes for a charge carrier to move along the edge and are determined from a combination of the energies of the involved vertices and an interaction strength. Exclusions are built into the random walk to account for the Pauli exclusion principle. In time-of-flight experiments, charge carriers are injected into the material and the time until they reach a collecting electrode is recorded. Our approach allows direct evaluation of the expected hitting time of the collecting nodes in terms of a sparse, linear system, avoiding numerically cumbersome and potentially fluctuations-prone methods based on explicit time evolution from solutions of a high-dimensional Master Equation or from kinetic Monte Carlo (KMC). We validate the GRW approach by numerical studies of charge dynamics of single and multiple carriers in diffusive and drift-diffusive regimes using a surrogate lattice model of a realistic material whose properties have been simulated within a multiscale model framework combining quantum-mechanical and molecular-mechanics methods. The surrogate model allows varying types and strengths of energetic disorder from the reference baseline. Comparison with results from the Master Equation confirms the theoretical equivalence of both approaches also in numerical implementations. We further show that KMC results show substantial deviations due to inadequate sampling. All in all, we find that the GRW method provides a powerful alternative to the more commonly used methods without sampling issues and with the benefit of making use of sparse matrix methods.