Free-energy landscapes govern the behavior of all interactions in the presence of thermal fluctuations in the fields of physical chemistry, materials sciences, and the biological sciences. From the energy landscape, critical information about an interaction, such as the reaction kinetic rates, bond lifetimes, and the presence of intermediate states, can be determined. Despite the importance of energy landscapes to understanding reaction mechanisms, most experiments do not directly measure energy landscapes, particularly for interactions with steep force gradients that lead to premature jump to contact of the probe and insufficient sampling of transition regions. Here we present an atomic force microscopy (AFM) approach for measuring energy landscapes that increases sampling of strongly adhesive interactions by using white-noise excitation to enhance the cantilever's thermal fluctuations. The enhanced fluctuations enable the recording of subtle deviations from a harmonic potential to accurately reconstruct interfacial energy landscapes with steep gradients. Comparing the measured energy landscape with adhesive force measurements reveals the existence of an optimal excitation voltage that enables the cantilever fluctuations to fully sample the shape and depth of the energy surface.atomic force microscopy | energy landscape | interfacial energy | stochastic excitation | dynamic force spectroscopy E nergy landscapes mediate all physical, chemical, and biological interfacial interactions (1-8). Therefore, determining the magnitude and profile of landscapes at the nanoscale is critical to understanding and controlling these processes. Current measurement tools, such as the surface force apparatus (9, 10), optical traps (11-13), and atomic force microscopy (AFM) (14-16) are valuable for measuring minute forces at high resolution and have validated theoretical relationships describing short-range interfacial adhesion forces (17)(18)(19).Conventional interaction force profiles are measured using force-distance curves, in which a soft spring deflects in response to interfacial electrostatic, van der Waals, and hydration forces, and with the average spring position corresponding to the magnitude of the force for each separation distance (20, 21). Although force interactions are important, they are insufficient for direct comparison with energy measurements of bulk assays (22, 23) and simulations (24, 25). Obtaining energy profiles by integrating the measured forces is problematic due to inaccuracies in the measured force and separation at small distances, especially where force gradients are large and the probe position does not accurately reflect tip-sample force due to inertia (26). This problem appears in AFM force curves as snap-in behavior resulting from large gradient attractive forces that exceed the probe spring constant (27,28). Using stiffer cantilevers to prevent snap-in reduces sensitivity to forces at all length scales (29), especially subtle, near-surface force-field variations that extend over subnanometer d...