Upload
nascha
View
34
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Inferring effective forces in collective motion. Yael Katz , Christos Ioannou , Kolbjørn Tunstrøm and Iain Couzin Dept. of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology Princeton University Cristi á n Huepe - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Inferring effective forces in collective motion
Yael Katz, Christos Ioannou, Kolbjørn Tunstrøm and Iain Couzin Dept. of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology Princeton University
Cristián Huepe Unaffiliated NSF Grantee Cristian Huepe Labs Inc. - Chicago IL
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grants No. DMS-0507745 & PHY-0848755
Outline• Overview
Background Some basic models of collective
motion Challenge: The inverse problem
• A detailed effective-force analysis Fish schooling: quasi 2D experiments Model-free approach Effective-forces: results
Motivation Collective motion is observed in diverse animal species,
not only in bacteria. Fish schools & bird flocks can involve from a few
individuals to several thousands Locust swarms can contain 109 individuals traveling
thousands of kilometers
– Background
Current efforts Quantitative experiments Distinguishing generic and specific behaviors
Challenges in modeling Different models produce similar dynamics We can be prejudiced by familiar interactions
The inverse problem: Deducing the interaction rules from collective
dynamics
– Challenges
Intuitive flocking algorithm (Craig Reynolds – Sony)
Generic rules (from computer graphics)
– Flocks, Herds, and Schools: A Distributed Behavioral Model Computer Graphics, 21(4), pp. 25-34, 1987
– Defined Boids and simple interaction rules:
▪ Separation
▪ Alignment
▪ Cohesion
Motivation Non-equilibrium swarming dynamics Emerging collective behavior Statistical description Complex behavior
The Vicsek model
Other models Agent-based algorithms
Discrete time Continuous time (ODEs)
Field-based descriptions (PDEs)
– The Vicsek model
The “zones” model
– A more biological model
Journal of Theoretical Biology (2002) 218, 1-11I. D. Couzin, J. Krause, R. James, G. D. Ruxton &N. R. Franks
- “Insect-like” swarm:
- Torus, “milling”:
- Migration, flocking:
Different algorithms yield similar collective motion What interactions are animal swarms actually using? Are we making underlying assumptions? In other words:
Can we properly address the inverse problem?
- Challenge: The inverse problem
Outline• Overview
Background Some basic models of collective
motion Challenge: The inverse problem
• A detailed effective-force analysis Fish schooling: quasi 2D experiments Model-free approach Effective-forces: results
Experimental System
Work with:
Prof Iain Couzin, Dr Yael Katz,
Dr Kolbjørn Tunstrøm
Dr Christos Ioannou
Other collaborators:Dr Andrey SokolovAndrew Hartnett,
Etc.
Princeton University
1000 fish dynamics
1000 fish dynamics
Method Measure mean effective forces on 2-fish & 3-fish systems Use large dataset: 14 experiments of 56 minutes each Use classical mechanics formalism (force-driven systems)
F=ma & trajectories given by (q,p) per degree of freedom
Goals “Model-free” approach on clear mathematical grounds Gain intuition over multiple possible dynamical dependencies Study deviations from classical mechanics
Memory, higher-order interactions, etc.
Other methods Maximum entropy Bayesian inference
The effective-force approach
Space-like variables: Distance front-back Distance left-right
Velocity-like variables: Neighbor fish speed Focal fish speed Relative heading
Acceleration-like variables? Neighbor fish turning rate Neighbor fish speeding Focal fish turning rate Focal fish speeding
The two-fish system
Position-dependent forces
• Zero force high density
• ||v||>0.5 BL/s
• F||(y), F=(x)
Velocity-dependent forces
• Higher speed larger forces & preferred y-distance
• Aligned Higher F||
• Misaligned Higher F
Temporal correlation
Orientation information Front to back
Speed information Both ways
The three-body problem
Intrinsic 3-body interaction
Best match:
2neigbor 1neigbor 223 7.0 SS FFF 2neigbor 1neigbor 223 4.0 TT FFF
Residual 3-body interaction:“Non-negligible” “Negligible”
Best match:
Residual 3-body interaction:
Conclusions
Using an effective-force approach we found that: Within the interaction zone, speeding depends mainly on front-back
distance, and turning on left-right distance Trailing fish turn to follow fish in front but adjust speed to follow
neighbors in front or behind Alignment emerges from attraction/repulsion interactions:
No evidence for explicit alignment Tuning response is approximately averaged while speeding is between
averaging and additive Speeding response follows no linear superposition principle: Residual
intrinsic three-body interaction
New models and simulations to analyze
New statistical/emergent properties to find … Fin
… Fin