Arnold tongue entrainment reveals dynamical principles of the embryonic segmentation clock
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Living systems exhibit an unmatched complexity, due to countless, entangled interactions across scales. Here, we aim to understand a complex system, that is, segmentation timing in mouse embryos, without a reference to these detailed interactions. To this end, we develop a coarse-grained approach, in which theory guides the experimental identification of the segmentation clock entrainment responses. We demonstrate period- and phase-locking of the segmentation clock across a wide range of entrainment parameters, including higher-order coupling. These quantifications allow to derive the phase response curve (PRC) and Arnold tongues of the segmentation clock, revealing its essential dynamical properties. Our results indicate that the somite segmentation clock has characteristics reminiscent of a highly non-linear oscillator close to an infinite period bifurcation and suggests the presence of long-term feedbacks. Combined, this coarse-grained theoretical-experimental approach reveals how we can derive simple, essential features of a highly complex dynamical system, providing precise experimental control over the pace and rhythm of the somite segmentation clock.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".