Nonreciprocal synchronization in embryonic oscillator ensembles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Synchronization of coupled oscillators is a universal phenomenon encountered across different scales and contexts e.g., chemical wave patterns, superconductors and the unison applause we witness in concert halls. The existence of common underlying coupling rules define universality classes, revealing a fundamental sameness between seemingly distinct systems. Identifying rules of synchronization in any particular setting is hence of paramount relevance. Here, we address the coupling rules within an embryonic oscillator ensemble linked to vertebrate embryo body axis segmentation. In vertebrates, the periodic segmentation of the body axis involves synchronized signaling oscillations in cells within the presomitic mesoderm (PSM), from which somites, the pre-vertebrae, form. At the molecular level, it is known that intact Notch-signaling and cell-to-cell contact is required for synchronization between PSM cells. However, an understanding of the coupling rules is still lacking. To identify these, we develop a novel experimental assay that enables direct quantification of synchronization dynamics within mixtures of oscillating cell ensembles, for which the initial input frequency and phase distribution are known. Our results reveal a “winner-takes-it-all” synchronization outcome i.e., the emerging collective rhythm matches one of the input rhythms. Using a combination of theory and experimental validation, we develop a new coupling model, the “Rectified Kuramoto” (ReKu) model, characterized by a phase-dependent, non-reciprocal interaction in the coupling of oscillatory cells. Such non-reciprocal synchronization rules reveal fundamental similarities between embryonic oscillators and a class of collective behaviours seen in neurons and fireflies, where higher level computations are performed and linked to non-reciprocal synchronization.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".