On the duality between interaction responses and mutual positions in flocking and schooling.

Andrea Perna, Guillaume Grégoire, Richard P Mann
Author Information
  1. Andrea Perna: Paris Interdisciplinary Energy Research Institute, Paris Diderot University, 10 rue Alice Domon et Léonie Duquet, Paris, 75013 France.
  2. Guillaume Grégoire: Laboratoire Matiere Systemes Complexes, Paris Diderot University, 10 rue Alice Domon et Léonie Duquet, Paris, 75013 France.
  3. Richard P Mann: Mathematics Department, Uppsala University, Lägerhyddsvägen 1, Uppsala, 75754 Sweden ; Chair of Sociology, in particular of Modeling and Simulations, ETH Zürich, Clausiusstrasse 50, Zürich, 8092 Switzerland.

Abstract

Recent research in animal behaviour has contributed to determine how alignment, turning responses, and changes of speed mediate flocking and schooling interactions in different animal species. Here, we propose a complementary approach to the analysis of flocking phenomena, based on the idea that animals occupy preferential, anysotropic positions with respect to their neighbours, and devote a large amount of their interaction responses to maintaining their mutual positions. We test our approach by deriving the apparent alignment and attraction responses from simulated trajectories of animals moving side by side, or one in front of the other. We show that the anisotropic positioning of individuals, in combination with noise, is sufficient to reproduce several aspects of the movement responses observed in real animal groups. This anisotropy at the level of interactions should be considered explicitly in future models of flocking and schooling. By making a distinction between interaction responses involved in maintaining a preferred flock configuration, and interaction responses directed at changing it, our work provides a frame to discriminate movement interactions that signal directional conflict from interactions underlying consensual group motion.

Keywords

References

  1. PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e22827 [PMID: 21829657]
  2. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Jul 13;107(28):12576-80 [PMID: 20616032]
  3. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Nov 15;108(46):18720-5 [PMID: 21795604]
  4. J Theor Biol. 2011 Aug 21;283(1):145-51 [PMID: 21620861]
  5. PLoS Comput Biol. 2012;8(9):e1002678 [PMID: 23028277]
  6. J Theor Biol. 2002 Sep 7;218(1):1-11 [PMID: 12297066]
  7. J R Soc Interface. 2013 Sep 25;10(89):20130529 [PMID: 24068173]
  8. Nature. 2010 Apr 8;464(7290):890-3 [PMID: 20376149]
  9. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Mar 27;109(13):4786-91 [PMID: 22427355]
  10. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Nov 15;108(46):18726-31 [PMID: 22065759]
  11. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2006 Sep;74(3 Pt 1):030904 [PMID: 17025586]
  12. Phys Rev Lett. 2009 Jan 9;102(1):010602 [PMID: 19257176]
  13. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2014 Jan;89(1):010302 [PMID: 24580155]
  14. J Phys Condens Matter. 2012 Nov 21;24(46):464130 [PMID: 23114651]
  15. Interface Focus. 2012 Dec 6;2(6):764-73 [PMID: 23173077]
  16. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Jan 29;105(4):1232-7 [PMID: 18227508]
  17. Interface Focus. 2012 Dec 6;2(6):757-63 [PMID: 24312729]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0responsesflockinginteractionsinteractionanimalschoolingpositionsalignmentapproachanalysisanimalsmaintainingmutualsidemovementmotionRecentresearchbehaviourcontributeddetermineturningchangesspeedmediatedifferentspeciesproposecomplementaryphenomenabasedideaoccupypreferentialanysotropicrespectneighboursdevotelargeamounttestderivingapparentattractionsimulatedtrajectoriesmovingonefrontshowanisotropicpositioningindividualscombinationnoisesufficientreproduceseveralaspectsobservedrealgroupsanisotropylevelconsideredexplicitlyfuturemodelsmakingdistinctioninvolvedpreferredflockconfigurationdirectedchangingworkprovidesframediscriminatesignaldirectionalconflictunderlyingconsensualgroupdualityCollectiveFlockingMovementSchooling

Similar Articles

Cited By