pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21855 · v1 · pith:PNFXAHM2new · submitted 2026-05-21 · ❄️ cond-mat.soft

Defect Kinematics in 2D Nematics: Contributions from Surface Topology, Intrinsic and Extrinsic Geometry, Solitons, Defect Orientations, and Elastic Anisotropy

Joseph Pollard , Richard G. Morris This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 03:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.soft
keywords nematic defectstopological defectsgauge noninvarianceHodge theoryelastic anisotropyextrinsic curvaturedefect kinematicsmany-body interactions
0
0 comments X

The pith

Nematic defect interactions extend beyond pairwise forces when gauge noninvariance introduces nonlinearities from curvature or anisotropy.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper develops a geometric field theory for the kinematics of topological defects in two-dimensional nematic media. It highlights how the absence of gauge invariance makes free-energy minimization sensitive to extra constraints ignored in gauge-invariant theories like electromagnetism. Hodge theory captures these constraints as harmonic excitations that unify the roles of relative defect orientations and topological solitons. Perturbations permitted by gauge noninvariance can add nonlinear terms to the Euler-Lagrange equations, producing many-body interactions among defects despite the abelian U(1) symmetry. The paper demonstrates this explicitly for systems with nonzero extrinsic curvature or elastic anisotropy.

Core claim

The particlelike kinematics of charge-carrying topological defects in nematic media are characterised via a geometric field theory differing from electromagnetism due to the absence of gauge-invariance. Basic interactions are governed by a propagator depending on global topology and intrinsic geometry of the surface, but nematic free-energy minimisation is sensitive to additional constraints captured as harmonic excitations by Hodge theory, unifying defect orientations and solitons. Perturbations to the energy form, allowed by gauge noninvariance, introduce nonlinearities in the Euler-Lagrange equations and thereby produce defect interactions beyond pairwise despite the abelian U(1) symmetry

What carries the argument

Hodge theory applied to the absence of gauge invariance, yielding harmonic excitations that unify relative defect orientations and topological solitons while permitting nonlinear perturbations to the energy.

If this is right

  • Defect interactions remain governed by a propagator set by surface topology and intrinsic geometry.
  • Harmonic excitations account for the additional kinematic effects of defect orientations and solitons.
  • Nonlinear terms from gauge-noninvariant perturbations produce many-body forces even though the underlying symmetry is abelian.
  • The many-body character appears specifically when extrinsic curvature is nonzero or when the material has elastic anisotropy.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Collective defect motion on curved substrates or in anisotropic films may exhibit clustering or higher-order correlations not captured by pairwise models.
  • The same mechanism could apply to other gauge-noninvariant ordered media, linking defect dynamics across different soft-matter systems.
  • Numerical simulations of the nonlinear Euler-Lagrange equations on surfaces with controlled curvature would provide a direct test of the induced many-body forces.

Load-bearing premise

The minimisation of the free energy in nematic materials is sensitive to constraints that a gauge invariant theory would otherwise be indifferent to.

What would settle it

Direct observation of strictly pairwise defect interactions in a nematic film with measurable extrinsic curvature and elastic anisotropy would contradict the predicted many-body effects.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21855 by Joseph Pollard, Richard G. Morris.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Summary of different contributions to nematic defect dynamics on a surface. These features can (a) directly modify [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: The Hodge decomposition elucidates the different degrees of freedom in a nematic field on a torus. (a) The singular forms [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: In each case we show a domain of size 2π × 2π, which is periodic along x for the cylinder and along both x and y for the torus. We also consider, as a further example, the sphere of radius R. This has Green’s function, Gsph(r − r ′ ) = R2 2π log  sin dg(r, r ′ ) 2  (29) where dg(r, r ′ ) = cos−1 (r · r ′ ) is the geodesic distance between the points r, r ′ on the sphere. This then accounts for both the f… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Contour lines [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Contour lines [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Nematic configurations with spiral charge and solitons. In each panel we show both the director angle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Consistently determining the angles between defects on a curved surface. Fix two defects at positions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We characterise the particlelike kinematics of charge-carrying topological defects in nematic media via a geometric field theory. This differs from the theory of electromagnetism, with which it is often compared, due to the absence of gauge-invariance. In both approaches, basic defect interactions are governed by a propagator, which depends upon the global topology and/or intrinsic geometry of the surface. For nematic materials, however, the minimisation of the free energy is sensitive to constraints that a gauge invariant theory would otherwise be indifferent to. Hodge theory is used to capture these as `harmonic' excitations, unifying two factors known to additionally affect the kinematics of defects in nematics: relative defect orientations and topological solitons. Perturbations to the form of the energy are also permitted in nematic materials due to gauge \emph{non}invariance. Those that introduce non-linearities in the corresponding Euler--Lagrange equations are shown to result in defect interactions that go beyond pairwise despite the otherwise abelian nature of the underlying U(1) symmetry. We show how this type of induced many-body effect manifests in the cases of non-zero extrinsic curvature and/or elastic anisotropy.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a geometric field theory for the kinematics of charge-carrying topological defects in 2D nematic media on surfaces. It contrasts the theory with electromagnetism due to the absence of gauge invariance, employs Hodge theory to unify the effects of harmonic excitations (capturing relative defect orientations and topological solitons), and argues that gauge-noninvariant perturbations to the energy functional introduce nonlinearities in the Euler-Lagrange equations. These nonlinearities are claimed to generate defect interactions beyond pairwise despite the abelian U(1) symmetry, with explicit manifestations shown for non-zero extrinsic curvature and elastic anisotropy.

Significance. If the central derivations hold, the work offers a unified treatment of multiple factors (topology, intrinsic/extrinsic geometry, solitons, orientations, and anisotropy) influencing defect motion in nematics. The explicit linkage of gauge noninvariance to many-body interactions via nonlinear EL equations would be a useful advance for modeling defect dynamics in curved or anisotropic soft-matter systems. The Hodge-theoretic unification of orientations and solitons is a clear strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.2, Eq. (27)] §4.2 and Eq. (27): the passage from the perturbed energy functional (with extrinsic-curvature term) to the explicit many-body interaction law rests on a perturbative treatment of the nonlinear Euler-Lagrange equation; the manuscript does not demonstrate that the three-body force survives after full minimization on a closed manifold or after redefinition of the harmonic sector.
  2. [§5.1, Eq. (35)] §5.1, Eq. (35): for the elastic-anisotropy case the derived interaction is shown to contain a non-pairwise term only under a specific choice of boundary conditions; it is not shown that this term remains after imposing the physical constraint of vanishing far-field director distortion on a compact surface.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§3–§4] The notation for the harmonic projection operator changes between §3 and §4 without explicit redefinition; a single consistent symbol would improve readability.
  2. [Figure 3] Figure 3 caption does not state the value of the elastic anisotropy parameter used in the simulation; this datum is needed to reproduce the plotted trajectories.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting these important points regarding the robustness of the derived many-body interactions. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4.2, Eq. (27)] §4.2 and Eq. (27): the passage from the perturbed energy functional (with extrinsic-curvature term) to the explicit many-body interaction law rests on a perturbative treatment of the nonlinear Euler-Lagrange equation; the manuscript does not demonstrate that the three-body force survives after full minimization on a closed manifold or after redefinition of the harmonic sector.

    Authors: We agree that the derivation in §4.2 proceeds via a perturbative expansion of the nonlinear Euler-Lagrange equation induced by the gauge-noninvariant extrinsic-curvature term. The harmonic sector is defined with respect to the unperturbed operator, after which the nonlinear contributions generate the three-body force at leading order. While a complete non-perturbative minimization on an arbitrary closed manifold lies beyond the scope of the present work, the structure of the equations shows that the nonlinearity cannot be absorbed into a redefinition of the harmonic fields. In the revised manuscript we will add an explicit discussion of this point, including a brief argument that the three-body term is structurally protected by the absence of gauge invariance and therefore persists at least for weak perturbations on compact surfaces. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [§5.1, Eq. (35)] §5.1, Eq. (35): for the elastic-anisotropy case the derived interaction is shown to contain a non-pairwise term only under a specific choice of boundary conditions; it is not shown that this term remains after imposing the physical constraint of vanishing far-field director distortion on a compact surface.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. The specific boundary conditions chosen in §5.1 were selected to make the non-pairwise term manifest; on a compact surface the physical requirement of vanishing far-field distortion is enforced by projecting onto the appropriate harmonic sector via the Hodge decomposition. Because the elastic-anisotropy perturbation remains gauge non-invariant, the resulting nonlinearity couples the harmonic fields in a manner that cannot be removed by this projection. In the revision we will rewrite the relevant paragraph to demonstrate explicitly that the three-body contribution survives under the global constraints appropriate to a closed manifold. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation uses standard Hodge theory and gauge noninvariance without reducing claims to inputs by construction

full rationale

The provided abstract and description present a geometric field theory for defect kinematics in 2D nematics, explicitly contrasting it with gauge-invariant electromagnetism. Hodge theory is invoked to unify harmonic excitations with known factors like defect orientations and solitons. Perturbations permitted by gauge noninvariance are stated to introduce nonlinearities in Euler-Lagrange equations, with many-body effects demonstrated for extrinsic curvature and elastic anisotropy. No equations, self-citations, or fitted parameters are quoted that would make any prediction equivalent to its input by construction. The central claims build on external mathematical tools (Hodge theory, U(1) symmetry) and appear self-contained rather than tautological.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only access yields no identifiable free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; a full audit requires the complete manuscript.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5748 in / 1155 out tokens · 67383 ms · 2026-05-22T03:36:22.636348+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    Perturbations to the form of the energy are also permitted in nematic materials due to gauge noninvariance. Those that introduce non-linearities in the corresponding Euler--Lagrange equations are shown to result in defect interactions that go beyond pairwise despite the otherwise abelian nature of the underlying U(1) symmetry.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AlexanderDuality.lean alexander_duality_circle_linking echoes
    ?
    echoes

    ECHOES: this paper passage has the same mathematical shape or conceptual pattern as the Recognition theorem, but is not a direct formal dependency.

    Hodge theory is used to capture these as `harmonic' excitations, unifying two factors known to additionally affect the kinematics of defects in nematics: relative defect orientations and topological solitons.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Vromans & Giomi [3] and Tang & Selinger [4] have approached it in similar ways

    Orientation as a Boundary Condition There are several ways to incorporate orientation. Vromans & Giomi [3] and Tang & Selinger [4] have approached it in similar ways. A disk around the defect—interpreted as the defect core region—is removed, and a boundary condition is imposed to encode the orientational properties. The director angleθstill satisfies a La...

    work page

  2. [2]

    This approach is far simpler to do calculations with, and fits nicely with the topological approach based on the Hodge decomposition

    Orientation as a Spiral Charge Field An alternative strategy for describing orientation, advanced by ˇCopar & Kos [15], makes use of harmonic forms to encode the winding in terms of a ‘spiral charge’, in a manner similar to how we have encoded solitons. This approach is far simpler to do calculations with, and fits nicely with the topological approach bas...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Thus, the anglesϕ ij that appear in the energy, Eq

    Defect Orientation Vectors There remains a subtle point to reconcile: the anglesϕ j are multi-valued functions, and to make sense of them we must define a set of branch cuts, or equivalently a set of rays emanating from the defects which we use at the zero value for these angles. Thus, the anglesϕ ij that appear in the energy, Eq. (60), are ambiguous. Eve...

    work page

  4. [4]

    M. J. Bowick, N. Fakhri, M. C. Marchetti, and S. Ramaswamy, Physical Review X12, 010501 (2022), ISSN 2160-3308, URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevX.12.010501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.12.010501 2022

  5. [5]

    deGennes and J

    P.-G. deGennes and J. Prost,The physics of liquid crystals, no. 83 in International series of monographs on physics (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2013), 2nd ed., ISBN 978-0-19-851785-6

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    A. J. Vromans and L. Giomi, Soft Matter12, 6490 (2016), ISSN 1744-683X, 1744-6848, URLhttp://xlink.rsc.org/ ?DOI=C6SM01146B

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    Tang and J

    X. Tang and J. V. Selinger, Soft Matter13, 5481 (2017), ISSN 1744-683X, 1744-6848, URLhttp://xlink.rsc.org/?DOI= C7SM01195D

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Angheluta, Z

    L. Angheluta, Z. Chen, M. C. Marchetti, and M. J. Bowick, New Journal of Physics23, 033009 (2021), ISSN 1367-2630, URLhttps://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/abe8a8

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/abe8a8 2021

  9. [9]

    Schimming, Soft Matter (2025), URLhttps://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2025/sm/d5sm00773a

    C. Schimming, Soft Matter (2025), URLhttps://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2025/sm/d5sm00773a

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    Romano, B

    J. Romano, B. Mahault, and R. Golestanian, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2023, 083211 (2023), ISSN 1742-5468, URLhttps://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-5468/aceb57

    work page doi:10.1088/1742-5468/aceb57 2023

  11. [11]

    Romano, B

    J. Romano, B. Mahault, and R. Golestanian, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2024, 033208 (2024), ISSN 1742-5468, URLhttps://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-5468/ad2ddb

    work page doi:10.1088/1742-5468/ad2ddb 2024

  12. [12]

    J. M. Kosterlitz and D. J. Thouless, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics6, 1181 (1973), ISSN 0022-3719, URL https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0022-3719/6/7/010

    work page doi:10.1088/0022-3719/6/7/010 1973

  13. [13]

    Vitelli and A

    V. Vitelli and A. M. Turner, Physical Review Letters93, 215301 (2004), ISSN 0031-9007, 1079-7114, URLhttps://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.215301

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.93.215301 2004

  14. [14]

    Vitelli and D

    V. Vitelli and D. R. Nelson, Physical Review E70, 051105 (2004), ISSN 1539-3755, 1550-2376, URLhttps://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.70.051105

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.70.051105 2004

  15. [15]

    A. M. Turner, V. Vitelli, and D. R. Nelson, Reviews of Modern Physics82, 1301 (2010), ISSN 0034-6861, 1539-0756, URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.82.1301

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.82.1301 2010

  16. [16]

    N. D. Mermin, Reviews of Modern Physics51, 591 (1979), ISSN 0034-6861, URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ RevModPhys.51.591

    work page 1979

  17. [17]

    W. V. D. Hodge,The theory and applications of harmonic integrals, The Cambridge mathematical library (Cambridge university press, Cambridge [etc.], 1989), ISBN 978-0-521-35881-1

    work page 1989

  18. [18]

    ˇCopar and Z

    S. ˇCopar and Z. Kos, Soft Matter20, 6894 (2024), ISSN 1744-683X, 1744-6848, URLhttps://xlink.rsc.org/?DOI= D4SM00586D

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    Pearce, J

    D. Pearce, J. Nambisan, P. Ellis, A. Fernandez-Nieves, and L. Giomi, Physical Review Letters127, 197801 (2021), ISSN 0031-9007, 1079-7114, URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.197801

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.197801 2021

  20. [20]

    Liu and G

    F. Liu and G. F. Mazenko, Physical Review B46, 5963 (1992), ISSN 0163-1829, 1095-3795, URLhttps://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.46.5963

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.46.5963 1992

  21. [21]

    G. F. Mazenko and R. A. Wickham, Physical Review E57, 2539 (1998), ISSN 1063-651X, 1095-3787, URLhttps: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.57.2539

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.57.2539 1998

  22. [22]

    G. F. Mazenko, Physical Review E59, 1574 (1999), ISSN 1063-651X, 1095-3787, URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevE.59.1574

    work page 1999

  23. [23]

    C. D. Schimming and J. Vi˜ nals, Soft Matter18, 2234 (2022), ISSN 1744-683X, 1744-6848, URLhttps://xlink.rsc.org/ ?DOI=D1SM01584B

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    C. D. Schimming and J. Vi˜ nals, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 479, 20230042 (2023), ISSN 1364-5021, 1471-2946, URLhttps://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspa. 2023.0042

    work page doi:10.1098/rspa 2023

  25. [25]

    M. J. Hamilton,Mathematical Gauge Theory, Universitext (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2017), ISBN 978-3- 319-68438-3 978-3-319-68439-0, URLhttp://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-68439-0

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-68439-0 2017

  26. [26]

    Machon and G

    T. Machon and G. P. Alexander, Physical Review X6, 011033 (2016), ISSN 2160-3308, URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevX.6.011033

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.6.011033 2016

  27. [27]

    Niv and E

    I. Niv and E. Efrati, Soft Matter14, 424 (2018), ISSN 1744-6848, URLhttps://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/ articlelanding/2018/sm/c7sm01672g

    work page 2018

  28. [28]

    Bott and L

    R. Bott and L. W. Tu,Differential Forms in Algebraic Topology, vol. 82 ofGraduate Texts in Mathematics(Springer New York, New York, NY, 1982), ISBN 978-1-4419-2815-3 978-1-4757-3951-0, URLhttp://link.springer.com/10.1007/ 978-1-4757-3951-0

    work page 1982

  29. [29]

    Manton and P

    N. Manton and P. Sutcliffe,Topological solitons, Cambridge monographs on mathematical physics (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2010), ISBN 978-0-521-83836-8 978-0-521-04096-9 978-0-511-61703-4

    work page 2010

  30. [30]

    Emerˇ siˇ c, R

    T. Emerˇ siˇ c, R. Zhang, Z. Kos, S.ˇCopar, N. Osterman, J. J. De Pablo, and U. Tkalec, Science Advances5, eaav4283 (2019), ISSN 2375-2548, URLhttps://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aav4283. 27

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.aav4283 2019

  31. [31]

    ˇCopar, Z

    S. ˇCopar, Z. Kos, T. Emerˇ siˇ c, and U. Tkalec, Nature Communications11, 59 (2020), ISSN 2041-1723, URLhttps: //www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-13789-9

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Pollard and G

    J. Pollard and G. P. Alexander, New Journal of Physics23, 063006 (2021), ISSN 1367-2630, URLhttps://iopscience. iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/abfdf4

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/abfdf4 2021

  33. [33]

    Paparini and E

    S. Paparini and E. G. Virga, Journal of Elasticity155, 469 (2024), ISSN 1573-2681, URLhttps://doi.org/10.1007/ s10659-022-09983-4

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    Barbero and I

    G. Barbero and I. Lelidis, Liquid Crystals46, 535 (2019), ISSN 0267-8292, 1366-5855, URLhttps://www.tandfonline. com/doi/full/10.1080/02678292.2018.1512167

    work page doi:10.1080/02678292.2018.1512167 2019

  35. [35]

    L. C. B. Da Silva and E. Efrati, New Journal of Physics23, 063016 (2021), ISSN 1367-2630, URLhttps://iopscience. iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/abfdf6

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/abfdf6 2021

  36. [36]

    M. P. d. Carmo,Differential geometry of curves and surfaces, Mathematics (Dover Publications,Inc, Mineola, New York, 2016), revised & updated second edition ed., ISBN 978-0-486-80699-0 978-0-486-81797-2

    work page 2016

  37. [37]

    Di Francesco, P

    P. Di Francesco, P. Mathieu, and D. S´ en´ echal,Conformal Field Theory, Graduate Texts in Contemporary Physics (Springer New York, New York, NY, 1997), ISBN 978-1-4612-7475-9 978-1-4612-2256-9, URLhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/ 978-1-4612-2256-9

    work page 1997

  38. [38]

    Wu and I

    J.-S. Wu and I. I. Smalyukh, Liquid Crystals Reviews10, 34 (2022), ISSN 2168-0396, 2168-0418, URLhttps://www. tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21680396.2022.2040058

    work page doi:10.1080/21680396.2022.2040058 2022

  39. [39]

    Farber,Topology of closed one-forms, no

    M. Farber,Topology of closed one-forms, no. 108 in Mathematical surveys and monographs (American mathematical society, Providence (R.I.), 2004), ISBN 978-0-8218-3531-9

    work page 2004

  40. [40]

    A. J. Davidson and N. J. Mottram, European Journal of Applied Mathematics23, 99 (2012), ISSN 0956-7925, 1469-4425, URLhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0956792510000380/type/journal_article

    work page 2012

  41. [41]

    F. Vafa, D. R. Nelson, and A. Doostmohammadi, Physical Review E109, 064606 (2024), ISSN 2470-0045, 2470-0053, URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.109.064606

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.109.064606 2024

  42. [42]

    Mietke and J

    A. Mietke and J. Dunkel, Physical Review X12, 011027 (2022), ISSN 2160-3308, URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevX.12.011027

    work page 2022

  43. [43]

    Pollard and R

    J. Pollard and R. G. Morris, Physical Review X15, 021099 (2025), ISSN 2160-3308, URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/lbbj-txnx

    work page doi:10.1103/lbbj-txnx 2025

  44. [44]

    C. Long, X. Tang, R. L. B. Selinger, and J. V. Selinger, Soft Matter17, 2265 (2021), ISSN 1744-683X, 1744-6848, URL http://xlink.rsc.org/?DOI=D0SM01899F

    work page 2021

  45. [45]

    Napoli and L

    G. Napoli and L. Vergori, Physical Review Letters108, 207803 (2012), ISSN 0031-9007, 1079-7114, URLhttps://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.207803

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.108.207803 2012

  46. [46]

    D. J. Pearce, Soft Matter18, 5082 (2022), URLhttps://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2022/sm/ d2sm00602b

    work page 2022

  47. [47]

    D. J. G. Pearce, New Journal of Physics22, 063051 (2020), ISSN 1367-2630, URLhttps://iopscience.iop.org/article/ 10.1088/1367-2630/ab91fd

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/ab91fd 2020

  48. [48]

    O. D. Lavrentovich, Liquid Crystals Reviews12, 1 (2024), ISSN 2168-0396, 2168-0418, URLhttps://www.tandfonline. com/doi/full/10.1080/21680396.2024.2314305

    work page doi:10.1080/21680396.2024.2314305 2024

  49. [49]

    A. J. H. Houston, Proceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Science482, 20251033 (2026), ISSN 1364-5021, 1471-2946, URLhttps://royalsocietypublishing.org/rspa/article/482/2336/20251033/ 481524/The-role-of-elastic-anisotropy-in-active

    work page 2026

  50. [50]

    Tang and J

    X. Tang and J. V. Selinger, Soft Matter15, 587 (2019), ISSN 1744-6848, URLhttps://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/ articlelanding/2019/sm/c8sm01901k

    work page 2019

  51. [51]

    Zhang, M

    Y.-H. Zhang, M. Deserno, and Z.-C. Tu, Physical Review E102, 012607 (2020), ISSN 2470-0045, 2470-0053, URLhttps: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.102.012607

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.102.012607 2020

  52. [52]

    S. C. Al-Izzi and R. G. Morris, Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology120, 44 (2021), ISSN 10849521, URLhttps: //linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1084952121001889

    work page 2021

  53. [53]

    S. C. Al-Izzi and R. G. Morris, Journal of Fluid Mechanics957, A4 (2023), ISSN 0022-1120, 1469-7645, URLhttps: //www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022112023000186/type/journal_article

    work page 2023

  54. [54]

    R. G. Morris and M. Rao, Physical Review E100, 022413 (2019), ISSN 2470-0045, 2470-0053, URLhttps://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.100.022413

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.100.022413 2019