pith. sign in

arxiv: 2504.20565 · v2 · submitted 2025-04-29 · 🧬 q-bio.QM · q-bio.PE

DLCM: a versatile multi-level solver for heterogeneous multicellular systems

Erik Blom , Stefan Engblom This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 18:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧬 q-bio.QM q-bio.PE
keywords multicellular systemscell mechanicssurface tensionstochastic simulationpressure-driven migrationreaction-diffusioncomputational modelingcell sorting
0
0 comments X

The pith

A solver couples cellular pressure to population curvature via elliptic projection to include surface tension between cell groups.

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

The paper presents a computational solver for modeling populations of interacting cells in space while keeping the approach efficient and based on measurable parameters. Cells are treated as discrete entities on a lattice with movements and reactions occurring through a continuous-time Markov chain, yet continuous fields such as pressure and chemical concentrations are handled on the grid. The central advance links cell pressure directly to the curvature of cell clusters through an elliptic projection step, which incorporates mechanical effects like surface tension at interfaces between different cell types. This setup supports simulations of processes including cell sorting, signaling, tumor expansion, and directed movement, and the authors show that the computational cost scales optimally for pressure-driven migration. A sympathetic reader would care because the method aims to let biologists test specific mechanistic ideas about how cell groups self-organize without requiring either extreme simplification or prohibitive run times.

Core claim

The DLCM-solver treats cells as discrete objects on a fixed lattice and advances their positions and states via continuous-time Markov chain reaction-transport events while supporting continuous microenvironment quantities through the framework. Space-continuous pressure and chemical fields are projected onto the grid, and an essential feature couples cellular pressure to the curvature of cell populations by elliptic projection, thereby including surface tension between populations. The solver is constructed as a module that integrates with intracellular models and is demonstrated on benchmark cases of cell sorting, cellular signaling, tumor growth, and chemotaxis; formal complexity analysis

What carries the argument

elliptic projection that couples cellular pressure to the curvature of cell populations on the computational grid, allowing surface tension effects

If this is right

  • Surface tension between cell populations can be included directly through the pressure-curvature coupling.
  • Models of chemotaxis, mechanotaxis, nutrient-driven growth, and death become feasible within the same framework.
  • Computational complexity is theoretically optimal for systems driven by pressure-based cell migration.
  • Intra-cellular reaction networks can be combined with the extracellular mechanical and chemical features handled by the solver.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The approach could be tested against quantitative measurements of boundary curvature in mixed cell cultures to check whether the projection step reproduces observed interface sharpening.
  • It opens a route to examine how varying surface tension strengths alter the stability of tumor spheroids or embryonic tissue layers in parameter sweeps.
  • Adaptive mesh refinement around high-curvature regions might further reduce cost while preserving the pressure-curvature link for large-scale tissue simulations.

Load-bearing premise

That discrete cells on a fixed lattice combined with continuous-time Markov chain events can represent the continuous physical and biological dynamics of heterogeneous multicellular systems well enough for mechanistic study.

What would settle it

A simulation of cell sorting or tumor growth that produces interface shapes or migration rates differing substantially from direct experimental measurements of the same quantities when surface tension is the dominant mechanical factor.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.20565 by Erik Blom, Stefan Engblom.

Figure 2.1
Figure 2.1. Figure 2.1: The two-level structure of the DLCM framework. Top: the outer pop￾ulation level where cells are represented by their state vector residing in discrete voxels on a grid, and whose position and phenotype change by state update rules in time-increments of scale dt. Green represents occupied voxels. The blue line connects the centers of the two voxels, Ωi and Ωj , and the red line is their shared edge: dij a… view at source ↗
Figure 2.2
Figure 2.2. Figure 2.2: Impact of elliptic projection penalty parameter on the curvature eval￾uation. The pressure distribution (top row, colormap range capped to [−4, 4]) and corre￾sponding isolines (bottom row) for a circular population with a smaller circle removed from it. The boundary values are equal to the curvature (i.e., σ10 = 1 and p = 0 outside the popu￾lation, cf. (2.6)) as estimated from Algorithm 1. From left to r… view at source ↗
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.1. Figure 3.1: Cell sorting experiments. Three examples of spontaneous sorting of cells of two different types from an initially random configuration (left), to a segregated population (right). The top row shows the symmetric experiment with an equal number of cells of both types. The rows below show the asymmetric experiments, with 25% and 12.5% cells of type 2 (purple), respectively. Engulfment occurs when the second… view at source ↗
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.2. Figure 3.2: Cell signaling experiments. Outcome of the Delta-Notch model with prolifer￾ation, showing Delta values in each voxel normalized to [0, 1]. The top row shows the model with continuous internal state, and the bottom row the corresponding discrete model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.3. Figure 3.3: Avascular tumor growth experiments. Red cells have sufficient oxygen and are proliferating, green cells are quiescent due to lack of oxygen, and black cells are necrotic (cf. (3.5)), with darker shades indicating that a voxel contains two cells. Figures a)–d) show the tumor growth in time, and figures e), f ), highlight the morphological discrepancy that emerges due to high and low surface tension coeffi… view at source ↗
Figure 3.4
Figure 3.4. Figure 3.4: Four chemotaxis models in two dimensions. Mean cell number over 100 simulations of a variety of simple chemotaxis models. a): pressure-driven migration and chemotaxis; b): diffusion-driven migration and chemotaxis; c): pressure-driven migration with cells consuming a chemo-repellent; migration and signals defined by (3.7) and (3.9). d): migration down the gradient of a field that couples the pressure and… view at source ↗
Figure 3.5
Figure 3.5. Figure 3.5: Chemotaxis model in three dimensions Cells emit a substance that diffuses and attracts other cells proportionally to a cell specific signaling sensitivity χ. Figures a) and b) show the sensitivity levels of cells in the population at t = 0 and t = 105 , respectively. Figures c) and d) show the corresponding population and its shadow in the xy plane. Doubly occupied voxels in red. A small amount of cells … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Computational modeling of multicellular systems may aid in untangling cellular dynamics and emergent properties of biological cell populations. A key challenge is to balance the level of model detail and the computational efficiency, while using physically interpretable parameters to facilitate meaningful comparisons with biological data. For this purpose, we present the DLCM-solver (discrete Laplacian cell mechanics), a flexible and efficient computational solver for spatial and stochastic simulations of populations of cells, developed from first principle to support mechanistic investigations. The solver has been designed as a module in URDME, the unstructured reaction-diffusion master equation open software framework, to allow for the integration of intra-cellular models with extra-cellular features handled by the DLCM. The solver manages discrete cells on a fixed lattice and reaction-transport events in a continuous-time Markov chain. Space-continuous micro-environment quantities such as pressure and chemical substances are supported by the framework, permitting a variety of modeling choices concerning chemotaxis, mechanotaxis, nutrient-driven cell growth and death, among others. An essential and novel feature of the DLCM-solver is the coupling of cellular pressure to the curvature of the cell populations by elliptic projection onto the computational grid, with which we can include effects from surface tension between populations. We demonstrate the flexibility of the framework by implementing benchmark problems of cell sorting, cellular signaling, tumor growth, and chemotaxis models. We additionally formally analyze the computational complexity and show that it is theoretically optimal for systems based on pressure-driven cell migration. In summary, the solver balances efficiency and a relatively fine resolution, while supporting a high level of interpretability.

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 introduces the DLCM-solver as a module within the URDME framework for spatial stochastic simulations of heterogeneous multicellular systems. It models discrete cells on a fixed lattice with continuous-time Markov chain reaction-transport events, while supporting continuous fields for pressure and chemical substances to enable processes such as chemotaxis and mechanotaxis. A central feature is the use of elliptic projection to couple cellular pressure to the curvature of cell populations, allowing inclusion of surface tension effects. The work demonstrates the solver on benchmarks including cell sorting, cellular signaling, tumor growth, and chemotaxis, and provides a formal complexity analysis claiming theoretical optimality for pressure-driven migration.

Significance. If the elliptic projection method is shown to accurately recover physically consistent surface tension behavior, the DLCM-solver could provide a valuable, interpretable, and efficient tool for mechanistic investigations of multicellular dynamics that bridges discrete cell representations with continuum mechanical effects. The integration with the open URDME framework and the formal complexity analysis (showing optimality for pressure-driven cases) are explicit strengths that enhance extensibility and reproducibility.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and DLCM-solver description] Abstract and DLCM-solver description: The claim that the elliptic projection onto the computational grid couples cellular pressure to population curvature to include surface tension effects is load-bearing for the central contribution. However, the manuscript provides no mesh refinement study, comparison to analytic solutions (such as Young-Laplace pressure jumps across a circular interface or equilibrium droplet shapes), or quantitative error metrics to confirm that the discrete-lattice approximation recovers expected curvature-driven forces without lattice artifacts.
  2. [Benchmark problems section] Benchmark problems section: The demonstrations of cell sorting and tumor growth models are presented to show flexibility, but lack specific quantitative validation of the surface tension implementation (e.g., measured sorting energetics or interface pressure consistency). This weakens support for the mechanistic interpretability asserted in the abstract.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Methods] The description of how the elliptic projection is discretized and solved on the unstructured grid could benefit from an explicit equation or pseudocode to clarify implementation details for readers.
  2. [Results] A few figure captions in the benchmark results could be expanded to include the specific parameter values used for surface tension strength.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and insightful comments, which highlight important aspects of validating the elliptic projection method. We address each major comment point by point below and will incorporate revisions to provide the requested quantitative support.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and DLCM-solver description] Abstract and DLCM-solver description: The claim that the elliptic projection onto the computational grid couples cellular pressure to population curvature to include surface tension effects is load-bearing for the central contribution. However, the manuscript provides no mesh refinement study, comparison to analytic solutions (such as Young-Laplace pressure jumps across a circular interface or equilibrium droplet shapes), or quantitative error metrics to confirm that the discrete-lattice approximation recovers expected curvature-driven forces without lattice artifacts.

    Authors: We agree that the absence of explicit validation studies for the elliptic projection leaves the central claim insufficiently supported. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated validation subsection that includes direct comparisons to analytic solutions (Young-Laplace pressure jump across a circular interface and equilibrium droplet shapes), a mesh-refinement study, and quantitative error metrics. These additions will demonstrate convergence and the absence of dominant lattice artifacts, thereby strengthening the mechanistic foundation of the surface-tension implementation. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Benchmark problems section] Benchmark problems section: The demonstrations of cell sorting and tumor growth models are presented to show flexibility, but lack specific quantitative validation of the surface tension implementation (e.g., measured sorting energetics or interface pressure consistency). This weakens support for the mechanistic interpretability asserted in the abstract.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the current benchmark presentations would be strengthened by quantitative metrics that directly probe the surface-tension effects. We will revise the benchmark section to report measured sorting energetics for the cell-sorting example and interface pressure consistency for the tumor-growth model, comparing these quantities to the expected behavior derived from the imposed surface-tension parameters. This will provide concrete evidence for the interpretability of the mechanochemical coupling. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in DLCM solver presentation

full rationale

The paper presents DLCM as a new solver module within URDME, with the elliptic projection for pressure-curvature coupling described as an implemented feature rather than a derived prediction. Benchmarks (cell sorting, tumor growth) and complexity analysis are shown as demonstrations of the framework, without any reduction of outputs to fitted parameters, self-referential definitions, or load-bearing self-citations that collapse the central claim. The derivation chain for the solver mechanics remains independent of the target results, consistent with a standard computational methods contribution.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on standard domain assumptions from lattice-based and stochastic reaction-diffusion modeling without introducing new free parameters or invented entities beyond the solver framework itself.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Discrete cells on a fixed lattice with continuous-time Markov chain events can represent multicellular dynamics.
    This is the foundational modeling choice stated in the abstract for the DLCM approach.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5821 in / 1332 out tokens · 62964 ms · 2026-05-22T18:38:30.836158+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.

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

33 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Keller-Segel chemotaxis models: A review

    G. Arumugam and J. Tyagi. “Keller-Segel chemotaxis models: A review”. In: Acta Appl. Math. 171 (2021), pp. 1–82. doi: 10.1007/s10440-020-00374-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s10440-020-00374-2 2021

  2. [2]

    URDME: a modular framework for stochas- tic simulation of reaction-transport processes in complex geometries

    B. Drawert, S. Engblom, and A. Hellander. “URDME: a modular framework for stochas- tic simulation of reaction-transport processes in complex geometries”. In:BMC Syst. Biol. 6.76 (2012), pp. 1–17. doi: 10.1186/1752-0509-6-76

    work page doi:10.1186/1752-0509-6-76 2012

  3. [3]

    Journal of The Royal Society Interface 14(135), 20170326 (2017)

    M. Ben Amar and M. Wu. “Re-epithelialization: advancing epithelium frontier during wound healing”. In: J. R. Soc. Interface 11.93 (2014), pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1098/rsif. 2013.1038

    work page doi:10.1098/rsif 2014

  4. [4]

    Morphological stability for in silico models of avascular tumors

    E. Blom and S. Engblom. “Morphological stability for in silico models of avascular tumors”. In: Bull. Math. Biol. 86.7 (2024), pp. 1–33. doi: 10 . 1007 / s11538 - 024 - 01297-x

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    How computational models can help unlock biological systems

    G. W. Brodland. “How computational models can help unlock biological systems”. In: Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 47-48 (2015), pp. 62–73. doi: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2015.07.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2015.07.001 2015

  6. [6]

    Pattern formation by lateral inhibition with feedback: a mathemat- ical model of delta-notch intercellular signalling

    J. R. Collier et al. “Pattern formation by lateral inhibition with feedback: a mathemat- ical model of delta-notch intercellular signalling”. In: J. Theoret. Biol. 183.4 (1996), pp. 429–446. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.1996.0233

    work page doi:10.1006/jtbi.1996.0233 1996

  7. [7]

    Spontaneous separation of bi-stable biochemical systems into spatial domains of opposite phases

    J. Elf and M. Ehrenberg. “Spontaneous separation of bi-stable biochemical systems into spatial domains of opposite phases”. In: Syst. Biol. 1.2 (2004), pp. 230–236

    work page 2004

  8. [8]

    Kealy and D.J

    S. Engblom. “Stochastic simulation of pattern formation in growing tissue: a multilevel approach”. In: Bull. Math. Biol. 81.8 (2019), pp. 3010–3023. doi: 10.1007/s11538- 018-0454-y

    work page doi:10.1007/s11538- 2019

  9. [9]

    Scalable population-level modelling of biological cells incorporating mechanics and kinetics in continuous time

    S. Engblom, D. B. Wilson, and R. E. Baker. “Scalable population-level modelling of biological cells incorporating mechanics and kinetics in continuous time”. In: R. Soc. Open Sci. 5.8 (2018), p. 180379. doi: 10.1098/rsos.180379. 21

    work page doi:10.1098/rsos.180379 2018

  10. [10]

    Seven challenges in the multiscale modeling of multicellular tissues

    A. G. Fletcher and J. M. Osborne. “Seven challenges in the multiscale modeling of multicellular tissues”. In: WIREs Mech. Dis. 14.1 (2022). doi: 10.1002/wsbm.1527

    work page doi:10.1002/wsbm.1527 2022

  11. [11]

    PhysiCell: An open source physics-based cell simulator for 3-D multicellular systems

    A. Ghaffarizadeh et al. “PhysiCell: An open source physics-based cell simulator for 3-D multicellular systems”. In: PLOS Comput. Biol. 14 (2018), pp. 1–31. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pcbi.1005991

    work page 2018

  12. [12]

    A general method for numerically simulating the stochastic time evo- lution of coupled chemical reactions

    D. T. Gillespie. “A general method for numerically simulating the stochastic time evo- lution of coupled chemical reactions”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 22.4 (1976), pp. 403–434. doi: 10.1016/0021-9991(76)90041-3

    work page doi:10.1016/0021-9991(76)90041-3 1976

  13. [13]

    Emerging morphologies in round bacterial colonies: comparing volumetric versus chemotactic expansion

    C. Giverso, M. Verani, and P. Ciarletta. “Emerging morphologies in round bacterial colonies: comparing volumetric versus chemotactic expansion”. In: Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol. 15.3 (2016), pp. 643–661. doi: 10.1007/s10237-015-0714-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s10237-015-0714-9 2016

  14. [14]

    Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE

    J. A. Glazier and F. Graner. “Simulation of the differential adhesion driven rearrange- ment of biological cells”. In:Phys. Rev. E 47.3 (1993), p. 2128. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE. 47.2128

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve 1993

  15. [15]

    Mechanics and self-organization in tissue development

    P. G´ omez-G´ alvez et al. “Mechanics and self-organization in tissue development”. In: Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 120 (2021). Special issue: The mechanics of development by Timothy Saunders and Ivo Telley, pp. 147–159. doi: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2021.07.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2021.07.003 2021

  16. [16]

    The ecological roles of bacterial chemo- taxis

    J. M. Keegstra, F. Carrara, and R. Stocker. “The ecological roles of bacterial chemo- taxis”. In: Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 20.8 (2022), pp. 491–504. doi: 10.1038/s41579-022- 00709-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41579-022- 2022

  17. [17]

    Initiation of slime mold aggregation viewed as an insta- bility

    E. F. Keller and L. A. Segel. “Initiation of slime mold aggregation viewed as an insta- bility”. In: J. Theoret. Biol. 26.3 (1970), pp. 399–415. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(70) 90092-5

    work page doi:10.1016/0022-5193(70 1970

  18. [18]

    Cell Sorting in Development

    S. F. Krens and C.-P. Heisenberg. “Cell Sorting in Development”. In: Curr. Top. Devel. Biol. Vol. 95. 2011, pp. 189–213. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-385065-2.00006-2

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-385065-2.00006-2 2011

  19. [19]

    Bayesian calibration of a stochastic, multiscale agent-based model for predicting in vitro tumor growth

    E. A. B. F. Lima et al. “Bayesian calibration of a stochastic, multiscale agent-based model for predicting in vitro tumor growth”. In: PLOS Comput. Biol. 17.11 (2021), pp. 1–35. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008845

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008845 2021

  20. [20]

    Key challenges facing data-driven multicellular systems biology

    P. Macklin. “Key challenges facing data-driven multicellular systems biology”. In: Gi- gaScience 8.10 (2019). doi: 10.1093/gigascience/giz127

    work page doi:10.1093/gigascience/giz127 2019

  21. [21]

    Progress Towards Computational 3-D Multicellular Systems Biology

    P. Macklin et al. “Progress Towards Computational 3-D Multicellular Systems Biology”. In: Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. Springer, 2016, pp. 225–246. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-42023- 3_12

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-42023- 2016

  22. [22]

    Cell migration and organization in the intestinal crypt using a lattice-free model

    F. A. Meineke, C. S. Potten, and M. Loeffler. “Cell migration and organization in the intestinal crypt using a lattice-free model”. In: Cell Prolif. 34.4 (2001), pp. 253–266. doi: 10.1046/j.0960-7722.2001.00216.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.0960-7722.2001.00216.x 2001

  23. [24]

    Comparing Individual-Based Approaches to Modelling the Self- Organization of Multicellular Tissues

    J. M. Osborne et al. “Comparing individual-based approaches to modelling the self- organization of multicellular tissues”. In: PLOS Comput. Biol. 13.2 (2017), e1005387. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005387. 22

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005387 2017

  24. [25]

    Caziot and B

    C. M. Phillips et al. “A hybrid model of tumor growth and angiogenesis: In silico experiments”. In: PLOS ONE 15.4 (2020), pp. 1–27. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone. 0231137

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pone 2020

  25. [26]

    Agent-based models in cellular systems

    J. Pleyer and C. Fleck. “Agent-based models in cellular systems”. In: Front. Phys. 10 (2023). doi: 10.3389/fphy.2022.968409

    work page doi:10.3389/fphy.2022.968409 2023

  26. [27]

    Chemotaxis in cancer

    E. T. Roussos, J. S. Condeelis, and A. Patsialou. “Chemotaxis in cancer”. In: Nat. Rev. Cancer 11.8 (2011), pp. 573–587. doi: 10.1038/nrc3078

    work page doi:10.1038/nrc3078 2011

  27. [28]

    Collective cell migration in development

    E. Scarpa and R. Mayor. “Collective cell migration in development”. In: J. Cell Biol. 212.2 (2016), pp. 143–155. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201508047

    work page doi:10.1083/jcb.201508047 2016

  28. [29]

    A review of algebraic multigrid

    K. St¨ uben. “A review of algebraic multigrid”. In: J. Comput. Appl. Math. 128.1 (2001), pp. 281–309. doi: 10.1016/S0377-0427(00)00516-1

    work page doi:10.1016/s0377-0427(00)00516-1 2001

  29. [30]

    Multi-Scale Modeling of Tissues Using CompuCell3D

    M. H. Swat et al. “Multi-Scale Modeling of Tissues Using CompuCell3D”. In: Methods Cell Biol. Vol. 110. 2012, pp. 325–366. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-388403-9.00013-8

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-388403-9.00013-8 2012

  30. [31]

    Cellular potts modeling of tumor growth, tumor invasion, and tumor evolution

    A. Szab´ o and R. M. Merks. “Cellular potts modeling of tumor growth, tumor invasion, and tumor evolution”. In: Front. Oncol. 3 (2013), p. 87. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2013. 00087

    work page doi:10.3389/fonc.2013 2013

  31. [32]

    Adhesion-Based Self-Organization in Tissue Patterning

    T. Y.-C. Tsai, R. M. Garner, and S. G. Megason. “Adhesion-Based Self-Organization in Tissue Patterning”. In: Ann. Rev. Cell Devel. Biol. 38 (2022), pp. 349–374. doi: 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-120420-100215

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-cellbio-120420-100215 2022

  32. [33]

    Chari and L

    A. Voss-B¨ ohme. “Multi-Scale Modeling in Morphogenesis: A Critical Analysis of the Cellular Potts Model”. In: PLOS ONE 7 (2012), pp. 1–14. doi: 10.1371/journal. pone.0042852

    work page doi:10.1371/journal 2012

  33. [34]

    Flow in porous media I: A theoretical derivation of Darcy’s law

    S. Whitaker. “Flow in porous media I: A theoretical derivation of Darcy’s law”. In: Transp. Porous Media 1.1 (1986), pp. 3–25. doi: 10.1007/BF01036523. 23 A Proof of Proposition 2.1 We first show the inequality (2.12) and then derive the scheme (2.13). To this end we use the standard function space V ≡ H1(Ωcomp) = {v; R Ωcomp ∥∇v∥2 < ∞} and assume that Vh...

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01036523 1986