Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Mean field limit for interacting systems on co-evolving networks

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that particle systems on co-evolving networks have a well-defined mean-field limit: the empirical trajectory measures converge to a deterministic path-space measure determined by a characteristic flow.

desk verdict A genuinely new mean-field limit for a non-local path-space system, but the advertised co-evolving network application is not actually verified. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.21312 v1 pith:XT4OAXRQ submitted 2025-07-28 math.AP math.DS

Sebastian Throm This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.APmath.DS MSC 82C2235Q83
keywords mean-fieldlimitco-evolvingnetworksadaptivegraphonsnon-local-in-timedynamicsDobrushinestimateWassersteindistanceinteractingparticlesystems
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proves that a large family of interacting particle systems whose interaction network co-evolves with the particles has a well-defined infinite-size limit. The key move is to integrate out the edge-weight dynamics: the coupling strength at each link becomes a functional of the whole past trajectories of the two particles, turning the model into a non-local-in-time system. Under a global Lipschitz condition on that functional, the empirical measures of the $N$-particle system converge in Wasserstein distance to a deterministic path-space measure built from a characteristic flow. The same conclusion holds for graph sequences whose limit is a non-Lipschitz graphon, provided the weights are defined by block averages. This matters because adaptive networks appear in neuroscience, opinion dynamics, and epidemics, and here their continuum description is shown to be memory-retaining rather than state-only.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is the characteristic flow $Z^x_t(\zeta^{\mathrm{in}}, \mu_0)$, defined as the unique solution of the non-local equation (21); it transports an initial particle state $\zeta^{\mathrm{in}}$ at continuum location $x$ through the mean-field interaction with the whole initial measure $\mu_0$. Stability of this flow is quantified by the Dobrushin estimate of Proposition 2.4, which bounds the Wasserstein distance between the pushed-forward measures at time $t$ by a constant times the initial distance, with the constant growing like $e^{2 L_K t}$. This estimate, together with the flow-map reduction of Lemma 1.1 that replaces co-evolving weights by the trajectory functional $K_t$, is what converts the finite-particle system into a contraction argument on path space. A graphon $W\colon I\times I\to\mathbb{R}$ serves as the continuum model of the network: it is a symmetric function whose values give the coupling weights between continuum locations.

What would settle it

Take a bounded, Lipschitz $K_t$ and the graphon $W(x,y)=xy$, solve the characteristic equation (21) numerically, and simulate the discrete system (6) for increasing $N$ with the same initial empirical data; if the Wasserstein distance between the empirical path measure and the characteristic-flow measure does not tend to zero on $[0,T]$, the central claim of Theorem 2.6 is false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that co-evolution of the network is not an obstruction to a mean-field limit: it merely turns the model into one with memory. More precisely, Theorem 2.6 states that if the interaction functional $K_t$ satisfies (11)-(13) and the initial graph is sampled from a symmetric Lipschitz graphon $W$, then $\mu^N = \frac1N \sum_{k=1}^N \delta_{(\phi^{N,k}_\cdot, x_{N,k})}$ satisfies $\mathrm{dist}(\mu^N, \mu)\to 0$, where $\mu = (Z^\cdot_\cdot(\cdot,\mu_0), \mathrm{Id})_\#\mu_0$ and $Z$ solves the characteristic equation (21). Theorem 3.5 extends this to non-Lipschitz graphons satisfying (26), using block-averaged weights. The limiting measure satisfies the weak equations (22) and (33), so the continuum limit is a measure on path space $C([0,T], \mathbb{R}^d)\times I$, and it is the unique fixed point of the characteristic flow.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the co-evolving interaction can be encoded by a bounded, globally Lipschitz functional $K_t$ after the edge-weight dynamics is integrated out; if a concrete weight rule produces a flow map that violates the Lipschitz bound (13), the convergence proof and both theorems fall through.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every admissible co-evolving system has a unique finite-$N$ solution, and the empirical measure converges to the characteristic-flow limit with error controlled by the initial sampling error and the factor $e^{2L_K T}$.
  • The infinite-particle limit is a measure on continuous paths, so the memory built into the adaptive couplings survives the limit.
  • The limiting weak equation (22) provides a continuum evolution law for co-evolving networks, enabling study of stationary states and long-time behaviour without simulating all $N$ particles.
  • For non-Lipschitz network limits, the block-averaged weight construction still yields convergence of local empirical measures, extending the theory beyond smooth graphons.
  • Stability under perturbations holds: nearby initial empirical measures produce nearby mean-field limits on any finite time horizon, at an explicitly quantified rate.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An implicit consequence of the flow-map reduction is that the framework should cover nonlinear edge-weight rules, not just the linear example (7), whenever the solution map of the weight equation is Lipschitz in the endpoint histories.
  • The path-space form of the limit suggests that correlation functions of the adaptive couplings, which depend on two or more times, can be extracted directly from $\mu$; state-space mean-field limits would lose this information.
  • Because Proposition 2.9 identifies the mean-field limit with a delta measure along the continuum solution for deterministic initial data, the two approximation routes, mean field and continuum limit, can be cross-checked numerically, with the Dobrushin estimate providing a quantitative error bound.
  • A natural testable extension is to let the sampled graphons converge only in $L^1$, as in the non-Lipschitz part, and to check whether the convergence rate is governed by the term $\|W^N-W\|_{L^1(I^2)}$ appearing in Proposition 3.3.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies mean-field limits for interacting particle systems on co-evolving networks. The adaptive weights are eliminated by solving the weight ODE through a flow map, yielding the nonlocal-in-time system (6) driven by a functional K. Under the boundedness and Lipschitz assumptions (11)-(13), the author constructs characteristic equations (21), proves several Dobrushin-type estimates, and states convergence of the empirical measures on path space (Theorem 2.6). Section 3 extends the setting to non-Lipschitz graphons satisfying (26) and states a second convergence theorem (Theorem 3.5). The paper also relates the mean-field limit to a continuum equation in the spirit of [40].

Significance. If completed, the result would be a useful extension of graphon mean-field theory to adaptive and co-evolving networks with memory. The characteristic-flow approach and the use of Wasserstein distances are standard and appropriate, and the strategy is clearly laid out; Example 1.3 is instructive. The paper also makes the right structural choice in isolating the regularity of K as the key hypothesis. However, the advertised scope currently exceeds the proved statements: the bridge from the co-evolving system (1) to the abstract system (6) is not verified against assumptions (11)-(13), and Theorem 3.5 is delegated to [24] rather than proved. Both issues are, in principle, fixable within the manuscript's scope, but they are load-bearing for the central claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 1.1, assumptions (11)-(13), Lemma 1.1] The abstract claims that the result applies to 'a large class of systems on co-evolving networks including non-linear weight dynamics', but no statement verifies that the flow-map-induced functional K_t(a,r_t f,r_t g)=Φ_t[a,f,g]C(f(t),g(t)) from (1)/(5) satisfies (11)-(13). This is not a purely technical omission: for globally Lipschitz F_t(w,a,b)=w and bounded non-zero C, one has Φ_t[a,f,g]=a e^t, so sup_{a∈R}|K_t(a,r_t f,r_t g)|=∞ and (11) fails. Even for Example 1.3, K_0(a,f,g)=a C(f_0,g_0), which violates (11) unless the first argument is restricted to a bounded interval. Since (11) is used in Proposition 2.1 and in the Dobrushin estimates, Theorem 2.6 as stated does not cover the original co-evolving network system (1). The author should either verify (11)-(13) under explicit hypotheses on F and C, or state and prove a version of the theorem in which the first argument ranges over the bounded set of initial weights (which is natural because all evaluations use a=W(x,y)).
  2. [Theorem 3.5 and Section 3.3] Theorem 3.5 is advertised as a second main result, yet its proof is entirely delegated to [24, Theorem 3.11]. The same applies to Propositions 3.1 and 3.3, which are stated without proofs, and the weak equation (33) is asserted without derivation. A journal proof of a main theorem cannot consist of a reference to a different paper's argument, especially since the present setting has a nonlocal-in-time functional K and a measure-valued path-space formulation that are not identical to the static Kuramoto setting in [24]. At minimum, a full proof or a rigorous, self-contained proof sketch of the key estimates and of the convergence step is needed.
  3. [Theorem 2.6, proof, and Proposition 2.4] The proof of Theorem 2.6 says that the convergence dist(µ^N,µ)→0 'is an immediate consequence of Proposition 2.4'. Proposition 2.4, however, is a statement about time-t marginals µ_t=(et,Id)#µ and does not by itself give convergence in P(C([0,T])×I). The missing step is to use the characteristic representation ϕ^{N,k}=Z^{x_{N,k}}_·(ϕ^{N,k,in},µ^N_0), Proposition 2.3 at t=T, and Lemma 2.2 to estimate the C([0,T])-distance between the two push-forwards; this argument should be written out. The one-sentence derivation of the weak equation (22) should also be expanded.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Lemma 2.2, proof] In the chain of inequalities, several displayed lines omit absolute values: for instance the line after '≤ ζ_in − ζ~_in + ...' should estimate |Z^x_t(ζ_in)−Z^{˜x}_t(ζ~_in)|, not the signed difference.
  2. [Proposition 3.4, proof] In the proof of Proposition 3.4, the first displayed estimate after the definition of dist_I uses e^{2L_K T} in the first term; the surrounding derivation and Proposition 3.3 suggest the intended factor is e^{L_K t}, and the final estimate should be derived consistently.
  3. [Theorem 3.5, Section 3.3] The mode of convergence in Theorem 3.5 is not specified: the statement 'µ^{n,m,·} converges to µ^· as n,m→∞' should say whether this is convergence in probability, in L^1, or almost surely with respect to the random initial data.
  4. [Equations (30)-(31)] There are notation inconsistencies between the subscripts (k−1)m+ℓ used for the particle states and the initial data ϕ^{N,kℓ,in}; these indices should be unified to avoid ambiguity.
  5. [Theorem 1.5] Theorem 1.5, which provides existence and uniqueness for the discrete system (6), is stated without proof ('we omit the details'); since the fixed-point argument is short and this statement underpins the later characteristic representation, a brief proof should be included.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the mean-field limit is derived from an independently stated characteristic equation and Dobrushin estimates; the only self-citation ([40]) is peripheral.

full rationale

The central claim (Theorem 2.6) is not circular. The limiting measure μ = (Z^·_·(·,μ_0), Id)#μ_0 is defined by the characteristic equation (21), an independent flow equation under assumptions (11)–(13), and convergence of the empirical measures is established through Dobrushin's estimate (Proposition 2.4), a genuine Gronwall-based contraction argument. The proof does not assume the conclusion: Proposition 2.5 records that the discrete solution is the characteristic flow evaluated on its own empirical initial measure, which is a consistency property, not a fitted prediction. No parameter is fitted to the data whose convergence is asserted, and no known result is merely renamed. The only self-citation used in the derivation, [40] (Throm), appears in Section 2.3 in the peripheral discussion of the continuum-limit analogue and in Remark 2.8; that cited result is not used to prove the main mean-field limit. Theorem 3.5 refers to [24, Theorem 3.11] for an external construction, which is independent support rather than circular reliance. The paper also contains omitted proof details (Theorem 1.5, Proposition 2.1, Theorem 3.5), but those are exposition choices, not circular dependencies. A separate correctness concern, not circularity, is that the reduction from the co-evolving model (1) to the abstract system (6) is not checked: Lemma 1.1 gives a flow representation, but the paper does not verify that the induced K satisfies the boundedness assumption (11) for general nonlinear F; this is a scope or verification gap, not a circular use of the target result.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted and no new entities are postulated. The derivation for the Lipschitz graphon case is self-contained, with the main external input being the standard graphon approximation and Dobrushin machinery. The non-Lipschitz theorem relies on an unproved adaptation of [24], and the reduction from (1) to (6) depends on the strong regularity conditions (11)-(13) that are never verified for a general nonlinear F.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The interaction functional K_t satisfies the global Lipschitz and boundedness conditions (11)-(13).
    All existence, uniqueness, and Dobrushin estimates in Lemmas 2.2, 2.3, 3.2, 3.3 and the main theorems rest on these uniform bounds. The paper does not verify them for a general F in the original system (1) despite claiming applicability to nonlinear weight dynamics.
  • domain assumption The initial network is generated from a graphon W, and the initial empirical measures converge to µ_0 in Wasserstein distance (dist(µ^N_0, µ_0) → 0).
    This is the standard graphon setup used in [9,24]; it is assumed in Theorems 2.6 and 3.5.
  • domain assumption The non-Lipschitz graphon approximation machinery of [24, Theorem 3.11] carries over to the non-local system (6) without modification.
    The proof of Theorem 3.5 is not given; the paper states that it follows the same lines as [24]. Since [24] treats a Markovian Kuramoto model, the adaptation to memory-dependent K is non-trivial and is not demonstrated.
  • domain assumption W satisfies either the Lipschitz condition (15) or the translation-continuity condition (26).
    Restricts the class of graph limits considered; (26) is a weak continuity condition in L^1 used for non-Lipschitz graphons.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Mean field limit for interacting systems on co-evolving networks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XT4OAXRQ

@misc{pith2026250721312,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Mean field limit for interacting systems on co-evolving networks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XT4OAXRQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.21312}
}
read the original abstract

Interacting particle systems are in frequent use to model collective behaviour in various situations and applications. For many systems, the interaction between the agents is restricted to an underlying network structure and often, the latter also evolves in time with its dynamics coupled to the evolution of the particles. Due to their relevance for applications such systems on adaptive or co-evolutionary networks have received increasing interest in recent years. In particular, a fundamental question concerns the behaviour of the system in the infinite particle limit. In this work we provide a mean-field description for a general particle system which exhibits non-locality in time (memory). The result applies particularly to a large class of systems on co-evolving networks including non-linear weight dynamics.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. The mean-field limit of non-exchangeable particle systems with non-conservative dynamics and adaptive weights

    math.AP 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Non-exchangeable particles with adaptive weights converge to a Vlasov-type equation, with the limit described by vector-valued dynamic extended graphons.

  2. A note on application of mean-field limit to non-exchangeable non-conservative systems

    math.AP 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Non-exchangeable, non-conservative particle systems converge, as N grows, to a Vlasov-type equation with a mass source term, via extended graphons and a generalized Glivenko-Cantelli lemma.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [24]

    Medvedev

    Dmitry Kaliuzhnyi-Verbovetskyi and Georgi S. Medvedev. The Mean Field Equation for the Kuramoto Model on Graph Sequences with Non-Lipschitz Limit. SIAM J. Math. Anal., 50(3):2441–2465, 2018. 18

    work page 2018

  2. [40]

    Continuum limit for interacting systems on adaptive networks

    Sebastian Throm. Continuum limit for interacting systems on adaptive networks. Euro- pean Journal of Applied Mathematics , pages 1–15, December 2024

    work page 2024

  3. [1]

    Mean-field and graph limits for collective dynamics models with time-varying weights

    Nathalie Ayi and Nastassia Pouradier Duteil. Mean-field and graph limits for collective dynamics models with time-varying weights. J. Differential Equations , 299:65–110, 2021

    work page 2021

  4. [2]

    Dynamical processes on complex networks

    Alain Barrat, Marc Barth´ elemy, and Alessandro Vespignani. Dynamical processes on complex networks. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008

    work page 2008

  5. [3]

    Graphon mean field systems

    Erhan Bayraktar, Suman Chakraborty, and Ruoyu Wu. Graphon mean field systems. Ann. Appl. Probab., 33(5):3587–3619, 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [4]

    Adaptive dynamical networks

    Rico Berner, Thilo Gross, Christian Kuehn, J¨ urgen Kurths, and Serhiy Yanchuk. Adaptive dynamical networks. Physics Reports, 1031:1–59, August 2023

    work page 2023

  7. [5]

    Borgs, J

    C. Borgs, J. T. Chayes, L. Lov´ asz, V. T. S´ os, and K. Vesztergombi. Convergent sequences of dense graphs. I. Subgraph frequencies, metric properties and testing. Adv. Math. , 219(6):1801–1851, 2008

    work page 2008

  8. [6]

    Opinion dynamics with emergent collective memory: a society shaped by its own past

    Gioia Boschi, Chiara Cammarota, and Reimer K¨ uhn. Opinion dynamics with emergent collective memory: a society shaped by its own past. Phys. A , 558:124909, 19, 2020

    work page 2020

Show all 42 references
  1. [7]

    Braun and K

    W. Braun and K. Hepp. The Vlasov dynamics and its fluctuations in the 1 /N limit of interacting classical particles. Comm. Math. Phys. , 56(2):101–113, 1977

    1977

  2. [8]

    Kinetic equations for processes on co-evolving networks

    Martin Burger. Kinetic equations for processes on co-evolving networks. Kinetic and Related Models, 15(2):187, 2022

    2022

  3. [9]

    Medvedev

    Hayato Chiba and Georgi S. Medvedev. The mean field analysis for the Kuramoto model on graphs i. the mean field equation and transition point formulas. Preprint arXiv:1612.06493, December 2016. arXiv:1612.06493. 17

    2016 arXiv

  4. [10]

    A law of large numbers and large deviations for interacting diffusions on Erd˝ os–R´ enyi graphs

    Fabio Coppini, Helge Dietert, and Giambattista Giacomin. A law of large numbers and large deviations for interacting diffusions on Erd˝ os–R´ enyi graphs. Stoch. Dyn. , 20(2):2050010, 19, 2020

    2020

  5. [11]

    Couzin, Jens Krause, Richard James, Graeme D

    Iain D. Couzin, Jens Krause, Richard James, Graeme D. Ruxton, and Nigel R. Franks. Collective memory and spatial sorting in animal groups. J. Theoret. Biol. , 218(1):1–11, 2002

    2002

  6. [12]

    An infinite-dimensional metapopulation SIS model

    Jean-Fran¸ cois Delmas, Dylan Dronnier, and Pierre-Andr´ e Zitt. An infinite-dimensional metapopulation SIS model. J. Differential Equations , 313:1–53, 2022

    2022

  7. [13]

    Co-evolving networks for opinion and social dynamics in agent-based models

    Nataˇ sa Djurdjevac Conrad, Nhu Quang Vu, and S¨ oren Nagel. Co-evolving networks for opinion and social dynamics in agent-based models. Chaos, 34(9):Paper No. 093116, 15, 2024

    2024

  8. [14]

    R. L. Dobrushin. Vlasov equations. Functional Analysis and Its Applications , 13(2):115–123, 1979

    1979

  9. [15]

    Mean-field approximations with adaptive coupling for networks with spike-timing-dependent plasticity.Neural Comput., 35(9):1481– 1528, 2023

    Benoit Duchet, Christian Bick, and ´Aine Byrne. Mean-field approximations with adaptive coupling for networks with spike-timing-dependent plasticity.Neural Comput., 35(9):1481– 1528, 2023

    2023

  10. [16]

    Graphop mean-field limits for Kuramoto- type models

    Marios Antonios Gkogkas and Christian Kuehn. Graphop mean-field limits for Kuramoto- type models. SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst. , 21(1):248–283, 2022

    2022

  11. [17]

    Mean field limits of co- evolutionary signed heterogeneous networks

    Marios Antonios Gkogkas, Christian Kuehn, and Chuang Xu. Mean field limits of co- evolutionary signed heterogeneous networks. European Journal of Applied Mathematics , pages 1–44, January 2025

    2025

  12. [18]

    On the dynamics of large particle systems in the mean field limit

    Fran¸ cois Golse. On the dynamics of large particle systems in the mean field limit. In Macroscopic and large scale phenomena: coarse graining, mean field limits and ergodicity , volume 3 of Lect. Notes Appl. Math. Mech. , pages 1–144. Springer, [Cham], 2016

    2016

  13. [19]

    Dommar D’Lima, and Bernd Blasius

    Thilo Gross, Carlos J. Dommar D’Lima, and Bernd Blasius. Epidemic dynamics on an adaptive network. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 96:208701, May 2006

    2006

  14. [20]

    Synchronization of Kuramoto oscillators with adaptive couplings

    Seung-Yeal Ha, Se Eun Noh, and Jinyeong Park. Synchronization of Kuramoto oscillators with adaptive couplings. SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst. , 15(1):162–194, 2016

    2016

  15. [21]

    Mean-field limit of non- exchangeable systems

    Pierre-Emmanuel Jabin, David Poyato, and Juan Soler. Mean-field limit of non- exchangeable systems. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , 78(4):651–741, 2025

    2025

  16. [22]

    Benjamin J¨ uttner and Erik A. Martens. Complex dynamics in adaptive phase oscillator networks. Chaos, 33(5):Paper No. 053106, 16, 2023

    2023

  17. [23]

    Medvedev

    Dmitry Kaliuzhnyi-Verbovetskyi and Georgi S. Medvedev. The semilinear heat equation on sparse random graphs. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 49(2):1333–1355, 2017

    2017

  18. [25]

    Local-density dependent Markov pro- cesses on graphons with epidemiological applications

    D´ aniel Keliger, Ill´ es Horv´ ath, and B´ alint Tak´ acs. Local-density dependent Markov pro- cesses on graphons with epidemiological applications. Stochastic Process. Appl., 148:324– 352, 2022

    2022

  19. [26]

    Power Network Dynamics on Graphons

    Christian Kuehn and Sebastian Throm. Power Network Dynamics on Graphons. SIAM J. Appl. Math. , 79(4):1271–1292, 2019

    2019

  20. [27]

    Vlasov equations on digraph measures

    Christian Kuehn and Chuang Xu. Vlasov equations on digraph measures. J. Differential Equations, 339:261–349, 2022

    2022

  21. [28]

    American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2012

    L´ aszl´ o Lov´ asz.Large networks and graph limits , volume 60 of American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications . American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2012

    2012

  22. [29]

    Limits of dense graph sequences.J

    L´ aszl´ o Lov´ asz and Bal´ azs Szegedy. Limits of dense graph sequences.J. Combin. Theory Ser. B , 96(6):933–957, 2006

    2006

  23. [30]

    Quenched asymptotics for interacting diffusions on inhomogeneous random graphs

    Eric Lu¸ con. Quenched asymptotics for interacting diffusions on inhomogeneous random graphs. Stochastic Process. Appl., 130(11):6783–6842, 2020

    2020

  24. [31]

    Medvedev

    Georgi S. Medvedev. The nonlinear heat equation on dense graphs and graph limits. SIAM J. Math. Anal. , 46(4):2743–2766, 2014

    2014

  25. [32]

    Medvedev

    Georgi S. Medvedev. The continuum limit of the Kuramoto model on sparse random graphs. Commun. Math. Sci. , 17(4):883–898, 2019

    2019

  26. [33]

    Medvedev and Mathew S

    Georgi S. Medvedev and Mathew S. Mizuhara. Stability of clusters in the second-order Kuramoto model on random graphs. J. Stat. Phys. , 182(2):Paper No. 30, 22, 2021

    2021

  27. [34]

    Mathematical Modeling of Collective Behavior in Socio-Economic and Life Sciences

    Giovanni Naldi, Lorenzo Pareschi, and Giuseppe Toscani, editors. Mathematical Modeling of Collective Behavior in Socio-Economic and Life Sciences . Birkh¨ auser Boston, 2010

    2010

  28. [35]

    Neunzert and J

    H. Neunzert and J. Wick. Die Approximation der L¨ osung von Integro- Differentialgleichungen durch endliche Punktmengen. pages 275–290. Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 395, 1974

    1974

  29. [36]

    Gomes, and Marie-Therese Wolfram

    Andrew Nugent, Susana N. Gomes, and Marie-Therese Wolfram. On evolving network models and their influence on opinion formation. Phys. D , 456:Paper No. 133914, 19, 2023

    2023

  30. [37]

    Porter and James P

    Mason A. Porter and James P. Gleeson. Dynamical systems on networks , volume 4 of Frontiers in Applied Dynamical Systems: Reviews and Tutorials . Springer, Cham, 2016. A tutorial

    2016

  31. [38]

    Low-dimensional behavior of a Kuramoto model with inertia and Hebbian learning

    Tachin Ruangkriengsin and Mason A Porter. Low-dimensional behavior of a Kuramoto model with inertia and Hebbian learning. Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Non- linear Science, 33(12), 2023

    2023

  32. [39]

    Jakub Sawicki, Rico Berner, Sarah A. M. Loos, Mehrnaz Anvari, Rolf Bader, Wolfram Barfuss, Nicola Botta, Nuria Brede, Igor Franovi´ c, Daniel J. Gauthier, Sebastian Goldt, Aida Hajizadeh, Philipp H¨ ovel, Omer Karin, Philipp Lorenz-Spreen, Christoph Miehl, Jan M¨ olter, Simona...

    2023

  33. [41]

    Springer-Verlag, Berlin,

    C´ edric Villani.Optimal transport, volume 338 of Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wis- senschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences] . Springer-Verlag, Berlin,

  34. [42]

    Collective nonlinear dynamics and self-organization in decentralized power grids

    Dirk Witthaut, Frank Hellmann, J¨ urgen Kurths, Stefan Kettemann, Hildegard Meyer- Ortmanns, and Marc Timme. Collective nonlinear dynamics and self-organization in decentralized power grids. Rev. Mod. Phys. , 94:015005, Feb 2022. 20

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.