Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 80 references

This perspective argues that active-matter physics provides the framework for Robophysics, letting robot swarms be designed from local interaction rules plus goal-oriented feedback to achieve the adaptability and shared purpose of living co

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 21:31 UTC pith:ZD4TJUSK

load-bearing objection A clear, honest perspective that connects active matter to swarm robotics, but the central claim is a research program, not an established result. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2511.14624 v2 pith:ZD4TJUSK submitted 2025-11-18 cond-mat.soft cs.AIcs.RO

Active Matter as a framework for living systems-inspired Robophysics

Giulia Janzen , Gaia Maselli , Juan F. Jimenez , Lia Garcia-Perez , D A Matoz Fernandez , Chantal Valeriani This is my paper
classification cond-mat.soft cs.AIcs.RO
keywords active matterrobophysicsswarm roboticscollective behaviorbio-inspired roboticsmachine learningreinforcement learningemergent behavior
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper is a perspective article that proposes active-matter physics as the framework for Robophysics, the study of physical principles governing robots in real-world environments. It argues that active matter—ensembles of self-propelled agents that consume energy and interact locally—captures the minimal ingredients needed to reproduce nature-inspired collective motion: purpose, perception, communication, and adaptive feedback. These ingredients, the authors claim, can be translated into the design of robot swarms, which currently struggle with coordination, shared purpose, and cost efficiency. The paper reviews challenges in swarm robotics and outlines how machine learning and reinforcement learning can close the gap between active-matter models, which typically lack internal decision-making, and the goal-oriented behavior of living collectives. If the framework holds, swarm robotics would gain a physics-based design language connecting local interaction rules to collective function.

Core claim

The central claim is that active-matter physics can be considered the framework for Robophysics: it allows researchers to extract the minimal ingredients needed to reproduce nature-inspired collective motion—purpose, perception, communication, and adaptive feedback—and translate them into robotic swarms. The paper argues that, just as single-robot locomotion has benefited from physics-based abstraction of biological systems, collective robot behavior can be understood and engineered through local interaction rules characteristic of active matter, such as alignment, attraction, and repulsion, combined with goal-oriented feedback. To make this work, the authors point to recent advances in mach

What carries the argument

The central object is the active-matter model: a set of self-propelled agents that consume energy to generate motion, driving the system out of equilibrium, and that produce emergent phenomena such as flocking or swarming purely from local interactions. In the paper's proposal, these models act as a design grammar for robot swarms. The essential added machinery is the coupling of active-matter rules with machine learning, especially reinforcement learning, which lets a swarm learn reward-maximizing actions and enables inverse design—finding the microscopic ingredients that produce a desired collective behavior. Also central is the concept of the bidirectional feedback loop between communicat

Load-bearing premise

The framework's load-bearing premise is that principles derived from self-propelled colloids and bacteria—agents with no onboard sensing, communication, or decision-making—carry over to robots that have physical constraints, sensor noise, intermittent connectivity, and hardware limits; the paper asserts this transfer but does not demonstrate it.

What would settle it

Give a small swarm of inexpensive robots purely local active-matter interaction rules (alignment, attraction, repulsion) plus a common light gradient as a shared-purpose signal, and measure whether collective motion shows the same disorder-to-order transition as a function of density or noise that active-matter simulations predict. A systematic departure from the predicted phase boundary—attributable to sensor noise, intermittent communication, or actuation limits—would falsify the transferability claim.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Robot swarms could be programmed by specifying local active-matter interaction rules plus a shared-purpose reward, rather than by centralized top-down control.
  • Combining reinforcement learning with active matter could enable inverse design: discovering the minimal microscopic rules that produce a desired collective function.
  • If the framework succeeds, Robophysics extends from single-robot locomotion to collective programmable behavior, making swarms more scalable and adaptable in real-world environments.
  • Treating communication as a physical process coupled to motion—rather than an abstract network layer—opens a research direction at the intersection of network dynamics and collective behavior.
  • Affordable small-robot testbeds could validate active-matter-inspired swarm algorithms under realistic sensor and communication constraints.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The transferability assumption is the load-bearing point: models built for colloids and bacteria lack the sensing, decision-making, and intermittent communication of robots. A decisive test would be whether a real swarm with noisy sensors reproduces the emergent behavior predicted by active-matter simulations.
  • The perspective implicitly suggests a new class of models in which communication enters the active-matter equations as a physical coupling field, letting network topology and collective motion co-evolve rather than treating them separately.
  • If the minimal-ingredient claim is right, the same local rules should govern collective behavior across scales—from molecular motors to robot swarms—making experimental swarm robotics a direct probe of non-equilibrium physics.
  • Reinforcement learning could be used not only to control swarms but to learn the shared-purpose reward itself, a step the paper hints at (goal-conditioned interaction rules) but does not explicitly develop.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This perspective article argues that Robophysics—the physics-based study of robot locomotion and control—can be extended from single robots to collectives by adopting active-matter physics as the organizing framework. After reviewing bio-inspired single-robot locomotion (Section II), the paper surveys collective challenges: communication constraints, coordination and scalability, cooperation and routing, collaboration and learning, competition and shared purpose, and testbeds (Section III). Section IV introduces active matter as a framework and discusses recent efforts to add perception, adaptability, and goal-oriented dynamics to active-matter models, together with machine-learning and reinforcement-learning tools. The Outlook (Section V) states the central claim: active matter provides the minimal ingredients—purpose, perception, communication, and adaptive feedback—to reproduce nature-inspired collective motion and translate it into robotic swarms. The paper is a review and vision statement rather than a technical contribution.

Significance. If the central claim were substantiated, the paper would provide a valuable cross-disciplinary bridge: a physics-based design language connecting local interaction rules to collective function in physical robot swarms, with potential impact on both active-matter research and swarm robotics. The manuscript is useful as an up-to-date, well-referenced survey of challenges at the interface, and it clearly articulates an open problem (the bidirectional coupling between communication and motion). However, the paper does not demonstrate the transferability of active-matter principles to embodied, communicating robots; it asserts this as a research program. The authors openly acknowledge the key gap—most active matter models lack internal decision-making and goal-oriented dynamics—but do not show how the cited new models or ML/RL tools close it. The strength of the paper lies in its accessible review and its honest identification of open challenges, not in validated results, which a perspective may not require but which the headline claim would need more support for.

major comments (3)
  1. [§IV and §V] The central claim—that active-matter physics allows us to 'extract the minimal ingredients' of purpose, perception, communication, and adaptive feedback and 'translate them into robotic swarms'—is asserted, not demonstrated. Section IV itself concedes that 'most active matter models lack internal decision-making and goal-oriented dynamics,' and the references [57–62] are only listed, not explained. The manuscript does not show how any concrete active-matter model, even in principle, maps onto the robot constraints detailed in §III.A (sensor noise, intermittent communication, hardware limits). As written, the transferability claim is a research agenda. Please add either a concrete worked example—e.g., a specific active-matter model augmented with a perception/goal term and its mapping to a Kilobot, Crazyflie, or Robotarium platform—or a structured roadmap with testable predictions and mil
  2. [§III.A] The paper identifies the bidirectional feedback loop between communication and motion as an open challenge, but it does not explain how active-matter principles would address it. Since this coupling is exactly the transfer problem (information exchange influences motion and motion shapes connectivity), the manuscript should specify which active-matter concepts are relevant—e.g., alignment or Vicsek-type interactions with communication noise, density-dependent interaction ranges, or active fluctuations—and what new physics or engineering questions they raise. As it stands, §III.A is a robotics/network survey with no active-matter content, weakening the paper's coherent narrative.
  3. [§III.B–§III.E] The collective-challenges sections (coordination, routing, cooperation, learning, competition) are written largely in generic multi-robot language, with active matter appearing only in §IV. If active matter is meant to unify these topics, the paper should explicitly map each challenge to an active-matter concept. For example, how does graph-based shape formation (§III.B) relate to active-matter ordering transitions? How do ACO and genetic algorithms (§III.C) connect to self-organization and local fluctuations? Without such mapping, the paper reads as two loosely connected reviews rather than a demonstration of 'active matter as a framework.' I recommend adding a bridge paragraph or table that connects each collective challenge to a specific active-matter mechanism or model.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§II] Typo: 'peristaltic warm-inspired soft robots' should presumably read 'worm-inspired'.
  2. [Affiliation] The fourth affiliation has a typo: 'Interdiplinarde' should be 'Interdisciplinar de Sistemas Complejos'.
  3. [References] Several references have formatting inconsistencies, e.g., [33] mixes author and journal styles, [45] has an unusual venue string, and [62] ends with a stray comma. Please normalize to the journal style.
  4. [Figures] Fig. 2 is described in §III.F (testing robot swarms) but not explicitly called out in the text before the figure; please ensure all figures are referenced in the main text. Also, Fig. 1's caption could better indicate how the top (living systems) and bottom (robotic collectives) panels map to the 'minimal ingredients' listed in §V.
  5. [§IV] The sentence 'machine learning methods have been nowadays increasingly applied to active matter systems' is awkward; consider revising to 'machine learning methods have increasingly been applied...'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the paper is a perspective that asserts a research agenda, with no derivations or predictions that reduce to fitted inputs or self-citations.

full rationale

This is a perspective/review article, not a derivation-based paper. The central claim—that active-matter physics can serve as a framework for robophysics—is offered as an outlook statement, not as a result derived from prior work by the authors. There are no equations, fitted parameters, or predictions whose content is forced by construction. The paper explicitly acknowledges the limitations of active-matter models ('most active matter models lack internal decision-making and goal-oriented dynamics'), which cuts against any charge of circularity: the proposed framework is presented as an open program rather than as an already-established equivalence. The self-citations that appear (e.g., refs. [68], [70], [73], [74]) are used descriptively, as examples of machine-learning applications to active matter and of interaction-rule extraction from experimental data; they are not load-bearing for the paper's main claim. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz, or renamed empirical result is invoked. Under the rubric, an honest non-finding is appropriate; the absence of evidence for transferability is a correctness/scope concern, not a circularity one. Score 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The perspective introduces no free parameters and no invented entities. Its foundational assumptions are that local interactions underlie collective behavior, that active-matter theory captures those interactions, and that the resulting principles transfer to engineered robot swarms.

axioms (3)
  • domain assumption Living systems achieve collective functionality not via central control, but via local interactions which generate robust and adaptable group behavior.
    Foundational premise in Section III; not proven in the paper, though widely supported in collective-behavior literature.
  • domain assumption Active matter is a robust framework for studying collective behaviors in both living and synthetic systems.
    Used as the starting point in Section IV; the paper relies on the validity of active-matter theory rather than deriving it.
  • ad hoc to paper The minimal ingredients of living collective motion can be extracted from active matter and translated into robotic swarms.
    This is the central programmatic premise in Section V; it is asserted without demonstration and is the main load-bearing assumption of the perspective.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 9898 in / 7077 out tokens · 72234 ms · 2026-08-03T21:31:56.744325+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Robophysics investigates the physical principles that govern living-like robots operating in complex, realworld environments. Despite remarkable technological advances, robots continue to face fundamental efficiency limitations. At the level of individual units, locomotion remains a challenge, while at the collective level, robot swarms struggle to achieve shared purpose, coordination, communication, and cost efficiency. This perspective article examines the key challenges faced by bio-inspired robotic collectives and highlights recent research efforts that incorporate principles from active-matter physics and biology into the modeling and design of robot swarms.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.14624 by Chantal Valeriani, D A Matoz Fernandez, Gaia Maselli, Giulia Janzen, Juan F. Jimenez, Lia Garcia-Perez.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Schematic illustration of how principles from living systems [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Group of five differential robots from the Robotarium-UCM. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

80 extracted references · 6 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    J.Aguilar,T.Zhang,F.Qian,M.Kingsbury,B.McInroe,N.Ma- zouchova, C. Li, R. Maladen, C. Gong, M. Travers,et al., Re- ports on Progress in Physics79, 110001 (2016)

    2016

  2. [2]

    G. Wang, T. V. Phan, S. Li, M. Wombacher, J. Qu, Y. Peng, G.Chen, D.I.Goldman, S.A.Levin, R.H.Austin, andL.Liu, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 108002 (2021)

    2021

  3. [3]

    M.Lyu,Y.Zhao,C.Huang, andH.Huang,RemoteSensing15 (2023)

    2023

  4. [4]

    S. Ecke, J. Dempewolf, J. Frey, A. Schwaller, E. Endres, H.-J. Klemmt, D. Tiede, and T. Seifert, Remote Sensing14, 3205 (2022)

    2022

  5. [5]

    M. A. Husman, W. Albattah, Z. Z. Abidin, Y. M. Mustafah, K. Kadir, S. Habib, M. Islam, and S. Khan, Electronics10, 2974 (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    Conte, G

    C. Conte, G. de Alteriis, F. De Pandi, E. Caputo, R. S. L. Moriello,G.Rufino, andD.Accardo,in2021 IEEE 8th Interna- tional Workshop on Metrology for AeroSpace (MetroAeroSpace) (IEEE, 2021) pp. 31–36

    2021

  7. [7]

    Al-Sheary and A

    A. Al-Sheary and A. Almagbile, Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture11, 1014 (2017)

    2017

  8. [8]

    Gohari, A

    A. Gohari, A. B. Ahmad, R. B. A. Rahim, A. S. M. Supa’at, S. Abd Razak, and M. S. M. Gismalla, IEEE Access10, 56611 (2022)

    2022

  9. [9]

    P.J.SchaefferandS.L.Lindstedt,ComprPhysiol3,289(2013)

    2013

  10. [10]

    B. R. Fajen, Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience7, 85 (2013)

    2013

  11. [11]

    Biewener and S

    A. Biewener and S. Patek,Animal Locomotion(Oxford Univer- sity Press, 2018)

    2018

  12. [12]

    Volpe, N

    G. Volpe, N. A. M. Araujo, M. Guix, M. Miodownik, N. Mar- tin, L. Alvarez, J. Simmchen, R. D. Leonardo, N. Pellicciotta, Q.Martinet,J.Palacci,W.K.Ng,D.Saxena,R.Sapienza,S.Na- dine, J. F. Mano, R. Mahdavi, C. Beck Adiels, J. Forth, C. San- tangelo, S. Palagi, J. M. Seok, V. A. Webster-Wood, S. Wang, L. Yao, A. Aghakhani, T. Barois, H. Kellay, C. Coulais, M...

    2025

  13. [13]

    Levine and D

    H. Levine and D. I. Goldman, Soft Matter19, 4204 (2023)

    2023

  14. [14]

    Bechinger, R

    C. Bechinger, R. Di Leonardo, H. Löwen, C. Reichhardt, G.Volpe, andG.Volpe,ReviewsofModernPhysics88,045006 (2016)

    2016

  15. [15]

    Takemori, M

    T. Takemori, M. Tanaka, and F. Matsuno, IEEE Transactions on Robotics34, 1384 (2018)

    2018

  16. [16]

    Tanaka, K

    M. Tanaka, K. Tanaka, and F. Matsuno, IEEE/ASME Transac- tions on Mechatronics20, 1633 (2015)

    2015

  17. [17]

    Qiyuan and L

    F. Qiyuan and L. Chen, R. Soc. Open Sci7, 7191192 (2020)

    2020

  18. [18]

    Q. Fu, S. W. Gart, T. W. Mitchel, J. S. Kim, G. S. Chirikjian, andC.Li,IntegrativeandComparativeBiology60,171(2020)

    2020

  19. [19]

    S.K.R.Moosavi,M.H.Zafar, andF.Sanfilippo,Mechatronics 112, 103418 (2025)

    2025

  20. [20]

    H. P. Thanabalan, L. Bengtsson, U. Lafont, and G. Volpe, Proc.SPIEPC13585,EmergingTopicsinArtificialIntelligence (ETAI) (2025)

    2025

  21. [21]

    R. Das, S. Prashanth, M. Babu, F. Visentin, S. Palagi, and B. Mazzolai, Scientific Reports13, 1571 (2023)

    2023

  22. [22]

    Phan and D

    H.-V. Phan and D. Floreano, Science Robotics9, 20 (2024)

    2024

  23. [23]

    Y. Chen, H. Zhao, J. Mao, P. Chirarattananon, E. F. Helbling, N.-s. P. Hyun, D. R. Clarke, and R. J. Wood, Nature575, 324 (2019)

    2019

  24. [24]

    S. L. Jeger, V. Wüest, C. Toumieh, and D. Floreano, npj Robot 2, 8 (2024)

    2024

  25. [25]

    M.Hauser,The Evolution of Communication(Cambridge,MA: MIT Press, 1997)

    1997

  26. [26]

    Gillam, Nature Education Knowledge3, 20 (2011)

    E. Gillam, Nature Education Knowledge3, 20 (2011)

    2011

  27. [27]

    W. Wang, W. Duan, S. Ahmed, A. Sen, and T. E. Mallouk, Accounts of chemical research48, 1938 (2015)

    1938

  28. [28]

    D. A. Fletcher and R. D. Mullins, Nature463, 485 (2010)

    2010

  29. [29]

    M. C. Marchetti, J. F. Joanny, S. Ramaswamy, T. B. Liverpool, J. Prost, M. Rao, and R. A. Simha, Rev. Mod. Phys.85, 1143 (2013)

    2013

  30. [30]

    I. D. Couzin, J. Krause, N. R. Franks, and S. A. Levin, Nature 433, 513 (2005)

    2005

  31. [31]

    S.J.Portugal,T.Y.Hubel,J.Fritz,S.Heese,D.Trobe,B.Voelkl, S.Hailes,A.M.Wilson, andJ.R.Usherwood,Nature505,399 (2014)

    2014

  32. [32]

    Beyond robustness: A taxonomy of approaches towards resilient multi-robot systems,

    A. Prorok, M. Malencia, L. Carlone, G. S. Sukhatme, B. M. Sadler, and V. Kumar, “Beyond robustness: A taxonomy of approaches towards resilient multi-robot systems,” (2021), arXiv:2109.12343 [cs.RO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  33. [33]

    S. A. . P. A. Gielis, J., Current Robotics Reports3, 213–225 (2022)

    2022

  34. [34]

    F.DresslerandO.B.Akan,Comput.Netw.54,881–900(2010)

    2010

  35. [35]

    W. Yao, H. G. de Marina, Z. Sun, and M. Cao, IEEE Transac- tions on Robotics39, 1119 (2022)

    2022

  36. [36]

    Sakurama and T

    K. Sakurama and T. Sugie, inGeneralized Coordination of Multi-robot Systems(2021)

    2021

  37. [37]

    N.Bartolini,A.Coletta,G.Maselli,M.Piva, andD.Silvestri,in IEEE INFOCOM 2021 - IEEE Conference on Computer Com- munications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS)(2021)pp.1–6

    2021

  38. [38]

    Grada, M

    A. Grada, M. Otero-Vinas, F. Prieto-Castrillo, Z. Obagi, and V. Falanga, Journal of Investigative Dermatology137, e11 (2017)

    2017

  39. [39]

    T. E. Angelini, E. Hannezo, X. Trepat, M. Marquez, J. J. Fred- berg, and D. A. Weitz, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences108, 4714 (2011)

    2011

  40. [40]

    D. Bi, X. Yang, M. C. Marchetti, and M. L. Manning, Physical Review X6, 021011 (2016)

    2016

  41. [41]

    S. G. Reebs, Animal behaviour59, 403 (2000)

    2000

  42. [42]

    Swaney, J

    W. Swaney, J. Kendal, H. Capon, C. Brown, and K. N. Laland, Animal Behaviour62, 591 (2001)

    2001

  43. [43]

    J.A.MarshallandA.Reina,AnimalBehaviour210,189(2024)

    2024

  44. [44]

    Mokhtarian, J

    A. Mokhtarian, J. Xu, P. Scheffe, M. Kloock, S. Schaefer, H. Bang, V.-A. Le, S. Ulhas, J. Betz, S. Wilson, S. Berman, L.Paull,A.Prorok, andB.Alrifaee,IEEERobotics&Automa- tion Magazine32, 146 (2025)

    2025

  45. [45]

    M.KegeleirsandM.Birattari,FrontiersRoboticsAI12(2025), 10.3389/FROBT.2025.1607978

    arXiv 2025

  46. [46]

    Magnenat, J.-C

    F.Mondada,M.Bonani,X.Raemy,J.Pugh,C.Cianci,A.Klap- tocz, S. Magnenat, J.-C. Zufferey, D. Floreano, A. Martinoli, et al., inProceedings of the 9th conference on autonomous robot systems and competitions, Vol. 1 (Castelo Branco: IPCB, 6 Instituto Politécnico de Castelo Branco, 2009) pp. 59–65

    2009

  47. [47]

    Rubenstein, C

    M. Rubenstein, C. Ahler, and R. Nagpal, in2012 IEEE inter- national conference on robotics and automation(IEEE, 2012) pp. 3293–3298

    2012

  48. [48]

    Paull, J

    L. Paull, J. Tani, H. Ahn, J. Alonso-Mora, L. Carlone, M. Cap, Y. F. Chen, C. Choi, J. Dusek, Y. Fang, D. Hoehener, S.-Y. Liu, M.Novitzky,I.F.Okuyama,J.Pazis,G.Rosman,V.Varricchio, H.-C.Wang,D.Yershov,H.Zhao,M.Benjamin,C.Carr,M.Zu- ber, S. Karaman, E. Frazzoli, D. Del Vecchio, D. Rus, J. How, J. Leonard, and A. Censi, in2017 IEEE International Confer- enc...

    2017

  49. [49]

    W.Giernacki,M.Skwierczyński,W.Witwicki,P.Wroński, and P.Kozierski,in2017 22nd international conference on methods and models in automation and robotics (MMAR)(IEEE, 2017) pp. 37–42

    2017

  50. [50]

    García-Pérez, J

    L. García-Pérez, J. C. Sombría, A. G. Fontán, and J. F. J. Castellanos, inRobotics in Education, edited by R. Balogh, D. Obdržálek, and E. Christoforou (Springer Nature Switzer- land, Cham, 2023) pp. 243–254

    2023

  51. [51]

    Mañas Álvarez, M

    F.-J. Mañas Álvarez, M. Guinaldo, R. Dormido, and S. Dormido, IEEE Access11, 34899 (2023)

    2023

  52. [52]

    Wilson, P

    S. Wilson, P. Glotfelter, L. Wang, S. Mayya, G. Notomista, M. Mote, and M. Egerstedt, IEEE Control Systems Magazine 40, 26 (2020)

    2020

  53. [53]

    V. A. Baulin, A. Giacometti, D. A. Fedosov, S. Ebbens, N. R. Varela-Rosales, N. Feliu, M. Chowdhury, M. Hu, R. Füchslin, M. Dijkstra,et al., Soft Matter21, 4129 (2025)

    2025

  54. [54]

    Gompper, H

    G. Gompper, H. A. Stone, C. Kurzthaler, D. Saintillan, F. Peruani, D. A. Fedosov, T. Auth, C. Cottin-Bizonne, C. Ybert, E. Clement, T. Darnige, A. Lindner, R. E. Goldstein, B. Liebchen, J. Binysh, A. Souslov, L. Isa, R. di Leonardo, G.Frangipane,H.Gu,B.J.Nelson,F.Brauns,M.C.Marchetti, F. Cichos, V.-L. Heuthe, C. Bechinger, A. Korman, O. Feiner- man, A. Ca...

    2025

  55. [55]

    X. Ju, C. Chen, C. M. Oral, S. Sevim, R. Golestanian, M. Sun, N.Bouzari,X.Lin,M.Urso,J.SeokNam,Y.Cho,X.Peng,F.C. Landers, S. Yang, A. Adibi, N. Taz, R. Wittkowski, D. Ahmed, W. Wang, V. Magdanz, M. Medina-Sanchez, M. Guix, N. Bari, B. Behkam, R. Kapral, Y. Huang, J. Tang, B. Wang, K. Mo- rozov, A. Leshansky, S. Ahmad Abbasi, H. Choi, S. Ghosh, B. Borges F...

    2025

  56. [56]

    M.TeVrugtandR.Wittkowski,TheEuropeanPhysicalJournal E48, 12 (2025)

    2025

  57. [57]

    March-Pons, R

    D. March-Pons, R. Pastor-Satorras, and M. C. Miguel, Com- munications Physics8, 119 (2025)

    2025

  58. [58]

    March-Pons, E

    D. March-Pons, E. E. Ferrero, and M. C. Miguel, Physical Review Research6, 043205 (2024)

    2024

  59. [59]

    D.Acosta-Soba,A.Columbu, andG.Viglialoro,arXivpreprint arXiv:2501.13224 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    Abdoli, A

    I. Abdoli, A. Sharma, and H. Löwen, Physics of Fluids37 (2025)

    2025

  61. [61]

    Löwen and B

    H. Löwen and B. Liebchen, arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.08632 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  62. [62]

    W. Cai, G. Wang, Y. Zhang, X. Qu, and Z. Huang, Biophysics Reviews6, 031302 (2025),

    2025

  63. [63]

    Bapst, T

    V. Bapst, T. Keck, A. Grabska-Barwińska, C. Donner, E. D. Cubuk, S. S. Schoenholz, A. Obika, A. W. Nelson, T. Back, D. Hassabis,et al., Nature physics16, 448 (2020)

    2020

  64. [64]

    Boattini, F

    E. Boattini, F. Smallenburg, and L. Filion, Physical Review Letters127, 088007 (2021)

    2021

  65. [65]

    P. S. Clegg, Soft Matter17, 3991 (2021)

    2021

  66. [66]

    S. J. Wetzel, S. Ha, R. Iten, M. Klopotek, and Z. Liu, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.23616 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  67. [67]

    G. Jung, R. M. Alkemade, V. Bapst, D. Coslovich, L. Filion, F. P. Landes, A. J. Liu, F. S. Pezzicoli, H. Shiba, G. Volpe, F.Zamponi,L.Berthier, andG.Biroli,NatureReviewsPhysics 7, 91 (2025)

    2025

  68. [68]

    Ciarella, and L

    G.Janzen,C.Smit,S.Visbeek,V.E.Debets,C.Luo,C.Storm, S. Ciarella, and L. M. Janssen, Physical Review Materials8, 025602 (2024)

    2024

  69. [69]

    Cichos, K

    F. Cichos, K. Gustavsson, B. Mehlig, and G. Volpe, Nature Machine Intelligence2, 94 (2020)

    2020

  70. [70]

    Janzen, X

    G. Janzen, X. L. Smeets, V. E. Debets, C. Luo, C. Storm, L. M. Janssen, andS.Ciarella,EurophysicsLetters143,17004(2023)

    2023

  71. [71]

    Volpe, F

    G. Volpe, F. Cichos, and G. Volpe, inActive Colloids: From Fundamentals to Frontiers,1(RoyalSocietyofChemistry,2024) pp. 565 – 577

    2024

  72. [72]

    Menkovski, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.02129 (2025)

    K.Minartz,T.d’Hondt,L.Hillmann,J.Starruß,L.Brusch, and V. Menkovski, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.02129 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  73. [73]

    Q. J. Braat, G. Janzen, B. C. Jansen, V. E. Debets, S. Ciarella, and L. Janssen, Soft Matter (2025)

    2025

  74. [74]

    M.Ruiz-Garcia,C.M.BarriusoG,L.C.Alexander,D.G.Aarts, L. M. Ghiringhelli, and C. Valeriani, Physical Review E109, 064611 (2024)

    2024

  75. [75]

    Y. Liu, Y. Cui, H. Zhou, S. Lei, H. Yuan, T. Shen, and J. Yin, Computers, Materials & Continua82(2025)

    2025

  76. [76]

    R. S. Sutton, A. G. Barto,et al.,Reinforcement learning: An introduction, Vol. 1 (MIT press Cambridge, 1998)

    1998

  77. [77]

    S. L. Brunton and J. N. Kutz,Data-Driven Science and Engi- neering: Machine Learning, Dynamical Systems, and Control, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2022)

    2022

  78. [78]

    M.J.Falk,V.Alizadehyazdi,H.Jaeger, andA.Murugan,Phys. Rev. Res.3, 033291 (2021)

    2021

  79. [79]

    U. T. Lieu and N. Yoshinaga, Soft Matter21, 514 (2025)

    2025

  80. [80]

    Floyd, A

    C. Floyd, A. R. Dinner, and S. Vaikuntanathan, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.03798 (2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024