pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.18848 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-20 · 🧮 math.DS · math.OC

Consensus and flocking with transmission and reaction delays

Elisa Continelli , Jan Haskovec , Cristina Pignotti This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 03:15 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.DS math.OC
keywords consensusflockingmulti-agent systemstransmission delayreaction delayLyapunov functionalHalanay inequalityasymptotic stability
0
0 comments X

The pith

Sufficiently small transmission and reaction delays allow multi-agent systems to achieve asymptotic consensus and flocking.

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

The paper examines how two kinds of delays affect groups of agents trying to agree on a state or align their velocities. A simple linear two-agent case yields explicit stability insights. For the general nonlinear setting with a positive decaying influence function, the authors prove that consensus and flocking occur when both delays remain below a threshold set by the size of the initial data and the decay rate of the interactions. The proof combines a Lyapunov functional with a Halanay-type inequality. These conditions are relevant whenever real groups experience unavoidable lags in communication and response, such as in animal collectives, social networks, or robotic formations.

Core claim

For a linear two-agent system, the delays impact asymptotic stability in a way that can be analyzed explicitly. For the general multi-agent case with nonlinear globally positive influence function, sufficient conditions for asymptotic consensus and flocking are derived requiring the delays to be sufficiently small relative to the initial data and the decay rate of the influence function. The analysis uses a Lyapunov functional approach combined with a Halanay-type inequality.

What carries the argument

Lyapunov functional approach combined with a Halanay-type inequality, which bounds the derivative of a suitable energy functional to guarantee asymptotic stability when the delays satisfy the smallness condition.

Load-bearing premise

The delays must be sufficiently small relative to the initial data and the decay rate of the influence function for the Lyapunov-Halanay analysis to guarantee asymptotic stability.

What would settle it

A concrete numerical simulation of the linear two-agent system whose characteristic equation shows loss of stability for delays larger than the paper's sufficient bound, or convergence for delays below it.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.18848 by Cristina Pignotti, Elisa Continelli, Jan Haskovec.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Pure imaginary roots λ = ωi for the characteristic equation (2.2) colored by the value of ω ∈ (0, 2], obtained by numerical solution of the system (2.3)–(2.4). The black dashed lines demarcate the region where min{σ, τ} ≤ 1/2. The black circle marks the point σ = τ = π/4. Then sin ω τ+σ 2  = (−1)m, and inserting this into (2.6) yields 2 cos  ω τ − σ 2  = (−1)mω. (2.8) Moreover, (2.7) gives (τ − σ)ω = (2… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate consensus formation and flocking behavior in multi-agent systems subject to two distinct types of delays: a transmission delay accounting for information exchange between agents, and a reaction delay representing the processing time before agents adjust their states. For a simplified linear two-agent system, we provide explicit insight into how these delays affect asymptotic stability. We then derive sufficient conditions for asymptotic consensus and flocking in the general multi-agent setting with a nonlinear, globally positive influence function. These conditions require the delays to be sufficiently small relatively to the initial data and the decay rate of the influence function. The analysis is based on a Lyapunov functional approach combined with a Halanay-type inequality. Our results establish rigorous conditions under which collective behavior emerges in delayed multi-agent systems where both communication and reaction lags are non-negligible, with applications to biological, social, and engineered systems.

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 paper examines consensus and flocking in multi-agent systems incorporating both transmission delays (information exchange) and reaction delays (state adjustment). For a linear two-agent system it derives explicit stability conditions; for the general nonlinear multi-agent case with a globally positive influence function it establishes sufficient conditions for asymptotic consensus and flocking via a Lyapunov functional combined with a Halanay-type inequality, under the requirement that the delays remain sufficiently small relative to the initial data and the decay rate of the influence function.

Significance. If the derivations hold, the work supplies rigorous sufficient conditions for collective behavior in delayed multi-agent systems, extending standard Lyapunov-Halanay techniques to the simultaneous presence of two delay types. The explicit two-agent linear analysis offers concrete insight into delay effects, while the general-case conditions are applicable to biological, social, and engineered systems. The approach is parameter-free in its core structure once the small-delay hypothesis is imposed, and the manuscript correctly flags the small-delay restriction as the necessary price for treating arbitrary nonlinear influence functions.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (general nonlinear case): the Halanay inequality step requires the delays to be small relative to both the initial data and the decay rate of the influence function; the manuscript should state explicitly whether this smallness condition can be made uniform in the number of agents or whether it degrades with network size, as this directly affects the load-bearing claim of applicability to large multi-agent systems.
  2. [§2] §2 (linear two-agent case): the explicit stability thresholds are derived, but the transition from the two-agent linear analysis to the general nonlinear setting leaves open whether the same Lyapunov functional construction extends without additional topological assumptions (e.g., connectedness of the interaction graph); a brief remark on this point would strengthen the central claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Theorem 3.1] The abstract and introduction use the phrase 'sufficiently small relatively to the initial data'; a precise mathematical statement of this relation (e.g., an inequality involving the initial supremum norm and the decay constant) should appear in the statement of the main theorem.
  2. [§1] Notation for the transmission delay τ and reaction delay σ is introduced but not consistently subscripted when multiple pairs appear; a uniform indexing convention would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the requested clarifications in the revised version.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: §3 (general nonlinear case): the Halanay inequality step requires the delays to be small relative to both the initial data and the decay rate of the influence function; the manuscript should state explicitly whether this smallness condition can be made uniform in the number of agents or whether it degrades with network size, as this directly affects the load-bearing claim of applicability to large multi-agent systems.

    Authors: We appreciate this observation. Upon re-examination of the estimates in §3, the smallness condition on the delays is determined by ensuring the Halanay inequality yields a strictly negative derivative bound for the Lyapunov functional. Because the influence function is globally positive and the functional is built from pairwise interaction terms (with the disagreement measured in a manner that normalizes across the network), the resulting constants in the decay estimate do not scale with the number of agents N. The required upper bound on the delays therefore remains uniform in network size and depends only on the initial data and the decay rate of the influence function. We will add an explicit remark in the revised §3 stating this uniformity. revision: yes

  2. Referee: §2 (linear two-agent case): the explicit stability thresholds are derived, but the transition from the two-agent linear analysis to the general nonlinear setting leaves open whether the same Lyapunov functional construction extends without additional topological assumptions (e.g., connectedness of the interaction graph); a brief remark on this point would strengthen the central claim.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this suggestion. The transition is direct and does not require extra topological assumptions such as connectedness of the interaction graph. The global positivity of the influence function ensures that every pair of agents interacts with strictly positive strength, rendering the underlying graph complete for any finite N. The Lyapunov functional employed in the general nonlinear case is the natural multi-agent extension of the quadratic form used in the two-agent linear analysis. We will insert a short clarifying paragraph at the start of §3 to make this point explicit and thereby strengthen the exposition. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation uses standard tools on explicit equations

full rationale

The paper establishes sufficient conditions for asymptotic consensus and flocking via a Lyapunov functional plus Halanay-type inequality applied directly to the delayed multi-agent ODE system. The small-delay restriction relative to initial data and influence-function decay rate is stated explicitly as the price for handling the general nonlinear case; the two-agent linear case is solved explicitly for insight. No step reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, self-definition, or self-citation chain; the cited tools are independent, externally verifiable inequalities whose application here does not presuppose the target result.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis relies on standard Lyapunov theory and Halanay inequalities for delay differential equations; no new entities are postulated and no parameters are fitted to data.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Existence of a globally positive, decaying influence function that governs agent interactions
    Invoked to ensure the nonlinear coupling term drives consensus when delays are small.
  • standard math Standard properties of Lyapunov functionals for delay systems and applicability of Halanay-type inequalities
    Used to prove asymptotic stability without explicit construction details in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5441 in / 1320 out tokens · 24113 ms · 2026-05-10T03:15:30.391884+00:00 · methodology

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

37 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Choi and J

    Y.-P. Choi and J. Haskovec:Cucker-Smale model with normalized communication weights and time delay. Kinet. Relat. Models 10 (2017), pp. 1011–1033

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    Choi and Z

    Y.-P. Choi and Z. Li,Emergent behavior of Cucker-Smale flocking particles with heteroge- neous time delays, Appl. Math. Lett., 86:49–56, 2018

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Y.-P. Choi, A. Paolucci and C. Pignotti:Consensus of the Hegselmann-Krause opinion formation model with time delay. Math. Met. Appl. Sci. 44 (2019), pp. 4560–4579

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Cicolani, E

    C. Cicolani, E. Continelli and C. Pignotti:First and second-order Cucker-Smale models with non-universal interaction, time delay and communication failures.J. Dynam. Differential Equations, online first (2025). 22

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    Cicolani and C

    C. Cicolani and C. Pignotti:Opinion dynamics of two populations with time-delayed cou- pling.Math. Meth. Appl. Sci. 48 (2025), pp. 5731–5744

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Continelli and C

    E. Continelli and C. Pignotti:Consensus for Hegselmann–Krause type models with time variable time delays. Math. Meth. Appl. Sci. 46 (2023), pp. 18916–18934

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Continelli and C

    E. Continelli and C. Pignotti:Convergence to consensus results for Hegselmann-Krause type models with attractive-lacking interaction. Math. Control Relat. Fields 14 (2024), pp. 1408–1427

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Continelli:Asymptotic flocking for the Cucker-Smale model with time variable time de- lays

    E. Continelli:Asymptotic flocking for the Cucker-Smale model with time variable time de- lays. Acta Appl. Math. 188 (2023), Paper No. 15, 23 pp

    work page 2023

  9. [9]

    Cucker and S

    F. Cucker and S. Smale:Emergent behaviour in flocks, IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 52 (2007), pp. 852–862

    work page 2007

  10. [10]

    Cucker and S

    F. Cucker and S. Smale:On the mathematics of emergence, Jap. J. Math. 2 (2007), pp. 197–227

    work page 2007

  11. [11]

    Dong, S.-Y

    J.-G. Dong, S.-Y. Ha, K. Doheon, and K. Jeongho,Time-delay effect on the flocking in an ensemble of thermomechanical Cucker-Smale particles, J. Differential Equations, 266:2373– 2407, 2019

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    Erban, J

    R. Erban, J. Haskovec, Y. Sun:A Cucker-Smale model with noise and delay.SIAM J. Appl. Math., Vol. 76, No. 4 (2016), pp. 1535–1557

    work page 2016

  13. [13]

    Halanay:Differential Equations: Stability, Oscillations, Time Lags.Academic Press, New York London, 1966

    A. Halanay:Differential Equations: Stability, Oscillations, Time Lags.Academic Press, New York London, 1966

    work page 1966

  14. [14]

    Hale and S.M

    J.K. Hale and S.M. Verduyn Lunel:Introduction to functional differential equations. Applied mathematical sciences, Vol. 99 (1993), Springer-Verlag, New York

    work page 1993

  15. [15]

    Haskovec:Direct proof of unconditional asymptotic consensus in the Hegselmann-Krause model with transmission-type delay.Bull

    J. Haskovec:Direct proof of unconditional asymptotic consensus in the Hegselmann-Krause model with transmission-type delay.Bull. London Math. Soc. 53 (2021), pp. 1312–1323

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    Haskovec:A simple proof of asymptotic consensus in the Hegselmann-Krause and Cucker- Smale models with normalization and delay.SIAM J

    J. Haskovec:A simple proof of asymptotic consensus in the Hegselmann-Krause and Cucker- Smale models with normalization and delay.SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst. 20 (2021), pp. 130– 148

    work page 2021

  17. [17]

    J.Haskovec:Well posedness and asymptotic consensus in the Hegselmann-Krause model with finite speed of information propagation.Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 149 (2021), pp. 3425–3437

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    Haskovec:Flocking in the Cucker-Smale model with self-delay and nonsymmetric inter- action weights.J

    J. Haskovec:Flocking in the Cucker-Smale model with self-delay and nonsymmetric inter- action weights.J. Math. Anal. Appl. 514 (2022), pp. 126261

    work page 2022

  19. [19]

    Haskovec:Asymptotic behavior of the linear consensus model with delay and anticipation

    J. Haskovec:Asymptotic behavior of the linear consensus model with delay and anticipation. Math. Meth. Appl. Sci. 45 (2022), pp. 9979–9997

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    Haskovec:Cucker-Smale model with finite speed of information propagation: well- posedness, flocking and mean-field limit.Kinet

    J. Haskovec:Cucker-Smale model with finite speed of information propagation: well- posedness, flocking and mean-field limit.Kinet. Relat. Models 16 (2023), pp. 394–422

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    Haskovec:Adaptive sensitivity control for a feedback loop and a consensus model with unknown delay.Partial Differ

    J. Haskovec:Adaptive sensitivity control for a feedback loop and a consensus model with unknown delay.Partial Differ. Equ. Appl. 6 (2025), no. 2, Paper No. 12, 20 pp. 23

    work page 2025

  22. [22]

    Haskovec and I

    J. Haskovec and I. Markou:Asymptotic flocking in the Cucker-Smale model with reaction- type delays in the non-oscillatory regime.Kinet. Relat. Models 13 (2020), pp. 795–813

    work page 2020

  23. [23]

    Haskovec and I

    J. Haskovec and I. Markou:Exponential asymptotic flocking in the Cucker-Smale model with distributed reaction delays.Math. Biosci. Eng. 17 (2020), no. 5, pp. 5651–5671

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    Haskovec and M

    J. Haskovec and M. Rodriguez Cartabia:Optimal condition for asymptotic consensus in the Hegselmann-Krause model with finite speed of information propagation.Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 151 (2023), pp. 3871–3878

    work page 2023

  25. [25]

    Hegselmann and U

    R. Hegselmann and U. Krause,Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence models, analysis, and simulation, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 5, (2002), pp. 1–24

    work page 2002

  26. [26]

    Jabin and S

    P.E. Jabin and S. Motsch:Clustering and asymptotic behavior in opinion formation.J. Differential Equations 257 (2014), pp. 4165–4187

    work page 2014

  27. [27]

    Liu, and J

    Y. Liu, and J. Wu:Flocking and asymptotic velocity of the Cucker-Smale model with pro- cessing delay. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 415 (2014), pp. 53–61

    work page 2014

  28. [28]

    J. Lu, D. W. C. Ho and J. Kurths:Consensus over directed static networks with arbitrary finite communications delays. Phys. Rev. E, 80 (2009), Paper No. 066121, 7 pp

    work page 2009

  29. [29]

    Motsch and E

    S. Motsch and E. Tadmor:A New Model for Self-organized Dynamics and Its Flocking Behavior. J. Stat. Phys. 144 (2011), no. 5, pp. 923–947

    work page 2011

  30. [30]

    Paolucci and C

    A. Paolucci and C. Pignotti:Consensus Strategies for a Hegselmann–Krause Model with Leadership and Time Variable Time Delay. J. Dynam. Differential Equations 36 (2024), no. 4, pp. 3207–3232

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    Pignotti and E

    C. Pignotti and E. Trélat:Convergence to consensus of the general finite-dimensional Cucker-Smale model with time-varying delays. Comm. Math. Sci. 16 (2018), pp. 2053–2076

    work page 2018

  32. [32]

    Rodriguez Cartabia:Cucker-Smale model with time delay

    M. Rodriguez Cartabia:Cucker-Smale model with time delay. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 42 (2022), pp. 2409–2432

    work page 2022

  33. [33]

    Seuret, V

    A. Seuret, V. Dimos, V. Dimarogonas and K.H. Johansson:Consensus under Communica- tion Delays. Proceedings of the 47th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Cancun, Mexico, Dec. 9-11, 2008

    work page 2008

  34. [34]

    Smith:An Introduction to Delay Differential Equations with Applications to the Life Sciences.Springer New York Dordrecht Heidelberg London, 2011

    H. Smith:An Introduction to Delay Differential Equations with Applications to the Life Sciences.Springer New York Dordrecht Heidelberg London, 2011

    work page 2011

  35. [35]

    Somarakis and J

    C. Somarakis and J. Baras:Delay-independent convergence for linear consensus networks with applications to non-linear flocking systems. In Proceedings of the 12th IFAC Workshop on Time Delay Systems, pp. 159–164, Ann Arbor (2015)

    work page 2015

  36. [36]

    Szwaykowska, I.B

    K. Szwaykowska, I.B. Schwartz, L.M. Romero, C.R. Heckman, D. Mox and M. Ani Hsieh: Collective motion patterns of swarms with delay coupling: theory and experiment. Phys. Rev. E 93 (2016), 032307

    work page 2016

  37. [37]

    R. Zhou, J. Li:p-th moment consensus of multi-agent systems with relative state-dependent measurement noises and time delays.IET Control Theory Appl. 12 (2018), pp. 2245–2252. 24

    work page 2018