Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 55 references

Emergence of Order in Chemically Active Droplets: Temporal Dynamics and Collective Behavior

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read At sufficiently low Péclet number, chemically active droplets spontaneously organize into a long-range hexatic-like lattice, driven by repulsive chemical interactions.

desk verdict A solid experimental observation of hexatic-like ordering in active droplets at low Pe, with a plausible chemical-repulsion mechanism that is inferred rather than directly measured. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.07009 v1 pith:4QLBDDQ3 submitted 2025-02-10 cond-mat.soft

Sobiya Ashraf , Pawan Kumar , Prateek Dwivedi , Frédéric Blanc , Dipin Pillai , Rahul Mangal This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.soft
keywords activedropletsmicellarsolubilizationPécletnumberchemicalrepulsionhexaticorderself-organizationmatterquasi-2Dconfinement
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

Chemically active oil droplets that swim by micellar solubilization normally cluster into transient chains when their Péclet number is high, because hydrodynamic pusher interactions attract them sideways. This paper shows that when the Péclet number is lowered—by adding a high-molecular-weight polymer or by using smaller droplets that shrink as they dissolve—the chemical field of filled micelles each droplet leaves behind becomes an enveloping, long-range repulsive interaction. In a dense enough population, that repulsion drives the droplets apart into a non-close-packed, hexatic-like ordered state in which every droplet is caged by six neighbours at separations of several droplet diameters. The paper condenses the condition for ordering into the criterion $\mathrm{Pe}\,\phi^{-0.5} \le \psi$, where the effective repulsion range is taken to scale as $\psi/\mathrm{Pe}$ and $\phi$ is the area fraction. It also shows that the resulting ordered array is a soft, chemically structured environment that guides larger droplets along interstitial corridors and reflects them at cage boundaries.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Péclet number $\mathrm{Pe}=av/D$, the ratio of advection to diffusion of the filled micelles that each 5CB droplet releases. It controls the shape of the chemical field: at low $\mathrm{Pe}$ the field envelops the droplet, giving a long-range repulsive interaction, while at high $\mathrm{Pe}$ it is concentrated behind the droplet and hydrodynamic pusher effects dominate. The ordering argument rests on treating the repulsion as an effective enlarged droplet radius $a_{\mathrm{eff}}=\psi/\mathrm{Pe}$, using the $\mathrm{Pe}^{-1}$ scaling known from wall-rebound studies, and comparing it with the spacing $L = a\sqrt{\pi/(2\sqrt{3}\phi)}$ of a hexagonal lattice at area fraction $\phi$. When $a_{\mathrm{eff}}$ exceeds $L$, the system is predicted to order, giving the phase criterion $\mathrm{Pe}\,\phi^{-0.5}\le\psi$. The structural evidence comes from radial distribution functions, Voronoi-cell statistics, and mean-square-displacement plateaus that show caging in the ordered state.

What would settle it

Measure the pair repulsion between two droplets directly at several low Péclet numbers and check whether the force range scales as $1/\mathrm{Pe}$; if it does not, the proposed criterion loses its basis. A complementary check is to screen the chemical interaction by adding filled micelles to the background solution and see whether ordering disappears.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At low Péclet number, $\mathrm{Pe}=av/D$, the trail of filled micelles produced by a solubilizing 5CB droplet envelops the droplet and acts as an isotropic long-range chemical repulsion. The paper demonstrates experimentally that an ensemble of such droplets, after about two to three hours, develops a hexatic-like order: the radial distribution function shows peaks at regular intervals, Voronoi cells are predominantly six-sided, and nearest-neighbour separations are far larger than the droplet diameter (about five droplet diameters for 85 µm droplets with PEO, and about fifteen diameters for the shrinking 35 µm droplets). The same ordering appears in ordinary TTAB solution once the droplets shrink and slow enough to bring $\mathrm{Pe}$ down, confirming that the polymer is not the cause. The paper proposes that ordering occurs when the effective repulsive range $a_{\mathrm{eff}}=\psi/\mathrm{Pe}$ exceeds the hexagonal lattice spacing $L = a\sqrt{\pi/(2\sqrt{3}\phi)}$, which yields the criterion $\mathrm{Pe}\,\phi^{-0.5}\le \psi$, with $\psi$ an undetermined proportionality constant; the authors note the analogy to Wigner crystals. In the ordered state, the chemical fields of the anchored droplets create soft cages: a larger droplet placed in the array navigates along Voronoi-cell edges, deflects at cell corners, and, if trapped, oscillates between opposing repulsive barriers.

Load-bearing premise

The paper infers, rather than directly measures, that the long-range chemical repulsion—whose range is assumed to scale as the inverse of the Péclet number—is what causes the observed ordering, so the claim would collapse if the ordering actually came from the polymer additive or from the droplets' gradual shrinking over the experiment.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At high $\mathrm{Pe}$, pusher hydrodynamic interactions make droplets form short-lived chain-like clusters; as the droplets shrink and slow, $\mathrm{Pe}$ drops and the same population can spontaneously transition into the ordered state even without any polymer additive.
  • Ordering is a collective threshold phenomenon: both a sufficiently low $\mathrm{Pe}$ and a sufficiently high area fraction $\phi$ are required, with the phase boundary described by $\mathrm{Pe}\,\phi^{-0.5}\approx\mathrm{const}$.
  • In the ordered state droplets remain dynamically caged: their mean-square displacement plateaus at short times and grows only superdiffusively ($\sim t^{1.7}$) over long times, so the 'crystal' is out of equilibrium but structurally persistent.
  • The ordered array acts as a soft, chemically active template: larger droplets follow corridors along Voronoi-cell edges, deflect at corners, and can be permanently caged while oscillating, offering a physical mechanism for guided navigation in structured fluids.
  • The mechanism suggests a route to open, non-close-packed self-assemblies that minimize cross-talk between features, which the paper points toward for optical and electrochemical sensing applications.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable consequence the paper leaves implicit: if the $\psi/\mathrm{Pe}$ scaling holds, then at extremely low $\mathrm{Pe}$ the effective repulsion range grows so large that the droplets sit farther apart and the lattice should become more dilute; sweeping $\mathrm{Pe}$ below the reported range would reveal whether the ordering boundary has a lower branch.
  • The same criterion should apply to other micellar-solubilization droplet systems, and the proportionality constant $\psi$ may encode material parameters such as solubilization rate and micelle diffusivity, offering a knob for programming lattice spacing in soft active materials.
  • The navigation experiments suggest a minimal experimental model of active particles in a soft active lattice where the lattice sites are themselves chemically active; a natural extension would be to ask whether such corridors optimize or impede transport as a function of the injected droplet's size and $\mathrm{Pe}$.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This experimental paper studies the collective behavior of 5CB oil droplets that self-propel via micellar solubilization in a quasi-2D confinement. In a 6 wt.% TTAB solution at high Péclet number (~60), droplets exhibit pusher-like propulsion and form transient chain-like clusters, consistent with earlier observations. When PEO is added (lowering Pe to ~4–7), droplets slow down, their motion becomes more persistent, and over ~9000 s they develop a long-range ordered, hexatic-like arrangement with nearest-neighbor separations of several droplet diameters. The authors attribute this ordering to long-range chemical repulsion between droplets, and propose a criterion for ordering of the form Pe φ^{-0.5} ≤ ψ, where ψ is an undetermined constant. They also show that ordering can be achieved in pure TTAB by using smaller 35 µm droplets, and that larger droplets navigate through the ordered assembly, moving along Voronoi edges and being deflected at cell corners.

Significance. If the chemical-repulsion mechanism is substantiated, this work would provide a clear experimental demonstration of activity-induced open-lattice self-assembly in colloidal swimmers, distinct from hydrodynamic clustering. The paper contains several strong elements: careful measurements of droplet trajectories, RDF and Voronoi analysis, MSD showing caging, and a two-condition comparison (with/without PEO, and different droplet sizes) that supports the idea that low Pe is associated with ordering. The navigation experiment adds a functional dimension. However, the central claim that ordering is caused by long-range chemical repulsion is inferred from prior pair-interaction studies rather than directly measured in the many-body system, and the proposed ordering criterion contains an undetermined constant, making it a post-hoc rationalization rather than a falsifiable prediction. The paper would be significantly strengthened by a direct estimate of the interaction range/strength or by a parameter-free scaling test.

major comments (3)
  1. [III.D] The proposed ordering criterion Pe φ^{-0.5} ≤ ψ is not falsifiable as stated because ψ is an undetermined proportionality constant. The paper acknowledges this ('future experiments are warranted'), but as it stands the criterion cannot be tested or used for prediction. The authors should either determine ψ from an independent measurement (e.g., from the measured first-neighbor spacing via a_eff = ψ/Pe) or present a parameter-free version of the scaling argument.
  2. [III.B and III.C] The attribution of the observed ordering to long-range chemical repulsion is not directly tested. No measurement of the inter-droplet interaction potential or its range is presented; the effective range a_eff = ψ/Pe is imported from wall-interaction studies [49] without validation in the many-body droplet system. The control with 35 µm droplets in pure TTAB rules out PEO-specific depletion, but it does not exclude confinement-driven outward expansion or the continuous droplet shrinkage (Fig. 4a) as contributing causes. The authors should either provide an independent measurement of the pair interaction (e.g., from droplet trajectories or from the chemical field distribution) or quantitatively show that the inferred repulsion at separations of 5–15a is strong enough to overcome thermal/activity noise.
  3. [III.B] The structural characterization lacks statistical rigor: RDF peak positions (5.3a, 10.8a, 16.4a, 21a) are quoted without error bars, and the claim of hexatic ordering is based on the Voronoi edge histogram without a quantitative hexatic order parameter (e.g., ψ6) or its variance. Adding these would make the central ordering claim more convincing and would allow comparison with the proposed criterion.
minor comments (4)
  1. [I, III.A, III.D] There are several typos and inconsistencies: 'intruiguing' in Section I, 'he enhanced persistence' (missing 'T') in Section III.A, and 'Liperra' for 'Lippera' in Section III.D.
  2. [Figure 4] The sub-panels (b)–(g) are described in the text with some ambiguity between the two conditions (with/without PEO); consider restructuring the figure or caption to separate the two cases more clearly.
  3. [References] References [31] and [50] are the same preprint (Dwivedi et al., arXiv:2404.13740); please consolidate or clarify the intended distinction.
  4. [III.B] The statement that the first-nearest-neighbor peak 'gradually shifts to 5.3 a' could be better explained: the shift is attributed to droplet shrinkage and repulsion, but the factor 5.3 is not justified. A brief comment on why the spacing is not a close-packing distance would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the observed ordering is independently grounded, and the proposed Pe–phi criterion is an explicitly underdetermined scaling proposal rather than a fitted prediction.

full rationale

The central observation—that droplets form hexatic-like order at low Péclet number—is directly measured via RDF, Voronoi analysis, and time-lapse imaging, and is not derived from the paper's own assumptions. The mechanism attributing this ordering to chemical repulsion is imported from prior pair-interaction experiments by the same group (refs [31]/[50]) and from external numerical work (Lippera et al., refs [49]/[51]/[52]); while the self-citation is load-bearing for the mechanistic interpretation, the cited prior work is an experimentally falsifiable result rather than a definitional input of the present derivation, so it does not constitute circularity under the stated rules. The proposed ordering criterion, Pe phi^{-0.5} <= psi, contains an undetermined proportionality constant psi and is introduced after the ordering is observed; however, the paper explicitly frames it as a simple scaling proposal and concedes that 'future experiments are warranted to confirm the proposed phase envelope.' Because psi is not fitted to data and no quantitative prediction is claimed from it, the criterion is underdetermined and post-hoc in spirit, but it is not a circular reduction of the paper's central claim. The measured nearest-neighbor separations are compared with the geometric estimate L from the area fraction as a consistency check, not as a prediction derived from the criterion itself. Overall, the evidence for ordering is self-contained and the scaling argument is honestly presented as provisional, so no circular step meeting the required evidentiary standard is found.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper does not introduce new physical entities. Its central claim rests on measured quantities (Pe, phi) and one undetermined proportionality constant psi in the ordering criterion. The key assumptions are the dominance of chemical repulsion at low Pe and the application of a scaling borrowed from wall interactions to droplet-droplet interactions.

free parameters (1)
  • psi (proportionality constant in a_eff = psi / Pe) = undetermined
    Introduced in the ordering criterion Pe * phi^{-0.5} <= psi. The value is not measured or fitted; the paper states that future experiments are warranted to confirm the phase envelope.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Micellar solubilization drives self-propulsion of 5CB droplets
    Mechanism cited to prior work [12,13,16,38] and assumed throughout the experiments.
  • domain assumption Squirmer model applies to extract swimming mode (beta)
    Used in Fig. 1 and supporting Fig. S1(c) to classify droplets as pusher or puller. Standard for active droplets.
  • domain assumption Repulsive chemical interactions dominate at low Pe
    Inferred from prior pair-interaction studies [31,50] and used to explain the ordering in Section III.D.
  • domain assumption a_eff = psi / Pe scaling for the chemical interaction range
    Borrowed from Lippera et al. [49] for wall interactions and applied to droplet-droplet interactions without direct verification.
  • domain assumption Quasi-2D confinement and quasi-steady state over the experimental duration
    Droplets are confined in a 100 micrometer deep well and observed over 9000 s; the system is continuously evolving due to droplet shrinkage, but treated as quasi-steady in the analysis.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Emergence of Order in Chemically Active Droplets: Temporal Dynamics and Collective Behavior." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4QLBDDQ3

@misc{pith2026250207009,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Emergence of Order in Chemically Active Droplets: Temporal Dynamics and Collective Behavior},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4QLBDDQ3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.07009}
}
abstract

Collective behaviors such as swarming, chemical signaling, and clustering are fundamental to biological microorganisms, enabling hierarchical colony formation, coordinated motion, and enhanced nutrient accessibility crucial for their survival. Over the past few decades, extensive research has been dedicated to unraveling the mechanisms underlying these diverse collective patterns through experimental model systems. Among these, active droplets have emerged as valuable synthetic analogs, effectively replicating key biological attributes and serving as ideal platforms for investigating collective phenomena. This research explores the collective behavior of 4-Cyano-4-pentyl-biphenyl (5CB) oil droplets across varying P\'eclet ($Pe$) numbers. At high $Pe$, droplets exhibit a pusher mode of propulsion and form dynamic chain-like patterns. Decreasing $Pe$ enhances repulsive interactions among droplets, resulting in the inhibition of clustering. In the low $Pe$ regime, their repulsive interactions predominated by chemical field lead to the emergence of an ordered structure. Furthermore, we illustrate how active droplets efficiently navigate within a soft structured environment. These findings contribute to our comprehension of self-organized phenomena in active matter systems and provide insights for designing strategies for controlled locomotion in intricate fluidic environments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.07009 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Schematic depicting the experimental setup, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Optical micrographs captured at different time intervals depicting the collective motion of swimming 5CB droplets [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a, b, e, f) Voronoi diagrams and the corresponding (c, d, g, h) probability density distributions of polygonal cell areas [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Temporal evolution of droplet diameter in the absence and presence of PEO. For 5CB droplets swimming in pure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a-d) Time-lapse optical micrographs of the droplets swimming in pure TTAB aqueous solution, beginning with an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Schematic of the chemical field induced ordering in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. (a) Representative [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [49]

    Lippera, M

    K. Lippera, M. Benzaquen, and S. Michelin, Physical Re- view Fluids 5, 032201 (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [1]

    E. M. Purcell, in Physics and our world: reissue of the proceedings of a symposium in honor of Victor F Weis- skopf (World Scientific, 2014) pp. 47–67

    work page 2014

  3. [2]

    J. L. Moran and J. D. Posner, Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 49, 511 (2017)

    work page 2017

  4. [3]

    J. L. Anderson, Annual review of fluid mechanics 21, 61 (1989)

    work page 1989

  5. [4]

    J. R. Howse, R. A. Jones, A. J. Ryan, T. Gough, R. Vafabakhsh, and R. Golestanian, Physical review let- ters 99, 048102 (2007)

    work page 2007

  6. [5]

    Golestanian, T

    R. Golestanian, T. Liverpool, and A. Ajdari, New Journal of Physics 9, 126 (2007)

    work page 2007

  7. [6]

    Jiang, N

    H.-R. Jiang, N. Yoshinaga, and M. Sano, Physical review letters 105, 268302 (2010)

    work page 2010

  8. [7]

    Yang and M

    M. Yang and M. Ripoll, Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics 84, 061401 (2011)

    work page 2011

Show all 55 references
  1. [8]

    W. F. Paxton, K. C. Kistler, C. C. Olmeda, A. Sen, S. K. St. Angelo, Y. Cao, T. E. Mallouk, P. E. Lammert, and V. H. Crespi, Journal of the American Chemical Society 126, 13424 (2004)

    2004

  2. [9]

    Y. Wang, R. M. Hernandez, D. J. Bartlett, J. M. Bing- ham, T. R. Kline, A. Sen, and T. E. Mallouk, Langmuir 22, 10451 (2006)

    2006

  3. [10]

    Thutupalli, R

    S. Thutupalli, R. Seemann, and S. Herminghaus, New Journal of Physics 13, 073021 (2011)

    2011

  4. [11]

    D. J. P. Kumar, C. Borkar, and P. Dayal, Langmuir 37, 12586 (2021)

    2021

  5. [12]

    Dwivedi, D

    P. Dwivedi, D. Pillai, and R. Mangal, Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science , 101614 (2022)

    2022

  6. [13]

    Peddireddy, P

    K. Peddireddy, P. Kumar, S. Thutupalli, S. Herming- haus, and C. Bahr, Langmuir 28, 12426 (2012)

    2012

  7. [14]

    Michelin, Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 55, 77 (2023)

    S. Michelin, Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 55, 77 (2023)

    2023

  8. [15]

    Birrer, S

    S. Birrer, S. I. Cheon, and L. D. Zarzar, Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science 61, 101623 (2022)

    2022

  9. [16]

    Herminghaus, C

    S. Herminghaus, C. C. Maass, C. Kr¨ uger, S. Thutupalli, L. Goehring, and C. Bahr, Soft matter 10, 7008 (2014)

    2014

  10. [17]

    Morozov and S

    M. Morozov and S. Michelin, The Journal of chemical physics 150 (2019)

    2019

  11. [18]

    S. Suda, T. Suda, T. Ohmura, and M. Ichikawa, Physical Review Letters 127, 088005 (2021)

    2021

  12. [19]

    Dwivedi, A

    P. Dwivedi, A. Shrivastava, D. Pillai, and R. Mangal, Soft Matter 19, 4099 (2023)

    2023

  13. [20]

    Dwivedi, B

    P. Dwivedi, B. R. Si, D. Pillai, and R. Mangal, Physics of Fluids 33 (2021)

    2021

  14. [21]

    B. V. Hokmabad, R. Dey, M. Jalaal, D. Mohanty, M. Al- mukambetova, K. A. Baldwin, D. Lohse, and C. C. Maass, Physical review X 11, 011043 (2021)

    2021

  15. [22]

    C. Jin, C. Kr¨ uger, and C. C. Maass, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114, 5089 (2017). 12

    2017

  16. [23]

    B. V. Hokmabad, J. Agudo-Canalejo, S. Saha, R. Golestanian, and C. C. Maass, Proceedings of the Na- tional Academy of Sciences 119, e2122269119 (2022)

    2022

  17. [24]

    Dwivedi, A

    P. Dwivedi, A. Shrivastava, D. Pillai, and R. Mangal, Physics of Fluids 33, 082108 (2021)

    2021

  18. [25]

    R. Dey, C. M. Buness, B. V. Hokmabad, C. Jin, and C. C. Maass, Nature communications 13, 1 (2022)

    2022

  19. [26]

    Dwivedi, A

    P. Dwivedi, A. Shrivastava, D. Pillai, N. Tiwari, and R. Mangal, Soft Matter (2023)

    2023

  20. [27]

    C. Jin, J. Vachier, S. Bandyopadhyay, T. Macharashvili, and C. C. Maass, Physical Review E 100, 040601 (2019)

    2019

  21. [28]

    C. H. Meredith, P. G. Moerman, J. Groenewold, Y.-J. Chiu, W. K. Kegel, A. van Blaaderen, and L. D. Zarzar, Nature Chemistry 12, 1136 (2020)

    2020

  22. [29]

    Kumar, P

    P. Kumar, P. Dwivedi, S. Ashraf, D. Pillai, and R. Man- gal, Physical Review E 110, 024612 (2024)

    2024

  23. [30]

    B. V. Hokmabad, A. Nishide, P. Ramesh, C. Kr¨ uger, and C. C. Maass, Soft matter 18, 2731 (2022)

    2022

  24. [32]

    Thutupalli, D

    S. Thutupalli, D. Geyer, R. Singh, R. Adhikari, and H. A. Stone, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115, 5403 (2018)

    2018

  25. [33]

    Krueger, C

    C. Krueger, C. Bahr, S. Herminghaus, and C. C. Maass, The European Physical Journal E 39, 1 (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    Kumar, A

    M. Kumar, A. Murali, A. G. Subramaniam, R. Singh, and S. Thutupalli, Nature Communications 15, 4903 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Y. Liu, R. Kailasham, P. G. Moerman, A. S. Khair, and L. D. Zarzar, Angewandte Chemie International Edition 63, e202409382 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    Ershov, M.-S

    D. Ershov, M.-S. Phan, J. W. Pylv¨ an¨ ainen, S. U. Rigaud, L. Le Blanc, A. Charles-Orszag, J. R. Conway, R. F. Laine, N. H. Roy, D. Bonazzi, et al. , Nature Methods 19, 829 (2022)

    2022

  29. [37]

    Thielicke and R

    W. Thielicke and R. Sonntag, Journal of Open Research Software 9 (2021)

    2021

  30. [38]

    Todorov, P

    P. Todorov, P. Kralchevsky, N. Denkov, G. Broze, and A. Mehreteab, Journal of colloid and interface science 245, 371 (2002)

    2002

  31. [39]

    Kr¨ uger, G

    C. Kr¨ uger, G. Kl¨ os, C. Bahr, and C. C. Maass, Physical review letters 117, 048003 (2016)

    2016

  32. [40]

    M. Suga, S. Suda, M. Ichikawa, and Y. Kimura, Physical Review E 97, 062703 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    J. R. Blake, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 46, 199 (1971)

    1971

  34. [42]

    Voronoi, Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Math- ematik 134, 198 (1908)

    G. Voronoi, Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Math- ematik 134, 198 (1908)

    1908

  35. [43]

    Lotito and T

    V. Lotito and T. Zambelli, Advances in colloid and in- terface science 284, 102252 (2020)

    2020

  36. [44]

    E. A. Lazar, J. Lu, and C. H. Rycroft, American Journal of Physics 90, 469 (2022)

    2022

  37. [45]

    D. Bi, X. Yang, M. C. Marchetti, and M. L. Manning, Physical Review X 6, 021011 (2016)

    2016

  38. [46]

    Ganapathi, D

    D. Ganapathi, D. Chakrabarti, A. Sood, and R. Ganap- athy, Nature Physics 17, 114 (2021)

    2021

  39. [47]

    S. Soh, K. J. Bishop, and B. A. Grzybowski, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 112, 10848 (2008)

    2008

  40. [48]

    P. G. Moerman, H. W. Moyses, E. B. Van Der Wee, D. G. Grier, A. Van Blaaderen, W. K. Kegel, J. Groenewold, and J. Brujic, Physical Review E 96, 032607 (2017)

    2017

  41. [50]

    Dwivedi, S

    P. Dwivedi, S. Ashraf, P. Kumar, D. Pillai, and R. Man- gal, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.13740 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  42. [51]

    Lippera, M

    K. Lippera, M. Morozov, M. Benzaquen, and S. Michelin, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 886, A17 (2020)

    2020

  43. [52]

    Lippera, M

    K. Lippera, M. Benzaquen, and S. Michelin, Soft Matter 17, 365 (2021)

    2021

  44. [53]

    Q. Yang, M. Jiang, F. Picano, and L. Zhu, Nature Com- munications 15, 2874 (2024)

    2024

  45. [54]

    H. Li, S. Li, E. C. Regan, D. Wang, W. Zhao, S. Kahn, K. Yumigeta, M. Blei, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe,et al., Nature 597, 650 (2021)

    2021

  46. [55]

    L. Isa, K. Kumar, M. Muller, J. Grolig, M. Textor, and E. Reimhut, ACS nano 4, 5665 (2010). 13 Supporting Figures FIG. S1. (a) The temporal evolution of the fluorescence intensity with overlaid guassian fits along the line taken perpendicular to the trail of the droplet (see i...

    2010

  47. [60]

    The formation of such clusters is con- sistent with the side-ways hydrodynamic attraction be- tween the pusher droplets [32]

    Over time, a few of the droplets form dynamic clus- ters ranging in size from ∼ 2 to 4 (see supporting movie S1), leading to the formation of multiple lateral chain- like structures. The formation of such clusters is con- sistent with the side-ways hydrodynamic attraction be- ...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.