Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 70 references

Lattice-dependent orientational order in active crystals

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The orientational order of active crystals is set by the lattice structure and by a single distance-dependence parameter, through an effective spin-lattice mapping.

desk verdict New spin-lattice mapping for polarity-bond active crystals, but the adiabatic reduction is untested and the expansion parameter is actually |Ω−1| l/a rather than l/a. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.16501 v2 pith:UOZ7HPJJ submitted 2025-06-19 cond-mat.soft

Till Welker , Ricard Alert This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.soft
keywords activecrystalsorientationalorderpolarity-bondinteractionsspin-latticemappingXYmodelnematicalignmentgeometricfrustrationdistance-dependenceparameter
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

This paper asks what controls the orientations of particles in a crystal made of self-propelled particles that turn toward or away from each other. It establishes that, when the particles stay near their lattice sites via fast elastic relaxation, the orientational dynamics reduce to an effective spin model with three competing interactions: XY-style alignment, alignment to the lattice axes, and alignment to mirror images across lattice bonds. A single dimensionless parameter, $\Omega \equiv a f'(a)$, where $f(r)$ is the distance dependence of the turning torque, sets the signs and relative strengths of these terms, while the sign of the torque amplitude $\tilde{\Gamma}_0$ inverts the entire energy landscape. The predicted states—local ferro- or antiferromagnetic order on a chain, striped and polar-domain states on a square lattice, and frustrated compromise states on a triangular lattice—match direct Brownian dynamics simulations. If correct, the result means the crystalline lattice itself can be used as a design handle to control orientational order in active crystals.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the spin-lattice mapping: under fast elastic relaxation, position degrees of freedom disappear and the orientations obey $\mathrm{d}\theta_i/\mathrm{d}\tilde{t}=-\partial H/\partial\theta_i+\sqrt{2}\,\eta_i^r$ with the effective energy $H=\tilde{\Gamma}_0(l/a)\sum_{\langle i,j\rangle}[(\Omega+1)/2\,H^{\rm XY}_{ij}+(\Omega-1)/2\,(H^{\rm LA}_{ij}+H^{\rm MA}_{ij})]$. The dimensionless parameter $\Omega\equiv a f'(a)$ is the control knob: it decides which of the three terms dominates and with what sign, while $\tilde{\Gamma}_0$ sets the overall scale and its sign inverts the energy landscape. This mapping converts the original non-reciprocal torques into a gradient system, and it is what makes the chain equivalent to an anisotropic XY model in a nematic field, the square lattice symmetric under checkerboard spin flips, and the triangular lattice geometrically frustrated.

What would settle it

Simulate the full Langevin equations without the $\tau_e\ll\tau_\theta$ approximation, scanning the elastic constant $k$ (or the ratio $\tau_e/\tau_\theta$) at fixed $\tilde{\Gamma}_0$ and $\Omega$: if the predicted chain states ($\uparrow\downarrow$, $\rightarrow\leftarrow$, $\uparrow\uparrow$, $\leftarrow\leftarrow$) and square-lattice stripe patterns persist even when $\tau_e$ is comparable to $\tau_\theta$, then the fast-relaxation premise is not load-bearing; if they disappear or change, the spin-lattice mapping is limited by that timescale. Alternatively, measure $f(r)$ directly in an experimental active crystal and check whether the phase boundaries in the $\Omega$-$\tilde{\Gamma}_0$ plane match the measured $\Omega$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that polarity-bond interactions, torques of the form $\Gamma_{ji}=\Gamma_0 f(|\mathbf{r}_{ij}|)\,\hat{\mathbf{n}}_i\times\hat{\mathbf{r}}_{ij}$, on a fixed lattice generate orientational order whose character is fixed by the lattice geometry and by $\Omega\equiv a f'(a)$. The argument begins in the fast-relaxation regime $\tau_e\ll\tau_\theta$, where positions are slaved to orientations, $\mathbf{r}_i=\mathbf{r}_i^{(0)}+l\hat{\mathbf{n}}_i$. Expanding in $l/a$ and summing over nearest neighbors turns the torques into gradients of an effective energy $H$ containing an XY alignment term $H^{\rm XY}_{ij}=-\cos(\theta_j-\theta_i)$, a lattice-alignment term $H^{\rm LA}_{ij}=[\cos 2(\phi_{ij}-\theta_i)+\cos 2(\phi_{ij}-\theta_j)]/2$, and a mirror-alignment term $H^{\rm MA}_{ij}=-\cos(2\phi_{ij}-\theta_i-\theta_j)$, weighted by $(\Omega+1)/2$ and $(\Omega-1)/2$. The paper shows that this energy accounts for the states observed in simulations: on a chain, turn-towards torques give local ferromagnetic order and, away from $\Omega=1$, the states $\uparrow\uparrow$ or $\leftarrow\leftarrow$, while turn-away torques give antiferromagnetic states $\uparrow\downarrow$ or $\rightarrow\leftarrow$; on a square lattice, varying $\Omega$ from $-0.5$ to $0.5$ crosses from alternating stripes to polar domains with a weak lattice preference; on a triangular lattice, both antiferromagnetic and mirror-alignment interactions are frustrated. The overarching claim is that positional and orientational order are strongly coupled in such crystals, so the lattice structure controls the orientation.

Load-bearing premise

The spin-lattice mapping rests on the assumption that elastic relaxation toward lattice sites is much faster than orientation dynamics ($\tau_e\ll\tau_\theta$), so positions can be slaved to orientations via Eq. (4); if that separation of timescales fails, the effective energy and the predicted orientational states are not guaranteed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • On a one-dimensional chain, global polar order is forbidden for any noise strength $D_r>0$, but global nematic order can survive except at $\Omega=1$, where the model reduces to the rotationally invariant XY model and loses global order.
  • The two-particle energy landscape reproduces the many-body chain states, so the selected state can be read from a single bond: for turn-towards torques the most probable states are $\uparrow\uparrow$ for $0<\Omega<1$ and $\leftarrow\leftarrow$ for $\Omega>1$, while for turn-away torques the ground state switches from $\uparrow\downarrow$ for $\Omega<1$ to $\rightarrow\leftarrow$ for $\Omega>1$.
  • On a square lattice, flipping the orientation of every particle on one checkerboard sublattice and changing $\Gamma_0\to-\Gamma_0$ leaves the energy invariant, so every turn-away state has a turn-towards counterpart with the same ordering physics.
  • On a triangular lattice, both the antiferromagnetic XY term and the mirror-alignment term are geometrically frustrated, so the system selects compromise stripe states, extending the notion of frustration to active orientational order.
  • Experimental systems fall across the relevant range of $\Omega$: metal-dielectric Janus colloids have $\Omega=-4$, chemotactic particles have $\Omega=-2$, topological robot interactions have $\Omega=0$, and spring-coupled robots have $\Omega=1/(1-\ell/a)$, so switching the lattice should switch the orientational state without changing the particles.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same effective-energy decomposition should apply to any polarity-bond torque, so one could measure $f(r)$ in an experimental system and then read off the expected orientational state from the predicted phase diagrams without running a full simulation.
  • A natural next experiment is to place identical active particles on square and triangular optical or grooved lattices: the theory predicts stripe formation on one and frustrated states on the other, isolating the role of lattice geometry from particle chemistry.
  • Because the two-particle and three-particle energy arguments reproduce the many-body states, the dominant physics may be short-ranged correlations rather than collective long-range effects; this can be tested by comparing small-cluster equilibrium probabilities with $\exp(-H)$.
  • If the fast-relaxation assumption is relaxed, finite $\tau_e$ should generate corrections beyond the spin model; the first testable signature would be a dependence of the ordering thresholds on the elastic constant $k$ (equivalently on $l/a$) that is absent from the current phase diagram.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper studies active particles held on fixed crystalline lattices by harmonic springs, with mutual turn-towards or turn-away torques of the form Γ_ji = Γ0 f(|r_ij|) n_i × r̂_ij. Under the assumptions of fast elastic relaxation (τ_e ≪ τ_θ) and small displacements l ≪ a, the authors eliminate particle positions in favor of orientations and expand f(|r|)/|r| to first order in l/a. This yields the reduced angular dynamics in Eq. (8) and the effective spin Hamiltonian in Eq. (10), whose three terms describe XY-type alignment, alignment with lattice axes, and mirror alignment. The paper then analyzes one-dimensional chains, square lattices, and triangular lattices, using Brownian dynamics simulations of the angular dynamics and two- and three-particle energy arguments. The central claim is that orientational order in active crystals is controlled by both the lattice structure and the distance-dependence parameter Ω = a f'(a), leading to predicted states such as anti-aligned and aligned chain configurations, striped and polar-domain states on the square lattice, and frustrated states on the triangular lattice.

Significance. If the spin-lattice reduction is valid, this is a valuable contribution: it provides a parameter-free mapping from a non-reciprocal active-particle system to an equilibrium-like spin model, yields concrete and falsifiable predictions for several lattice geometries, and identifies lattice structure as a design handle for orientational order. The algebraic derivation is transparent, Ω is a physical property of the interaction rather than a fitted constant, and the paper includes code availability and finite-size checks. The main weakness is that the central reduction is not validated against the full position-orientation dynamics, and the small-expansion control parameter is parameter-dependent in a way that is not acknowledged. These issues do not make the central idea implausible, but they leave the paper's headline claims insufficiently supported as currently written.

major comments (2)
  1. [Active crystals as spin lattices, Eqs. (4)-(10)] The reduction from the microscopic Langevin equations (2)-(3) to the effective spin Hamiltonian (10) is the load-bearing step of the paper, but it is never checked against the full dynamics. The simulations in the sections 'One-dimensional chain,' 'Square lattice,' and 'Triangular lattice' integrate either the reduced torque Eq. (8) or, equivalently, the gradient dynamics of Eq. (10) with white noise; they do not integrate the translational equation (2). Thus the adiabatic slaving assumption Eq. (4) and the small-displacement expansion leading to Eq. (6) remain untested. If those assumptions fail in the parameter regimes of interest, the predicted orientational states would be properties of an auxiliary spin model rather than of the active crystal the paper claims to describe. Please provide a direct comparison with full position-orientation simulations for representative parameters (for example, the Ω values in Fig. 1c), or an analytical estimate of the elimination error.
  2. [Eq. (6) and Appendix A] The expansion of f(|r_ij|)/|r_ij| is controlled by |Ω−1|l/a, not by l/a alone. From Eq. (6), the first-order correction relative to the zeroth-order term is (Ω−1)[r0_ij·l(n_j−n_i)]/a^3 divided by 1/a, whose magnitude can be as large as 2|Ω−1|l/a. For the paper's own motivating examples, Ω=−4 for dipole-dipole torques and Ω=(1−ℓ/a)^{-1} for the spring-like torques shown in Fig. 1c, this factor is 5 or diverges as ℓ→a, so the truncated spin model is not a controlled expansion even when l ≪ a. The simulations use Ω=−0.5, 0, 0.5 on the square lattice and a moderate range on the chain, so they do not probe these regimes. Moreover, the existence of the Hamiltonian in Eq. (10) is demonstrated only for the first-order truncated torque; the exact slaved torque in Eq. (5) is not shown to be a gradient in the angle variables. This should be addressed by restricting the claims to |Ω−1|l/a ≪ 1, by simulating the exact slaved dynamics Eq. (5), or by showing explicitly that higher-order terms do not change the state selection.
minor comments (6)
  1. [One-dimensional chain] The sentence 'We perform Brownian dynamics simulations of Eqs. (3) and (8)' is ambiguous because Eq. (3) originally refers to the full angular equation with the original torque. Please state explicitly that the simulations use Eq. (8) as the torque in the angular equation, so it is clear that positions are not integrated.
  2. [Figure 4 caption] The caption writes 'Γ0 = 10a/l (Γ0 = −10a/l),' which is dimensionally inconsistent with the text's 'Γ0l/a = 10.' The intended condition appears to be Γ0l/a = ±10.
  3. [Appendix D] The phrase 'the energy of the XY with model' contains a typo and should read 'the energy of the XY model.'
  4. [Figure 1 caption] There is a stray 'b' in 'Turn-towards Γ0 > 0 b' and the label 'T urn-towards' has an unwanted space; these typographical issues should be fixed.
  5. [Discussion of nearest-neighbor interactions] The nearest-neighbor truncation is introduced without discussion for the power-law examples f(r)=a^4/r^4 and f(r)=a^2/r^2. For these interactions next-nearest-neighbor torques are not negligible (for the r^-4 case on a square lattice they are one quarter of the nearest-neighbor torque), so a sentence justifying the truncation for the experimental systems, or explicitly framing the model as a nearest-neighbor-only model, would be helpful.
  6. [Paragraph after Eq. (8)] The statement that the first term of Eq. (7) cancels because the lattice vectors add to zero should explicitly note that this holds for the infinite regular lattices considered; finite boundaries or lattice defects would require retaining that term.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the spin-lattice mapping is an explicit Taylor expansion of the microscopic torque with no fitted parameters, so the predicted states are derived rather than imported.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The effective spin Hamiltonian (Eq. 10) follows from the microscopic polarity-bond torque (Eq. 1) through an explicit Taylor expansion in l/a (Eq. 6 and Appendix A) and a nearest-neighbor lattice sum (Eq. 8); no parameter is fitted to the phenomena the paper claims to predict. The only input parameters are the torque amplitude Gamma_0, the displacement ratio l/a, and the distance-dependence parameter Omega = a f'(a), which is defined from the interaction kernel f, not inferred from simulation data. The predicted orientational states on chains, square lattices, and triangular lattices are obtained by analyzing the minima of this derived Hamiltonian and by Brownian-dynamics simulations of the same reduced angle dynamics (Eqs. 3 and 8); this means the simulations validate the spin model's internal phenomenology rather than the adiabatic reduction itself, but it does not make the prediction equivalent to an input by construction. The 'As in recent work 40' citation is a modeling assumption for fast elastic relaxation, and refs. 13 and 46 are used for physical interaction forms; neither is a self-citation carrying the central result. The unchecked smallness of |Omega-1| l/a in Eq. (6) and the assumption tau_e << tau_theta are correctness risks, not circular steps.

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

No parameters are fitted to data; Ω and Γ0 are physical control parameters of the model. The central derivation rests on four stated domain assumptions (adiabatic relaxation, small displacement, nearest-neighbor interactions, no translational noise) plus standard statistical-mechanics theorems. No new entities are introduced.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Fast elastic relaxation: τ_e = ξ_t / k is much smaller than the orientational time scale τ_θ = ξ_r / Γ_0, so positions adiabatically follow orientations (Eq. 4).
    Invoked in Section 'Active crystals as spin lattices'; if it fails, the spin-lattice mapping and all state predictions collapse. It is not tested numerically or experimentally.
  • domain assumption Small displacement l << a, allowing first-order expansion of f(|r|)/|r| (Eq. 6).
    Used to obtain Eq. (7); higher-order terms would alter the relative strengths of the three interaction contributions and possibly the phase diagram.
  • domain assumption Nearest-neighbor interactions and fixed, undeformed regular lattices with zero sum of lattice vectors.
    Used to cancel the zeroth-order torque term in Eq. (8); on deformed lattices the cancellation fails and additional terms appear.
  • domain assumption Harmonic confinement with no translational noise, so positions are exactly r_i = r_i^(0) + l n_i.
    Stated before Eq. (4); translational noise is ignored as negligible for Janus particles, which is a modeling assumption that may not hold in all systems.
  • standard math Peierls argument and Hohenberg-Mermin-Wagner theorem apply to the derived Hamiltonian on the chain.
    Used to explain the absence of global polar order on the chain; assumes standard equilibrium statistical mechanics applies to the derived Hamiltonian.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Lattice-dependent orientational order in active crystals." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UOZ7HPJJ

@misc{pith2026250616501,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Lattice-dependent orientational order in active crystals},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UOZ7HPJJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.16501}
}
read the original abstract

Via mechanisms not accessible at equilibrium, self-propelled particles can form phases with positional order, such as crystals, and with orientational order, such as polar flocks. However, the interplay between these two types of order remains relatively unexplored. Here, we address this point by studying crystals of active particles that turn either towards or away from each other, which can be experimentally realised with phoretic or Janus colloids or with elastically-coupled walker robots. We show that, depending on how these interactions vary with interparticle distance, the particles align along directions determined by the underlying crystalline lattice. To explain the results, we map the orientational dynamics of the active crystal onto a lattice of spins that interact via (anti-)ferromagnetic alignment with each other plus nematic alignment with the lattice directions. Our findings indicate that orientational and positional order can be strongly coupled in active crystals, thus suggesting strategies to control orientational order by engineering the underlying crystalline lattice.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M. C. Marchetti, J. F. Joanny, S. Ramaswamy, T. B. Liverpool, J. Prost, M. Rao, and R. A. Simha, Hydrodynamics of soft ac- tive matter, Rev. Mod. Phys.85, 1143 (2013)

    2013

  2. [2]

    M. E. Cates and J. Tailleur, Motility-Induced Phase Separation, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 6, 219 (2015)

    work page 2015

  3. [3]

    M. C. Marchetti, Y . Fily, S. Henkes, A. Patch, and D. Yllanes, Minimal model of active colloids highlights the role of mechan- ical interactions in controlling the emergent behavior of active matter, Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 21, 34 (2016)

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    Fodor and M

    ´E. Fodor and M. C. Marchetti, The statistical physics of active matter: From self-catalytic colloids to living cells, Physica A 504, 106 (2018)

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    B ¨ar, R

    M. B ¨ar, R. Großmann, S. Heidenreich, and F. Peruani, Self- Propelled Rods: Insights and Perspectives for Active Matter, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 11, 441 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Chat ´e, Dry Aligning Dilute Active Matter, Annu

    H. Chat ´e, Dry Aligning Dilute Active Matter, Annu. Rev. Con- dens. Matter Phys. 11, 189 (2020)

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Baconnier, O

    P. Baconnier, O. Dauchot, V . D ´emery, G. D ¨uring, S. Henkes, C. Huepe, and A. Shee, Self-aligning polar active matter, Rev. Mod. Phys. 97, 015007 (2025)

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Vicsek, A

    T. Vicsek, A. Czir ´ok, E. Ben-Jacob, I. Cohen, and O. Shochet, Novel Type of Phase Transition in a System of Self-Driven Par- ticles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 1226 (1995)

    work page 1995

Show all 70 references
  1. [9]

    Caprini and H

    L. Caprini and H. L ¨owen, Flocking without Alignment Interac- tions in Attractive Active Brownian Particles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 148202 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    Szab ´o, G

    B. Szab ´o, G. Sz ¨oll¨osi, B. G ¨onci, Z. Jur ´anyi, D. Selmeczi, and T. Vicsek, Phase transition in the collective migration of tissue cells: Experiment and model, Phys. Rev. E 74, 061908 (2006)

    2006

  3. [11]

    Ferrante, A

    E. Ferrante, A. E. Turgut, M. Dorigo, and C. Huepe, Elasticity- Based Mechanism for the Collective Motion of Self-Propelled Particles with Springlike Interactions: A Model System for Natural and Artificial Swarms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 268302 (2013)

    2013

  4. [12]

    Kne ˇzevi´c, T

    M. Kne ˇzevi´c, T. Welker, and H. Stark, Collective motion of active particles exhibiting non-reciprocal orientational interac- 8 tions, Sci. Rep. 12, 19437 (2022)

    2022

  5. [13]

    S. Das, M. Ciarchi, Z. Zhou, J. Yan, J. Zhang, and R. Alert, Flocking by Turning Away, Phys. Rev. X14, 031008 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    A. G. Subramaniam, S. Adhikary, and R. Singh, Minimal mech- anism for fluidic flocks in interacting active colloids, (2025), arXiv:2504.07050

    2025

  7. [15]

    G. S. Redner, M. F. Hagan, and A. Baskaran, Structure and Dynamics of a Phase-Separating Active Colloidal Fluid, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 055701 (2013)

    2013

  8. [16]

    Palacci, S

    J. Palacci, S. Sacanna, A. P. Steinberg, D. J. Pine, and P. M. Chaikin, Living crystals of light-activated colloidal surfers, Sci- ence 339, 936 (2013)

    2013

  9. [17]

    Buttinoni, J

    I. Buttinoni, J. Bialk ´e, F. K ¨ummel, H. L ¨owen, C. Bechinger, and T. Speck, Dynamical Clustering and Phase Separation in Suspensions of Self-Propelled Colloidal Particles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 238301 (2013)

    2013

  10. [18]

    Digregorio, D

    P. Digregorio, D. Levis, A. Suma, L. F. Cugliandolo, G. Gonnella, and I. Pagonabarraga, Full Phase Diagram of Ac- tive Brownian Disks: From Melting to Motility-Induced Phase Separation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 098003 (2018)

    2018

  11. [19]

    M. N. van der Linden, L. C. Alexander, D. G. A. L. Aarts, and O. Dauchot, Interrupted Motility Induced Phase Separation in Aligning Active Colloids, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 098001 (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    A. K. Omar, K. Klymko, T. GrandPre, and P. L. Geissler, Phase Diagram of Active Brownian Spheres: Crystallization and the Metastability of Motility-Induced Phase Separation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 188002 (2021)

    2021

  13. [21]

    B. M. Mognetti, A. ˇSari´c, S. Angioletti-Uberti, A. Cacciuto, C. Valeriani, and D. Frenkel, Living Clusters and Crystals from Low-Density Suspensions of Active Colloids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 245702 (2013)

    2013

  14. [22]

    Singh and R

    R. Singh and R. Adhikari, Universal Hydrodynamic Mech- anisms for Crystallization in Active Colloidal Suspensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 228002 (2016)

    2016

  15. [23]

    Thutupalli, D

    S. Thutupalli, D. Geyer, R. Singh, R. Adhikari, and H. A. Stone, Flow-induced phase separation of active particles is controlled by boundary conditions, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 115, 5403 (2018)

    2018

  16. [24]

    Mauleon-Amieva, M

    A. Mauleon-Amieva, M. Mosayebi, J. E. Hallett, F. Turci, T. B. Liverpool, J. S. Van Duijneveldt, and C. P. Royall, Compet- ing active and passive interactions drive amoebalike crystallites and ordered bands in active colloids, Phys. Rev. E 102, 032609 (2020)

    2020

  17. [25]

    S. J. Kole, X. Chao, A. Mauleon-Amieva, R. Hanai, C. P. Roy- all, and T. B. Liverpool, Non-reciprocal interactions drive emer- gent chiral crystallites, (2025), arXiv:2501.15996

    2025 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Bialk ´e, T

    J. Bialk ´e, T. Speck, and H. L ¨owen, Crystallization in a Dense Suspension of Self-Propelled Particles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 168301 (2012)

    2012

  19. [27]

    C. A. Weber, C. Bock, and E. Frey, Defect-Mediated Phase Transitions in Active Soft Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 168301 (2014)

    2014

  20. [28]

    Briand and O

    G. Briand and O. Dauchot, Crystallization of Self-Propelled Hard Discs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 098004 (2016)

    2016

  21. [29]

    Briand, M

    G. Briand, M. Schindler, and O. Dauchot, Spontaneously Flow- ing Crystal of Self-Propelled Particles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 208001 (2018)

    2018

  22. [30]

    X.-q. Shi, F. Cheng, and H. Chat ´e, Extreme Spontaneous De- formations of Active Crystals, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 108301 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    M. F. Zhang, B. Y . Fan, C. Y . Zhang, K. Chen, W.-d. Tian, and T. H. Zhang, Activity waves in condensed excitable phases of Quincke rollers, Soft Matter 21, 927 (2025)

    2025

  24. [32]

    Saka ¨ı, K

    N. Saka ¨ı, K. Skipper, F. J. Moore, J. Russo, and C. P. Royall, Dipolar colloids in three dimensions: non-equilibrium structure and re-entrant dynamics, Soft Matter 21, 5204 (2025)

    2025

  25. [33]

    Smeets, R

    B. Smeets, R. Alert, J. Pe ˇsek, I. Pagonabarraga, H. Ramon, and R. Vincent, Emergent structures and dynamics of cell colonies by contact inhibition of locomotion, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 113, 14621 (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    Delfau, C

    J.-B. Delfau, C. L ´opez, and E. Hern ´andez-Garc´ıa, Active clus- ter crystals, New J. Phys. 19, 095001 (2017)

    2017

  27. [35]

    Le Blay and A

    M. Le Blay and A. Morin, Repulsive torques alone trigger crys- tallization of constant speed active particles, Soft Matter 18, 3120 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Q. Yang, M. Jiang, F. Picano, and L. Zhu, Shaping active matter from crystalline solids to active turbulence, Nat. Commun. 15, 2874 (2024)

    2024

  29. [37]

    Gr ´egoire, H

    G. Gr ´egoire, H. Chat´e, and Y . Tu, Moving and staying together without a leader, Phys. D Nonlinear Phenom. 181, 157 (2003)

    2003

  30. [38]

    A. M. Menzel and H. L ¨owen, Traveling and resting crystals in active systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 055702 (2013)

    2013

  31. [39]

    Baconnier, D

    P. Baconnier, D. Shohat, C. H. L ´opez, C. Coulais, V . D´emery, G. D ¨uring, and O. Dauchot, Selective and collective actuation in active solids, Nat. Phys. 18, 1234 (2022)

    2022

  32. [40]

    Hern ´andez-L´opez, P

    C. Hern ´andez-L´opez, P. Baconnier, C. Coulais, O. Dauchot, and G. D ¨uring, Model of Active Solids: Rigid Body Motion and Shape-Changing Mechanisms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 238303 (2024)

    2024

  33. [41]

    Musacchio, A

    M. Musacchio, A. P. Antonov, H. L¨owen, and L. Caprini, Flock- ing as a second-order phase transition in self-aligning active crystals, (2025), arXiv:2506.12967

    2025 arXiv

  34. [42]

    S. A. M. Loos, S. H. L. Klapp, and T. Martynec, Long-Range Order and Directional Defect Propagation in the Nonreciprocal XY Model with Vision Cone Interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 198301 (2023)

    2023

  35. [43]

    Bandini, D

    G. Bandini, D. Venturelli, S. A. Loos, A. Jelic, and A. Gam- bassi, The XY model with vision cone: non-reciprocal vs. re- ciprocal interactions, J. Stat. Mech. Theory Exp. 2025, 053205 (2025)

    2025

  36. [44]

    Popli, A

    P. Popli, A. Maitra, and S. Ramaswamy, Don’t look back: Or- dering and defect cloaking in non-reciprocal lattice XY models, (2025), arXiv:2503.06480

    2025

  37. [45]

    Dopierala, H

    D. Dopierala, H. Chat ´e, X.-q. Shi, and A. Solon, In- escapable anisotropy of non-reciprocal XY models, (2025), arXiv:2503.14466

    2025 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Zhang, R

    J. Zhang, R. Alert, J. Yan, N. S. Wingreen, and S. Granick, Active phase separation by turning towards regions of higher density, Nat. Phys. 17, 961 (2021)

    2021

  39. [47]

    Henkes, Y

    S. Henkes, Y . Fily, and M. C. Marchetti, Active jamming: Self- propelled soft particles at high density, Phys. Rev. E84, 040301 (2011)

    2011

  40. [48]

    Alert, J

    R. Alert, J. Casademunt, and P. Tierno, Landscape-Inversion Phase Transition in Dipolar Colloids: Tuning the Structure and Dynamics of 2D Crystals, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 198301 (2014)

    2014

  41. [49]

    Alert, P

    R. Alert, P. Tierno, and J. Casademunt, Mixed-order phase tran- sition in a colloidal crystal, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 114, 12906 (2017)

    2017

  42. [50]

    Alert, P

    R. Alert, P. Tierno, and J. Casademunt, Formation of metastable phases by spinodal decomposition, Nat. Commun. 7, 13067 (2016)

    2016

  43. [51]

    N. D. Mermin and H. Wagner, Absence of Ferromagnetism or Antiferromagnetism in One- or Two-Dimensional Isotropic Heisenberg Models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 17, 1133 (1966)

    1966

  44. [52]

    P. M. Chaikin and T. C. Lubensky,Principles of condensed mat- ter physics (Cambridge University Press, 1995)

    1995

  45. [53]

    Goldenfeld, Lectures on Phase Transitions and the Renor- malization Group (Addison-Wesley, 1992)

    N. Goldenfeld, Lectures on Phase Transitions and the Renor- malization Group (Addison-Wesley, 1992). 9

    1992

  46. [54]

    Peierls, On Ising’s model of ferromagnetism, Math

    R. Peierls, On Ising’s model of ferromagnetism, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 32, 477 (1936)

    1936

  47. [55]

    Huang, Statistical Mechanics, 2nd ed

    K. Huang, Statistical Mechanics, 2nd ed. (John Wiley & Sons, 1987)

    1987

  48. [56]

    Y .-b. Shi, R. Moessner, R. Alert, and M. Bukov, General Hamiltonian description of nonreciprocal interactions, (2025), arXiv:2505.05246

    2025 arXiv

  49. [57]

    H. Xu, Y . Huang, R. Zhang, and Y . Wu, Autonomous waves and global motion modes in living active solids, Nat. Phys. 19, 46 (2023)

    2023

  50. [58]

    J. Yan, M. Han, J. Zhang, C. Xu, E. Luijten, and S. Granick, Reconfiguring active particles by electrostatic imbalance, Nat. Mater. 15, 1095 (2016)

    2016

  51. [59]

    van Blaaderen, R

    A. van Blaaderen, R. Ruel, and P. Wiltzius, Template-directed colloidal crystallization, Nature 385, 321 (1997)

    1997

  52. [60]

    K.-h. Lin, J. Crocker, V . Prasad, A. Schofield, D. Weitz, T. Lubensky, and A. Yodh, Entropically Driven Colloidal Crys- tallization on Patterned Surfaces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1770 (2000)

    2000

  53. [61]

    Ortiz-Ambriz and P

    A. Ortiz-Ambriz and P. Tierno, Engineering of frustration in colloidal artificial ices realized on microfeatured grooved lat- tices, Nat. Commun. 7, 10575 (2016)

    2016

  54. [62]

    M. M. Burns, J.-M. Fournier, and J. A. Golovchenko, Optical Matter: Crystallization and Binding in Intense Optical Fields, Science 249, 749 (1990)

    1990

  55. [63]

    Brunner and C

    M. Brunner and C. Bechinger, Phase Behavior of Colloidal Molecular Crystals on Triangular Light Lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 248302 (2002)

    2002

  56. [64]

    Mangold, P

    K. Mangold, P. Leiderer, and C. Bechinger, Phase Transitions of Colloidal Monolayers in Periodic Pinning Arrays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 158302 (2003)

    2003

  57. [65]

    Ophaus, E

    L. Ophaus, E. Knobloch, S. V . Gurevich, and U. Thiele, Two- dimensional localized states in an active phase-field-crystal model, Phys. Rev. E 103, 032601 (2021)

    2021

  58. [66]

    Solon, H

    A. Solon, H. Chat ´e, J. Toner, and J. Tailleur, Susceptibility of Polar Flocks to Spatial Anisotropy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 208004 (2022)

    2022

  59. [67]

    Maitra and S

    A. Maitra and S. Ramaswamy, Oriented Active Solids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 238001 (2019)

    2019

  60. [68]

    Scheibner, A

    C. Scheibner, A. Souslov, D. Banerjee, P. Sur ´owka, W. T. M. Irvine, and V . Vitelli, Odd elasticity, Nat. Phys.16, 475 (2020)

    2020

  61. [69]

    Y . Shen, J. O’Byrne, A. Schoenit, A. Maitra, R.-M. M `ege, R. V oituriez, and B. Ladoux, Flocking and giant fluctua- tions in epithelial active solids, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 122, e2421327122 (2025)

    2025

  62. [70]

    −nx inx j−ny iny j− (Ω− 1)nx inx j + Ω− 1 2 H LA ij # = ˜Γ0l a X ⟨i,j⟩

    Y . E. Keta and S. Henkes, Long-range order in two-dimensional systems with fluctuating active stresses, Soft Matter 21, 5710 (2025). 10 Appendix A: Distance-dependence expansion Here, we expand the distance-dependence function f (|rij|) |rij| of the torque given in Eq. (5) in...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.