ArticleScientific reports2022
Learning to predict synchronization of coupled oscillators on randomly generated graphs.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Local Predictors of Explosive Synchronization with Ordinal Methods.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Optimal synchronization in pulse-coupled oscillator networks using reinforcement learning.PNAS nexus · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Suppose we are given a system of coupled oscillators on an unknown graph along with the trajectory of the system during some period. Can we predict whether the system will eventually synchronize? Even with a known underlying graph structure, this is an important yet analytically intractable question in general. In this work, we take an alternative approach to the synchronization prediction problem by viewing it as a classification problem based on the fact that any given system will eventually synchronize or converge to a non-synchronizing limit cycle. By only using some basic statistics of the underlying graphs such as edge density and diameter, our method can achieve perfect accuracy when there is a significant difference in the topology of the underlying graphs between the synchronizing and the non-synchronizing examples. However, in the problem setting where these graph statistics cannot distinguish the two classes very well (e.g., when the graphs are generated from the same random graph model), we find that pairing a few iterations of the initial dynamics along with the graph statistics as the input to our classification algorithms can lead to significant improvement in accuracy; far exceeding what is known by the classical oscillator theory. More surprisingly, we find that in almost all such settings, dropping out the basic graph statistics and training our algorithms with only initial dynamics achieves nearly the same accuracy. We demonstrate our method on three models of continuous and discrete coupled oscillators-the Kuramoto model, Firefly Cellular Automata, and Greenberg-Hastings model. Finally, we also propose an "ensemble prediction" algorithm that successfully scales our method to large graphs by training on dynamics observed from multiple random subgraphs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.