ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2024
Smart active particles learn and transcend bacterial foraging strategies.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mixing of a binary passive particle system using smart active particles.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Anomalous Dynamics of Superparamagnetic Colloidal Microrobots with Tailored Statistics.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2025Article
- Chemotactic navigation in robotic swimmers via reset-free hierarchical reinforcement learning.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Reinforcement learning of biomimetic navigation: a model problem for sperm chemotaxis.The European physical journal. E, Soft matter · 2024Article
- Smart active particles learn and transcend bacterial foraging strategies.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Throughout evolution, bacteria and other microorganisms have learned efficient foraging strategies that exploit characteristic properties of their unknown environment. While much research has been devoted to the exploration of statistical models describing the dynamics of foraging bacteria and other (micro-) organisms, little is known, regarding the question of how good the learned strategies actually are. This knowledge gap is largely caused by the absence of methods allowing to systematically develop alternative foraging strategies to compare with. In the present work, we use deep reinforcement learning to show that a smart run-and-tumble agent, which strives to find nutrients for its survival, learns motion patterns that are remarkably similar to the trajectories of chemotactic bacteria. Strikingly, despite this similarity, we also find interesting differences between the learned tumble rate distribution and the one that is commonly assumed for the run and tumble model. We find that these differences equip the agent with significant advantages regarding its foraging and survival capabilities. Our results uncover a generic route to use deep reinforcement learning for discovering search and collection strategies that exploit characteristic but initially unknown features of the environment. These results can be used, e.g., to program future microswimmers, nanorobots, and smart active particles for tasks like searching for cancer cells, micro-waste collection, or environmental remediation.
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.