Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40851820›Full record

ArticlePhysical review fluids2025

Optimal trajectories for Bayesian olfactory search in turbulent flows: The low information limit and beyond.

R A Heinonen, L Biferale, A Celani, M Vergassola

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physical review fluids, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Fly navigational responses exploit plume-specific odor motion and gradient cues.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

R A HeinonenDept. Physics and INFN, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Via della Ricerca Scientifica 1, 00133 Rome, Italy.
L BiferaleDept. Physics and INFN, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Via della Ricerca Scientifica 1, 00133 Rome, Italy.
A CelaniQuantitative Life Sciences, The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, 34151 Trieste, Italy.
M VergassolaLaboratoire de physique, École Normale Supérieure, CNRS, PSL Research University, Sorbonne University, Paris 75005, France.

Funding

Odor trail tracking: a new paradigm to unveil algorithms and neural circuits underlying active sensation and continuous decision makingRF1NS128865 · NINDS · HARVARD UNIVERSITY · PI DULAC, CATHERINE, MURTHY, VENKATESH N · 2022 to 2022
$2.7M
Odor trail tracking: a new paradigm to unveil algorithms and neural circuits underlying active sensation and continuous decision makingR01NS128865 · NINDS · HARVARD UNIVERSITY · PI Catherine Dulac, VENKATESH N MURTHY · 2025 to 2026
$1.7M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS128865NINDS NIH HHS RF1 NS128865
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In turbulent flows, tracking the source of a passive scalar cue requires exploiting the limited information that can be gleaned from rare, randomized encounters with the cue. When crafting a search policy, the most challenging and important decision is what to do in the absence of an encounter. In this work, we perform high-fidelity direct numerical simulations of a turbulent flow with a stationary source of tracer particles, and obtain quasi-optimal policies (in the sense of minimal average search time) with respect to the empirical encounter statistics [1-3]. We study the trajectories under such policies and compare the results to those of the infotaxis heuristic. In the presence of a strong mean wind, the optimal motion in the absence of an encounter is zigzagging (akin to the well-known insect behavior "casting") followed by a return to the starting location. The zigzag motion generates characteristic

Identifiers

PMID40851820
PMCPMC12369886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.