ReviewPhilosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences2025
Foundation and challenges in modelling dilute active suspensions.
Review in Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fine-tuning the dispersion of active suspensions with oscillatory flows.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025Article
- Emerging directions for biologically active fluids.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025Article
- Metareview: a survey of active matter reviews.The European physical journal. E, Soft matter · 2025Review
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
Active suspensions, which consist of suspended self-propelling particles such as swimming microorganisms, often exhibit non-trivial transport properties. Continuum models are frequently employed to elucidate phenomena in active suspensions, such as shear trapping of bacteria, bacterial turbulence and bioconvection patterns in suspensions of algae. Yet, these models are often empirically derived and may not always agree with the individual-based description of active particles. Here we review the essential coarse-graining steps to develop commonly used continuum models from their respective microscopic dynamics. All the assumptions needed to reach popular continuum models from a multi-particle Fokker-Planck equation, which governs the probability of the full configuration space, are explicitly presented. In the dilute limit, this approach leads to the mean-field model (a.k.a. Doi-Saintillan-Shelley model), which can be further reduced to a continuum equation for particle density. Moreover, we review the limitations and highlight the challenges related to continuum descriptions, including significant issues in implementing physical boundary conditions and the possible emergence of singular solutions.This article is part of the theme issue 'Biological fluid dynamics: emerging directions'.
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.