ArticleSoft matter2025
Run-and-tumble particles learning chemotaxis.
Article in Soft matter, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Through evolution, bacteria have developed the ability to perform chemotactic motion in order to find nourishment. By adopting a machine learning approach, we aim to understand how this behavior arises. We consider run-and-tumble agents able to tune the instantaneous probability of switching between the run and the tumble phase. When such agents are navigating in an environment characterized by a concentration field pointing towards a circular target, we investigate how a chemotactic strategy may be learned starting from unbiased run-and-tumble dynamics. Target detection is allowed only during the tumble phase, which qualifies our agents as truly intermittent searchers. We compare the learning performances of agents that sense only the instantaneous concentration with those of two types of agents both having a short-term memory that allows them to perform temporal comparisons. While all types of learning agents develop successful target-search policies, we demonstrate that those achieved by agents endowed with temporal comparison abilities are significantly more efficient, particularly when the initial distance from the target is large. Finally, we also show that when an additional length scale is imposed, for example by fixing the initial distance to the target, the learning agents can leverage this information to further improve their efficiency in locating the target.
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.