• 沒有找到結果。

Peskin modeled the pacemaker as a network of N ”integrate-and-fire” oscillators, each char-acterized by a voltagelike state variable xi, subject to the dynamics

dxi

dt = −rxi+ s, 0 ≤ xi≤ 1, i = 1, 2, · · · N. (4.20)

Mirollo and Strogatz [19] proposed a new model and they assume that x evolves according to x = f (φ), where f : [0, 1] → [0, 1] is smooth, monotonic increasing (f > 0), and concave down (f′′< 0). Here φ ∈ [0, 1] is a phase variable such that (i) dφ/dt = 1/T , where T is a cycle period. (ii) f (0) = 0. (iii) f (1) = 1. Then they generate the function f and its inverse function g which are given in the following, respectively.

f (φ) = s

In contrast, we assume there exists a function f which is smooth, monotonic increasing (f > 0), and concave up (f′′> 0). So, we switch the function f and g of Eq. (4.21) to be the model of our phase diagrams.

We fixed s = 1, and change the variable r, then we have three different kinds of figures in Figure 4.1:

(a) When r = 0.4 and τ = 0.2, f (1 − φ) − f (τ − φ) > 1 − f (τ + φ) ∀φ ∈ I1. (b) When r = 0.7 and τ = 0.2, f (1 − φ) − f (τ − φ) < 1 − f (τ + φ) ∀φ ∈ I1. (c) When r = 0.72 and τ = 0.35, f (1 − φ) − f (τ − φ) and 1 − f (τ + φ) have an

intersection in I1.

Moreover, we add Figure 4.2 which is a phase diagram we make from Ernst [10] as a contrast.

And it’s energy function f and inverse function g is exactly the Mirollo-Strogatz-type (Eq. 4.21) oscillators we just mentioned.

And there are some notations for the following figures:

l1 : ǫ = 1 − f (τ + φ)

l2 : ǫ = f (1 − φ) − f (τ − φ) l3 : ǫ = 1 − f (τ − φ)

In the following tables, we fixed an arbitrary ǫ > 0, and shift φ in [0,1]. Therefore, we clearly see which area (ExN ) does the oscillator begin and figure out where it ends.

15

(I) f (φ) = ln(s−rφs )

(II) f (φ) = s r −s

r(s − r

s )φ, f > 0, f′′ < 0

Ex4

l3 l2

l1

1-f( )τ f(1- )τ

1-f(2 )τ

Ex1 Ex3 Ex2

Ex1 Ex1

Ex5 Ex6

Ex0

Figure 4.2. s := 1, r := 0.4, τ = 0.2, where s > r > 0

ǫ Dynamics Multistability

0 < ǫ < 1 − f (2τ ) φ → φEx5, if φ ∈ I1, Ex5, I3 Lag Syn. with Lag φEx5

φ →Period(τ, h(τ )), if φ ∈ I2\Ex5 Lag Syn. with Lag τ 1 − f (2τ ) ≤ ǫ < 1 − f (τ ) φ → φEx4 or τ , if φ ∈ I1, I3 Depends on the behavior of Ex2

φ → τ , if φ ∈ I2 Lag Syn. with Lag τ 1 − f (τ ) ≤ ǫ ≤ 1 φ → φEx4, if φ ∈ I1, I3 Lag Syn. with Lag φEx4

φ → τ , if φ ∈ I2 Lag Syn. with Lag τ

17

5. Inhibitory Couplings, ǫ < 0 5.1. Construction of the FireMap.

Configuration I1

In1 : |ǫ| < f (τ − φ) and φ ∈ I1

⇒ ǫ > −f (τ − φ) and φ ∈ I1 (For fixed ǫ, φ ∈ [0, τ − g(−ǫ)).)

time t φA φB

0 0 φ

τ − φ τ − φ → F(τ − φ, ǫ) > 0 τ

τ F(τ − φ, ǫ) + φ τ + φ → F(τ + φ, ǫ) > 0

h(φ) = 1 − F(τ + φ, ǫ) + F(τ − φ, ǫ) + φ (5.1) Using relation A4, F(τ + φ, ǫ) ≥ F(τ − φ, ǫ) + 2φ, we have φB(τ ) ≥ φA(τ ). Since F(τ − φ, ǫ) > 0, the firemap satisfies

h(φ) = 1 − F(τ + φ, ǫ) + F(τ − φ, ǫ) + φ

> 1 − (τ + φ) + F(τ − φ, ǫ) + φ

= 1 − τ + F(τ − φ, ǫ)

> 1 − τ. (5.2)

In2 : f (τ − φ) ≤ |ǫ| < f (τ + φ) and φ ∈ I1

⇒ −f (τ − φ) ≥ ǫ > −f (τ + φ) and φ ∈ I1 (For fixed ǫ, φ ∈ [0, τ ).)

time t φA φB

0 0 φ

τ − φ τ − φ → F(τ − φ, ǫ) = 0 τ

τ φ τ + φ → F(τ + φ, ǫ) > 0

h(φ) = 1 − |F(τ + φ, ǫ) − φ| (5.3)

Since F(τ + φ, ǫ) < τ + φ, the firemap satisfies

h(φ) = 1 − |F(τ + φ, ǫ) − φ|

> 1 − |τ + φ − φ|

= 1 − τ. (5.4)

(i) If F(τ + φ, ǫ) > φ,

(ii) If F(τ + φ, ǫ) < φ,

Define In2c : f (φ) − f (τ + φ) > ǫ > −f (τ + φ) (For fixed ǫ, φ ∈ [g(−ǫ) − τ, min{l2b, τ }).) R(φ) = h(φ) = 1 + F(τ + φ, ǫ) − φ

(iii) If F(τ + φ, ǫ) = φ,

Define In2d: ǫ = f (φ) − f (τ + φ) (For fixed ǫ, φ = l2b.) h(φ) = 1

In3 : f (τ + φ) ≤ |ǫ| and φ ∈ I1

⇒ ǫ ≥ −f (τ + φ) and φ ∈ I1 (For fixed ǫ, φ ∈ [0, min{g(−ǫ) − τ, τ }).)

time t φA φB

0 0 φ

τ − φ τ − φ → F(τ − φ, ǫ) = 0 τ

τ φ τ + φ → F(τ + φ, ǫ) = 0

h(φ) = R(φ) = 1 − φ (5.5)

Configuration I2

In4 : |ǫ| < f (τ + φ) − f (2τ ) and φ ∈ I2

⇒ ǫ > f (2τ ) − f (τ + φ) and φ ∈ I2 (For fixed ǫ, φ ∈ (l4, 1 − τ ], where l4 = g(f (2τ ) − ǫ) − τ .)

time t φA φB

0 0 φ

τ τ τ + φ → F(τ + φ, ǫ) > 0

h(φ) = 1 − F(τ + φ, ǫ) + τ (5.6)

We assume that |ǫ| is small enough such that F(τ +φ, ǫ) > 2τ . Since 2τ < F(τ +φ, ǫ) < τ +φ, the firemap satisfies

h(φ) = 1 − F(τ + φ, ǫ) + τ

< 1 − 2τ + τ = 1 − τ, (5.7)

and

h(φ) = 1 − F(τ + φ, ǫ) + τ

> 1 − τ − φ + τ

= 1 − φ ≥ τ. (5.8)

19

In5 : f (τ + φ) − f (2τ ) ≤|ǫ| < f (τ + φ) and φ ∈ I2

⇒ f (2τ ) − f (τ + φ) ≥ ǫ > −f (τ + φ) and φ ∈ I2

time t φA φB

0 0 φ

τ τ τ + φ → F(τ + φ, ǫ) > 0

h(φ) = 1 −|F(τ + φ, ǫ) − τ | (5.9)

We assume that |ǫ| is bigger than that in In4 such that 0 < F(τ + φ, ǫ) ≤ 2τ , then the firemap satisfies

h(φ) = 1 − |F(τ + φ, ǫ) − τ |

≥ 1 − |2τ − τ |

= 1 − τ. (5.10)

In6 : f (τ + φ) ≤ |ǫ| and φ ∈ I2

⇒ −f (τ + φ) ≥ ǫ and φ ∈ I2 (For fixed ǫ, φ ∈ [τ, g(−ǫ) − τ ].)

time t φA φB

0 0 φ

τ τ τ + φ → F(τ + φ, ǫ) = 0

h(φ) = R(φ) = 1 − τ (5.11)

Configuration I3

In0 : φ ∈ I3

time t φA φB

0 0 φ

1 − φ 1 − φ 1 → 0

h(φ) = 1 − φ (5.12)

5.2. Dynamics in Cases.

Configuration I1

Dynamics in In1 : ǫ > −f (τ − φ) and φ ∈ I1 (For fixed ǫ, φ ∈ [0, τ − g(−ǫ)).) h(φ) = 1 − F(τ + φ, ǫ) + F(τ − φ, ǫ) + φ

By Eq. (5.2), thus h : In1 7→ In0. Then the return map satisfies R(φ) = h(h(φ)) = 1 − h(φ)

= F(τ + φ, ǫ) − F(τ − φ, ǫ) − φ (5.13)

≥ 2φ − φ = φ.

The equality holds just as φ = 0. Since φ ∈ In1 and R(φ) > φ, R(φ) ∈ In1 ∪ In2. Specifically, if φ = 0 ∈ In1, Rk(φ) = 0 ∈ In1.

Proposition 5.1. There is no φ ∈ In1\{0} such that Rk(φ) ∈ In1\{0} for all k = 0, 1, 2, · · · . Proof. Suppose not, i.e., ∃φ ∈ In1\{0} s.t. Rk(φ) ∈ In1\{0} for all k = 0, 1, 2, · · · . Note that R(φ) is continuous in (0, τ − g(−ǫ)], since

R(φ) =

( F(τ + φ, ǫ) − F(τ − φ, ǫ) − φ, φ ∈ In1;

F(τ + φ, ǫ) − φ φ ∈ In2a∨ In2b. (5.14, 5.18) The return maps of In2a and In2b will be proved in Eqs. (5.14), (5.18).

( R((τ − g(−ǫ))) = F(2τ − g(−ǫ)) − (τ − g(−ǫ));

R(τ − g(−ǫ)) = F(2τ − g(−ǫ)) − (τ − g(−ǫ)).

Moreover, R(φ) > φ, ∀φ ∈ In1\{0}. Thus, Rk(φ) → φ for some φ ∈ (0, τ − g(−ǫ)], and such φ is a fixed point. That is R(φ) = φ. It follows that φ = τ − g(−ǫ), or ǫ = −f (τ − φ), then F(τ − φ, ǫ) = 0. Hence,

R(φ) = φ

⇒ F(τ + φ, ǫ) − F(τ − φ, ǫ) − φ = φ

⇒ F(τ + φ, ǫ) − φ = φ

⇒ F(τ + φ, ǫ) = 2φ

⇒ f (τ + φ) + ǫ = f (2φ)

⇒ f (τ + φ) − f (τ − φ) = f (2φ) − f (0) = f (φ+ φ) − f (φ− φ)

By relation A6, we know f (τ + φ) − f (τ − φ) > f (φ+ φ) − f (φ− φ), since τ > φ. →←

 Corollary 5.1. For each φ ∈ In1\{0}, there is a k ∈ N, depending on φ, such that Rk(φ) ∈ In2.

21

Dynamics in In2a : −f (τ − φ) ≥ ǫ ≥ −f (τ ) and φ ∈ I1 (For fixed ǫ, φ ∈ [l2a, τ ], where l2a = τ − g(−ǫ).)

h(φ) = 1 − F(τ + φ, ǫ) + φ By Eq. (5.4), thus h : In2a7→ In0. Then the return map satisfies

R(φ) = h(h(φ)) = 1 − h(φ)

= F(τ + φ, ǫ) − φ (5.14)

< τ + φ − φ = τ.

Thus R(φ) ∈ In1 ∪ In2.

Lemma 5.1. For each fixed ǫ, there exists a fixed point for R in In2a. Proof. Note that R(φ) is continuous in [τ − g(−ǫ), τ ].

If φ = l2a, we know that ǫ = −f (τ − l2a). The return map R(l2a) = F(τ + l2a, ǫ) − l2a

= g(f (τ + l2a) − f (τ − l2a)) − l2a

> g(f (l2a+ l2a) − f (l2a − l2a)) − l2a (A6)

= 2l2a − l2a = l2a. (5.15)

If φ = τ , the return map

R(τ ) = F(2τ, ǫ) − τ

< 2τ − τ = τ. (5.16)

By Eqs. (5.15), (5.16), there exists a fixed point for R in In2a.

 Since R(φ) = φ,

R(φ) = φ

⇒ F(τ + φ, ǫ) − φ = φ

⇒ F(τ + φ, ǫ) = 2φ

⇒ g(f (τ + φ) + ǫ) = 2φ

⇒ ǫ = f (2φ) − f (τ + φ). (5.17)

Thus, the fixed point in In2a must satisfies ǫ(φ) = f (2φ) − f (τ + φ).

then the fixed point for R in In2a is unique.

For any φ ∈ In2a,

R(φ) = F(τ + φ, ǫ) − 1

= g(f (τ + φ) − |ǫ|)f(τ + φ) − 1

> g(f (τ + φ))f(τ + φ) − 1

> 1 − 1 = 0.

Thus, l2a < R(l2a) < R(φ) < R(τ ) < τ . Hence, In2a is a trapping region.

Let φ be the fixed point of R(φ), i.e., R(φ) = φ. (i)As φ > φ,

R(φ) < φ (Otherwise, there exists another fixed point in [φ, τ ].)

⇒ Rk(φ) < · · · < R2(φ) < R(φ) < φ, ∀k = 1, 2, · · ·

and Rk(φ) > Rk) = φ, ∀k = 1, 2, · · · (∵ R is increasing.)

⇒ φ < Rk(φ) < Rk−1(φ) < · · · < φ, ∀k = 1, 2, · · · Thus, the sequence {Rk(φ)} is decreasing, and Rk(φ) → φ. (ii)As φ < φ,

Similarly, the sequence {Rk(φ)} is increasing, and Rk(φ) → φ. The unique fixed point φ is an attractor.

 Corollary 5.2. For each φ ∈ In2a, Rk(φ) converges to the fixed point φ. Specifically, if φ = 0, then the fixed point φ = 0, i.e., φA and φB synchronize.

Dynamics in In2b : −f (τ ) > ǫ > f (φ) − f (τ + φ) and φ ∈ I1 (For fixed ǫ, φ ∈ [l2b, τ ), where l2b satisfies ǫ = f (φ) − f (τ + φ).)

h(φ) = 1 − F(τ + φ, ǫ) + φ

Remark 5.1. φ = 0 6∈ In2b.

By Eq. (5.4), thus h : In2b7→ In0. Then the return map satisfies R(φ) = h(h(φ)) = 1 − h(φ)

= F(τ + φ, ǫ) − φ (5.18)

< τ + φ − φ = τ.

Since −f (τ ) > ǫ, R(φ) 6∈ In1 ∪ In2a. It follows that R(φ) ∈ In2\In2a∪ In3.

23

Proposition 5.3. There is no φ ∈ In2b such that Rk(φ) ∈ In2b for all k = 0, 1, 2, · · · .

Proof. Note that R(φ) is continuous in [l2b, τ ]. Assume that there exists a fixed point for R in In2b. Since the return map of In2b is the same as that in In2a. It follows that

R(φ) = φ

⇔ ǫ = f (2φ) − f (τ + φ) > f (2φ − 2φ) − f (τ + φ − 2φ) (5.17, A5)

⇔ ǫ = f (2φ) − f (τ + φ) > −f (τ − φ) > −f (τ ) (For φ 6= 0 ∈ In2b.)

⇔ ǫ > −f (τ ).

This contradicts the region of the ǫ in In2b. Then there is no fixed point for R in In2b.

Since R(l2b) = 0 and R(τ ) = F(2τ, ǫ) − τ < τ , it follows that R(φ) < φ. Otherwise, there exists fixed points in [l2b, τ ]. Thus, φ is decreasing in In2b.

Suppose not, i.e., ∃φ ∈ In2b, s.t. Rk(φ) ∈ In2b, for all k = 0, 1, 2, · · · . Since φ is decreasing, Rk(φ) → φ, for some φ ∈ [l2b, τ ]. It follows that φ = l2b is a fixed point in In2a. It makes contradiction.

 Corollary 5.3. For each φ ∈ In2b, there is a k ∈ N, depending on φ, such that Rk(φ) ∈ In2c∪ In2d∪ In3.

Dynamics in In2c : f (φ) − f (τ + φ) > ǫ > −f (τ + φ) and φ ∈ I1 (For fixed ǫ, φ ∈ [g(−ǫ) − τ, min{l2b, τ }).)

R(φ) = h(φ) = 1 + F(τ + φ, ǫ) − φ

Remark 5.2. φ = 0 6∈ In2c.

By Eq. (5.4), thus R, h : In2c 7→ In0. We iterate the return map and derive h(R(φ)) = 1 − R(φ) = 1 − h(φ)

= φ − F(τ + φ, ǫ) (5.19)

< φ.

Since R(φ) ∈ In0, h(R(φ)) < φ, h(R(φ)) ∈ In2c∪ In3.

Note that h(R(φ)) is continuous in In2c, and h(R(g(−ǫ) − τ )) = g(−ǫ) − τ . Clearly, we know that h(R(φ)) = 1 − F(τ + φ, ǫ) < 0. For each φ ∈ In2c, since g(−ǫ) − τ < φ, we have

h(R(g(−ǫ) − τ )) > h(R(φ))

⇒ g(−ǫ) − τ > h(R(φ))

Dynamics in In2d: ǫ = f (φ) − f (τ + φ) and φ ∈ I1 (For fixed ǫ, φ = l2b.) Lemma 5.2. There exists a unique fixed point for h in In4.

Proof. From Eq. (5.20), we know that h(l4) = 1 − τ > l4. It follows that

Now, we claim that the fixed point for h in In4 is unique.

Suppose not, i.e., ∃φ1< φ2 ∈ In4 s.t. h(φ1) = φ1 and h(φ2) = φ2. By Mean Value Theorem, h) = h(φ2) − h(φ1)

φ2− φ1

for some φ ∈ (φ1, φ2)

⇒ h) = 1 for some φ ∈ (φ1, φ2)

This is a contradiction with Eq. (5.21). Thus, there exists a unique fixed point φ for h in In4.



25

Since there exists a fixed point for h, h(φ) = φ

⇒ 1 − F(τ + φ, ǫ) + τ = φ

⇒ 1 + τ − φ = g(f (τ + φ) + ǫ)

⇒ ǫ = f (1 + τ − φ) − f (τ + φ). (5.23)

Thus, the fixed point in In4 must satisfy ǫ(φ) = f (1 + τ − φ) − f (τ + φ).

Proposition 5.4. Except for φ = φ, there is no φ ∈ In4 such that hk(φ) ∈ In4 for all k = 0, 1, 2, · · · . i.e., The unique fixed point φ for h in In4 is a repellor.

Proof. Suppose not, i.e., ∃φ ∈ In4 s.t. hk(φ) ∈ In4, for all k = 0, 1, 2, · · · . Let

S1:= {φ : h1(φ) ∈ In4} ⇒ S1 is an interval, S1 6= ∅. (∵ φ ∈ S1 and h(φ) < −1) S2:= {φ : h2(φ) ∈ In4} ⇒ S2 is an interval, S2 6= ∅. (∵ φ ∈ S2 ⊆ S1 and d

dφh2(φ) > 1)

... ...

⇒ S := {φ : hk(φ) ∈ In4 ∀k} = T

k=1

Sk is an interval (noempty).

By Eq. (5.21), R(φ) = h(h(φ))h(φ) > 1. Let H(φ) = R(φ) − φ, then we have H(φ) = R(φ) − 1 > 0.

1

(i) If φ < φ,

H(φ) < H(φ) = 0 ⇒ R(φ) < φ.

(ii) If φ > φ,

H(φ) > H(φ) = 0 ⇒ φ < R(φ).

Then (i) Rk(φ) < · · · < R2(φ) < R(φ) < φ < φ, ∀k ∈ N.

and (ii) Rk(φ) > · · · > R2(φ) > R(φ) > φ > φ, ∀k ∈ N.

2

(i) If φ < φ,

H(R(φ)) < H(φ)

⇒ R(R(φ)) − R(φ) < R(φ) − φ

⇒ |R(φ) − φ| < |R2(φ) − R(φ)|

(ii) If φ > φ,

H(φ) < H(R(φ))

⇒ |R(φ) − φ| < |R2(φ) − R(φ)|

Corollary 5.7. For each φ ∈ In4, there exists a unique fixed point φ which is a repellor. Also there is a k ∈ N, depending on φ, such that hk(φ) ∈ In5 ∪ In6.

Dynamics in In5 : f (2τ ) − f (τ + φ) ≥ ǫ > −f (τ + φ) and φ ∈ I2

h(φ) = 1 − |F(τ + φ, ǫ) − τ |

By Eq. (5.10), thus h : In5 7→ In0 ∪ l1−τ, where l1−τ is the line φ = 1 − τ . The firemap h(φ) = 1 − τ ∈ l1−τ just as φ = l4. Also, if φA(τ ) > φB(τ ), R(φ) = h(φ).

Furthermore,

h(φ) = 1

⇔ |F(τ + φ, ǫ) − τ | = 0

⇔ g(f (τ + φ) + ǫ) = τ

⇔ ǫ = f (τ ) − f (τ + φ).

Therefore, φA and φB synchronize just as ǫ(φ) = f (τ ) − f (τ + φ).

Corollary 5.8. For each φ ∈ In5, h : In5 7→ In0 ∪ l1−τ. Specifically, when ǫ(φ) = f (τ ) − f (τ + φ), φA and φB synchronize.

Dynamics in In6 : −f (τ + φ) ≥ ǫ and φ ∈ I2 (For fixed ǫ, φ ∈ [τ, g(−ǫ) − τ ].) h(φ) = R(φ) = 1 − τ

Thus h : In6 7→ In4 ∪ In5.

Corollary 5.9. For each φ ∈ In6, h : In6 7→ In4 ∪ In5.

Configuration I3

Dynamics in In0 : φ ∈ I3

h(φ) = 1 − φ Thus, h : In0 7→ I1.

Corollary 5.10. In0 is the same as Ex0 and we have h : In0 7→ I1.

27

5.3. Construction of Phase Diagrams.

Since for all φ ∈ In6, h(φ) = 1 − τ , and the line 1 − τ belongs to In4, In5, In6. Let’s find out how the oscillators run when φ = 1 − τ . We find that different τ leads to three different cases.

Here K(ǫ) = 0 as ǫ = −1

2). Moreover, the collection of such ǫ is an interval.

Thus, there is a ǫ such that h(1 − τ ) ∈ In6 with 1 − τ ∈ In4 if and only if τ ≤ g(1

(i) The proof is the same as Case 1-(ii).

(ii)The proof is the same as Case 1-(iii).

Case 3:

If τ > 1 2g(1

2), thenf (2τ ) − 1 > −f (2τ ).

(i) The proof is the same as Case 1-(ii).

(ii)The proof is the same as Case 1-(iii). 

In the following Figure 5.1 ∼ 5.3, we use the particular energy function f and inverse function g which are used in Section 4.3 (The inverse of Eq. (4.21)). Also, we fix s := 1, r := 0.9, and three different τ in Figure 5.1 ∼ 5.3.

Moreover, we add Figure 5.4 which is the phase diagram we make from Ernst [10] as a contrast.

And it’s energy function f and inverse function g is exactly the Mirollo-Strogatz-type (Eq. 4.21) oscillators we mentioned before. Also, we fixed s := 1, r := 0.4, and τ = 0.2 in Figure 5.4.

And there are some notations for the following figures:

l1 : ǫ = −f (τ − φ) l2 : ǫ = −f (τ + φ) l3 : ǫ = f (2τ ) − f (τ + φ) D1 : ∀φ ∈ D1, φ is an attractor.

D2 : ∀φ ∈ D2, the complete synchronization occurs.

D3 : ∀φ ∈ D3, φ is a repellor.

D4 : ∀φ ∈ D4, the complete synchronization occurs.

In the following tables, we fixed an arbitrary ǫ < 0, and shift φ in [0,1]. Therefore, we clearly see which area (InN ) does the oscillator begin and figure out where it ends.

29

(I) f (φ) = ln(s−rφs )

Case 2: g(1

Case 3: τ > 1 2g(1

2)

In1

In0 In3

In2

a

In6 In4

In5 In2

c

In2

b

-f( ) τ

-f(2 )+ τ f( ) τ

-f(2 ) τ f(2 )-1 τ

l

1

l

2

l

3

D

3

= In2

d

D

2

D

4

D

1

Figure 5.3. s := 1, r := 0.9, τ = 0.4, where s > r > 0

ǫ Dynamics Multistability

−f (τ ) ≤ ǫ < 0 φ→ φI n2a, if φ ∈ I1, I2\D3, I3 Lag Syn. with Lag φI n2a

φ→ φ, if φ ∈ D3 Lag Syn. with Lag φ

f(2τ ) − 1 < ǫ < −f (τ ),

−1 ≤ ǫ < f (2τ ) − 1

φ→Period(φI n3,1 − φI n3), if φ ∈ I1\D2, I2\{D3∪ D4}, I3 Lag Syn. with Lag φI n3

φ→ 0, if φ ∈ D2, D4 Complete Syn.

φ→ φ, if φ ∈ D3 Lag Syn. with Lag φ

(II) f (φ) = s r −s

r(s − r

s )φ, f > 0, f′′< 0

l3

In1

In3

In5 -f( )τ

f(2 )-1τ -f(2 )τ

In4

In0

In6

l2

In2 l1

Figure 5.4. s := 1, r := 0.4, τ = 0.2, where s > r > 0

ǫ Dynamics Multistability

−f (τ ) ≤ ǫ < 0 φ → 0, if φ ∈ I1, In5, I3 Complete Syn.

φ → φI n4, if φ ∈ In4 Lag Syn. with Lag φI n4

f (2τ ) − 1 < ǫ < −f (τ ) φ → φI n3, if φ ∈ I1, In5, I3 Lag Syn. with Lag φI n3

φ → φI n4, if φ ∈ In4 Lag Syn. with Lag φI n4

−1 ≤ ǫ < f (2τ ) − 1 φ → φI n3, if φ ∈ I1, I2, I3 Lag Syn. with Lag φI n3

33

6. Conclusion

It was numerically demonstrated in [10] that with N ≫ 2 convex oscillators, the system reveal multistable phase clustering for inhibitory couplings. For N ≫ 2 concave oscillators the corresponding system also has multistable phase clustering for excitatory couplings. Since for N = 2, the corresponding system has stable in-phase synchronization. It will be interesting to treat N as a parameter so as to see how the system evolves from synchronization to clustering synchronization as N increases.

References

[1] S. Bottani, Pulse-Coupled Relaxation Oscillators: From Biological Synchronization to Self-Organized Critical-ity, Phys. Rev. Lett., 74, 4189 (1995).

[2] J. Buck, Synchronous Rhythmic Flashing of Fireflies. II., Q. Rev. Biol., 63, 265 (1988).

[3] Y. C. Chang, and J. Juang, Stable Synchrony In Globally-Coupled Integrate-And-Fire Oscillators, preprint.

[4] H. Daido, Lower Critical Dimension for Populations of Oscillators with Randomly Distributed Frequencies: A Renormalization-Group Analysis, Phys. Rev. Lett., 61, 231 (1988).

[5] J. Deppisch, H. U. Bauer, T. Schillen, P. K¨onig, K. Pawelzik, and T. Geisel, Network 4, 243 (1993).

[6] R. Eckhorn, R. Bauer, W. Jordan, M. Brosch, W. Kruse, M. Munk, and H. J. Reitboeck, Biol. Cybern. 60, 121 (1988).

[7] A. K. Engel, P. K¨onig, A. K. Kreiter, and W. Singer, Science 252, 1177 (1991).

[8] G. Ermentrout, An adaptive model for synchrony in the firefly Pteroptyx malaccae, J. Math. Biol., 29, 571 (1991).

[9] U. Ernst, K. Pawelzik, and T. Geisel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 1570 (1995).

[10] U. Ernst, K. Pawelzik, and T. Geisel, Delay-induced multistable synchronization of biological oscillators, Phys.

Rev. E, 57, 2150 (1998).

[11] C. M. Gray, P. Kr¨onig, A. K. Engel, and W. Singer, Nature (London) 338, 334 (1989).

[12] J. Jalife, Mutual entrainment and electrical coupling as mechanisms for synchronous firing of rabbit sinoatrial pacemaker cells, J. Physiol., 356, 221 (1984).

[13] Y. Kuramoto and I. Nishikawa, Statistical macrodynamics of large dynamical systems. Case of a phase tran-sition in oscillator communities, J. Stat. Phys., 49, 596 (1987).

[14] Y. Kuramoto, Collective synchronization of pulse-coupled oscillators and excitable units, Physica D, 50, 15 (1991).

[15] W. W. Lytton and T. J. Sejnowski, J. Neurophys. 66,1059 (1991); C. van Vreeswijk, L. F. Abbott, and G. B. Ermentrout, J. Comp. Neurosci. (to be published); A. Nischwitz, H. Gl¨under, A. von Oertzen, and P.

Klausner, ANN Proceedings (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993), p. 622.

[16] C. v. d. Malsburg, Technical Report No. 81-2, MPI for Biophysical Chemistry, 1981.

[17] C. v. d. Malsburg and W. Schneider, Biol. Cybern. 54, 29 (1986).

[18] D. C. Michaels, E. P. Matyas, J. Jalife, Mechanisms of sinoatrial pacemaker synchronization: a new hypoth-esis, Circulation Res., 61, 704 (1987).

[19] R. E. Mirollo and S. H. Strogatz, Synchronization of pulse-coupled biological oscillators, SIAM J. Appl. Math., 50, 1645 (1990).

[20] C. S. Peskin, Mathematical Aspects of Heart Physiology, Courant Inst. Math. Sci., New York Univ., 268 (1975).

[21] J. Rubin and D. Terman, Geometric analysis of population rhythms in synaptically coupled neuronal networks, Neural Computation, 12, 597 (2000).

[22] A. Sherman, J. Rinzel, J. Keizer, Emergence of organized bursting in clusters of pancreatic beta-cells by channel sharing, Biophys. J., 54, 411 (1988).

[23] A. Sherman and J. Rinzel., Collective properties of insulin secreting cells, in “Cell to Cell Signalling: From Experiments to Theoretical Models”, A. Goldbeter, ed., Academic Press, London, 61 (1989).

[24] S. H. Strogatz, C. M. Marcus, R. M. Westervelt, and R. E. Mirollo, Simple Model of Collective Transport with Phase Slippage, Phys. Rev. Lett., 61, 2380 (1988).

[25] S. Strogatz, Lecture Notes in Biomathematics, Springer, Berlin, 100, (1993).

[26] Vincent Torre, A theory of synchronization of heart pace-maker cells, J. Theoret. Biol., 61, 55 (1976).

[27] A. T. Winfree, The Geometry of Biological Time (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1980).

[28] C. W. Wu, Synchronization in Coupled Chaotic Circuits and Systems, World Scientific series on nonlinear science, Series A, 41, World Scientific, Singapore, (2002).

35

相關文件