skip to main content
research-article

Self-organizing synchronization with inhibitory-coupled oscillators: Convergence and robustness

Published:01 October 2012Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Solutions for time synchronization based on coupled oscillators operate in a self-organizing and adaptive manner and can be applied to various types of dynamic networks. The basic idea was inspired by swarms of fireflies, whose flashing dynamics shows an emergent behavior. This article introduces such a synchronization technique whose main components are “inhibitory coupling” and “self-adjustment.” Based on this new technique, a number of contributions are made. First, we prove that inhibitory coupling can lead to perfect synchrony independent of initial conditions for delay-free environments and homogeneous oscillators. Second, relaxing the assumptions to systems with delays and different phase rates, we prove that such systems synchronize up to a certain precision bound. We derive this bound assuming inhomogeneous delays and show by simulations that it gives a good estimate in strongly-coupled systems. Third, we show that inhibitory coupling with self-adjustment quickly leads to synchrony with a precision comparable to that of excitatory coupling. Fourth, we analyze the robustness against faulty members performing incorrect coupling. While the specific precision-loss encountered by such disturbances depends on system parameters, the system always regains synchrony for the investigated scenarios.

References

  1. Abbott, L. F. and van Vreeswijk, C. 1993. Asynchronous states in neural networks of pulse-coupled oscillators. Phys. Rev. E 48, 2, 1483--1490.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Babaoglu, O., Binci, T., Jelasity, M., and Montresor, A. 2007. Firefly-inspired heartbeat synchronization in overlay networks. In Proceedings of International Conference on Self-Adaptive Self-Organizing Systems. 77--86. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Bloch, I. J. M. and Romero, C. 2002. Firing sequence storage using inhibitory synapses in networks of pulsatil nonhomogeneous integrate-and-fire neural oscillators. Phys. Rev. E 66, 3, 036127.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Buck, J., Buck, E., Case, J., and Hanson, F. 1981. Control of flashing in fireflies. V. Pacemaker synchronization in pteroptyx cribellata. J. Comp. Physiology A 144, 3, 630--633.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Camazine, S., Deneubourg, J.-L, Franks, N. R., Sneyd, J., Theraulaz, G., and Bonabeau, E. 2001. Self-Organization in Biological Systems. Princeton University Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Ermentrout, B. 1991. An adaptive model for synchrony in the firefly pteroptyx malaccae. J. Math. Biol. 29, 571--585.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Ernst, U., Pawelzik, K., and Geisel, T. 1995. Synchronization induced by temporal delays in pulse-coupled oscillators. Phys. Rev. Let. 74, 9, 1570--1573.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Ernst, U., Pawelzik, K., and Geisel, T. 1998. Delay-induced multistable synchronization of biological oscillators. Phys. Rev. E 57, 2, 2150--2162.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Hong, Y.-W. and Scaglione, A. 2005. A scalable synchronization protocol for large scale sensor networks and its applications. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 23, 5, 1085--1099. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Jahnke, S., Memmesheimer, R., and Timme, M. 2008. Stable irregular dynamics in complex neural networks. Phys. Rev. Let. 100, 4, 048102.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Jahnke, S., Memmesheimer, R., and Timme, M. 2009. How chaotic is the balanced state? Frontiers Comp. Neurosci. 10, Article 13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Jin, D. Z. 2002. Fast convergence of spike sequences to periodic patterns in recurrent networks. Phys. Rev. Let. 89, 20, 208102.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Klinglmayr, J., Bettstetter, C., and Timme, M. 2009. Globally stable synchronization by inhibitory pulse coupling. In Proceedings of International Symposium on Applied Sciences in Biomedical Communication Technologies (ISABEL).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Kuramoto, Y. 1975. Self-entrainment of a population of coupled non-linear oscillators. In Proceedings of International Symposium on Mathematical Problems in Theoretical Physics. Lecture Notes in Physics Series, vol. 39, Springer, 420--422.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuramoto, Y. 1991. Collective synchronization of pulse-coupled oscillators and excitable units. Physica D 50, 1, 15--30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Leidenfrost, R. and Elmenreich, W. 2009. Firefly clock synchronization in an 802.15.4 wireless network. EURASIP J. Embed. Sys., 186406. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Leidenfrost, R., Elmenreich, W., and Bettstetter, C. 2010. Fault-tolerant averaging for self-organizing synchronization in wireless ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of International Symposium on Wireless Communication Systems (ISWCS).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Lucarelli, D. and Wang, I.-J. 2004. Decentralized synchronization protocols with nearest neighbor communication. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Mathar, R. and Mattfeldt, J. 1996. Pulse-coupled decentral synchronization. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 56, 4, 1094--1106. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Mirollo, R. E. and Strogatz, S. H. 1990. Synchronization of pulse-coupled biological oscillators. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 50, 6, 1645--1662. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Pagliari, R. and Scaglione, A. 2011. Scalable network synchronization with pulse-coupled oscillators. IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput. 10, 3, 392--405. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Peskin, C. S. 1975. Mathematical Aspects of Heart Physiology. Courant Institute Lecture Notes. Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Rhouma, M. B. H. and Frigui, H. 2001. Self-organization of pulse-coupled oscillators with application to clustering.IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 23, 2, 180--195. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Strogatz, S. 2003. SYNC: The Emerging Science of Spontaneous Order. Hyperion books. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Timme, M. 2002. Collective dynamics in networks of pulse-coupled oscillators. Ph.D. thesis, Georg-August-University Göttingen.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Timme, M. and Wolf, F. 2008. The simplest problem in the collective dynamics of neural networks: Is synchrony stable? Nonlinearity 21, 7, 1579--1599.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Timme, M., Wolf, F., and Geisel, T. 2002. Coexistence of regular and irregular dynamics in complex networks of pulse-coupled oscillators. Phys. Rev. Let. 89, 25, 258701.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Tsodyks, M., Mitkov, I., and Sompolinsky, H. 1993. Pattern of synchrony in inhomogeneous networks of oscillators with pulse interactions. Phys. Rev. Let. 71, 8, 1280--1283.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Tyrrell, A. and Auer, G. 2008. Decentralized inter-base station synchronization inspired from nature. In Proceedings of IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC). 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Tyrrell, A., Auer, G., and Bettstetter, C. 2010a. Emergent slot synchronization in wireless networks. IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput. 9, 5, 719--732. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Tyrrell, A., Auer, G., Bettstetter, C., and Naripella, R. 2010b. How does a faulty node disturb decentralized slot synchronization over wireless networks? In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. van Vreeswijk, C. A., Abbott, L. F., and Ermentrout, G. B. 1994. When inhibition, not excitation, synchronizes neural firing.J. Comp. Neurosci. 1, 4, 313--321.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Werner-Allen, G., Tewari, G., Patel, A., Welsh, M., and Nagpal, R. 2005. Firefly-inspired sensor network synchronicity with realistic radio effects. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys). 142--153. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Winfree, A. T. 1967. Biological rhythms and the behavior of populations of coupled oscillators. J. Theoretical Biology 16, 1, 15--42.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Self-organizing synchronization with inhibitory-coupled oscillators: Convergence and robustness

                Recommendations

                Reviews

                Eliezer Dekel

                This paper introduces a synchronization technique inspired by the fascinating natural phenomenon of spontaneous synchronization. The authors cover a wide range of observed things that sync up spontaneously, ranging from male Asian fireflies with synchronous light flashes, to the 10,000 pacemaker cells that trigger the rest of the human heart to beat correctly. It is generally accepted that these occurrences of spontaneous synchronization arise from a completely distributed mechanism that is based on simple interactions between things. The case of the Asian fireflies is modeled by a system of pulse-coupled oscillators. The oscillators interact by emitting and receiving pulse signals. An oscillator emits a pulse signal at the end of its phase. Upon reception of a pulse signal, another oscillator adjusts its own phase. A system of oscillators that obeys these simple rules eventually reaches a synchronized pulse signal emission. This solution can be applied to various types of dynamic networks. Almost all approaches for the coupled oscillators model assume that the oscillator performs a positive phase jump (excitatory coupling). This paper considers a model that performs negative phase jumps (inhibitory coupling). The authors show that inhibitory coupling can lead to perfect synchrony independent of initial conditions for delay-free environments and homogeneous oscillators. They also show that inhibitory coupling with self-adjustment quickly leads to synchrony with a precision comparable to that of excitatory coupling. Their research shows that systems synchronize up to a certain precision bound, when the assumptions on delays and different phase rates are relaxed. Assuming inhomogeneous delays, they derive the bound and show via simulations that it gives a good estimate in strongly coupled systems. For the investigated scenarios, they analyze the robustness against faulty members performing incorrect coupling (Byzantine behavior) and find that the system always regains synchrony. The specific loss of precision encountered by such disturbances depends on system parameters. This well-written paper investigates a spontaneous synchronization scheme with inhibitory coupling and self-adjustment. Understanding spontaneous order holds great promise for automation possibilities in large complex systems like computing clouds. Online Computing Reviews Service

                Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

                Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

                Comments

                Login options

                Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

                Sign in

                Full Access

                PDF Format

                View or Download as a PDF file.

                PDF

                eReader

                View online with eReader.

                eReader
                About Cookies On This Site

                We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

                Learn more

                Got it!