t
+ cv
x
f
=
1
v
[(P
v
f
)f
+ d
v
f
+ (
f
v)f
]
:=
1
Q(f
)
:=
1
(Q
0
(f
) + R(f
)), (2.1)
11400013
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
P. Degond & J.G. Liu
where
Q
0
(f) =
v
[(P
v
f
)f + d
v
f],
R(f) =
v
[(
f
v)f].
Q
0
(f) is the operator studied in Ref. 10. R(f) is the precession operator about
an axis which is that of the average particle velocity. c 0 is the speed of the
selfpropelled particles. We let P
v
= Id v v be the projection operator onto
the plane normal to v and
f
=
_
S
2
f(v)dv,
f
=
_
S
2
f(v)vdv

_
S
2
f(v)vdv
,
the density and mean velocity direction associated to f. We dene the equilibria
(VonMisesFischer distribution):
F
=
exp(v )
_
S
2
exp(v )dv
,
with = 1/d. We note the compatibility relation:
= ,
F
= .
We dene
M
f
=
f
F
f
,
the equilibrium distribution associated to f.
2.2. Equilibria
In this section, we investigate the solutions of the equation Q(f) = 0, which are
the socalled local equilibria of the kinetic model.
Proposition 2.1. We have:
Q(f) = 0 0, S
2
, such that f = F
.
Proof. We note the following properties:
_
S
2
Q
0
(f)
f
M
f
dv = d
_
S
2
v
_
f
M
f
_
2
M
f
dv 0,
_
S
2
R(f)
f
M
f
dv =
_
S
2
(
f
v)
_
v
f
M
f
(P
v
f
)
f
M
f
_
f(v)dv = 0.
The rst line is proved in Ref. 10. To prove the second line, we remark that
v
M
f
=
P
v
M
f
, (
f
v) (P
v
f
) = 0 and that the rst term can be written as
2
2
_
S
2
v
_
(
f
v)
f
2
M
f
_
dv = 0.
11400014
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
Hydrodynamics of SelfAlignment Interactions
Then, if Q(f) = 0, we have
0 =
_
S
2
Q(f)
f
M
f
dv = d
_
S
2
v
_
f
M
f
_
2
M
f
dv.
This implies that
f
M
f
is a constant, and that therefore, f is of the form F
for a
given 0, S
2
. Conversely, by the compatibility relation, it is obvious that
f = F
satises Q(f) = 0.
Remark 2.1. We comment on the connection between this model and rodlike
polymers. In the case of rodlike polymers, the interaction operator is written
v
[(
v
+ w v)f + d
v
f],
where (v) is a potential and w is the precession direction. In general, nding
equilibria for polymer models is dicult.
23
Here, we deal with the special case where
(v) = v w which makes this computation possible. In general, the computation
is possible if the level curves of are invariant under precession rotation.
2.3. Generalized collisions invariants
We recall the denition of a generalized collision invariant (GCI) (see Ref. 10).
First, we dene the collision operator
Q(f, ) =
v
[(P
v
)f + d
v
f + ( v)f],
where now S
2
is not necessarily equal to
f
. For given , Q(, ) is a linear
operator and we will also consider its formal adjoint Q
(, ). Then, we have
Denition 2.1. For given S
2
, a function
dv = 0, f such that
f
= .
We note that the condition
f
= is a linear condition on f which can
equivalently be written A
_
S
2
f(v)vdv = 0, for all vectors A such that A = 0.
On the other hand, we have
_
S
2
Q(f, )
dv =
_
S
2
Q
, )fdv.
Therefore, that
is a GCI is equivalent to
A R
3
such that A = 0 and Q
, ) = A v,
or
(P
v
)
v
+ d
v
( v)
v
= A v.
11400015
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
P. Degond & J.G. Liu
In spherical coordinates (with polar axis , latitude [0, ] and longitude
[0, 2]), this equation is written (dropping the index ):
sin
+ d
_
1
sin
(sin
) +
1
sin
2
_
sin
= A
1
sin cos + A
2
sin sin, (2.2)
where A = (A
1
, A
2
, 0) are the coordinates of A, in an orthonormal coordinate basis
(e
1
, e
2
, ).
Proposition 2.2. The set C
(k)
(, ) =
(k)
1
() cos +
(k)
2
() sin , k = 1, 2
and
(2)
1
=
(1)
2
,
(2)
2
=
(1)
1
.
Finally, (
(1)
1
,
(1)
2
) satises the following elliptic system:
sin
(1)
1
+ d
_
1
sin
(sin
(1)
1
)
1
sin
2
(1)
1
_
sin
(1)
2
= sin , (2.3)
sin
(1)
2
+ d
_
1
sin
(sin
(1)
2
)
1
sin
2
(1)
2
_
+ sin
(1)
1
= 0. (2.4)
(
(2)
1
,
(2)
2
) satises the same system with righthand sides 0 and sin for the rst
and second equations respectively. The elliptic system has a unique zeroaverage
solution, which denes
(k)
uniquely.
Proof. The reduction of (2.2) to (2.3), (2.4) follows from using Fourier transform
in the variable. To solve this system, we construct the complexvalued function
(k)
() =
(k)
1
() + i
(k)
2
().
(1)
satises the complexvalued elliptic problem:
sin
(1)
+ d
_
1
sin
(sin
(1)
)
1
sin
2
(1)
_
+ isin
(1)
= sin,
whereas
(2)
satises the same equation with righthand side i sin. Since the
imaginary part of the operator is skewadjoint, it does not modify the energy iden
tity. Therefore, the same theory as in Ref. 10 applies and shows the existence and
uniqueness of the solution in the space of zero average functions. The remaining
part of the statement follows easily.
11400016
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
Hydrodynamics of SelfAlignment Interactions
3. Hydrodynamic Limit
The following theorem establishes the limit 0.
Theorem 3.1. We assume that f
f
0
as smoothly as needed. Then, we have
f
0
= F
, (3.1)
where = (x, t) and = (x, t) satisfy the following system
t
+ cc
1
x
() = 0, (3.2)
(
t
+ cc
2
cos (
x
) + cc
2
sin ((
x
))) + cdP
x
= 0. (3.3)
The coecient c
1
is dened by
c
1
=
_
S
2
F
(v)(v )dv =
_
S
2
exp(v )(v )dv
_
S
2
exp(v )dv
. (3.4)
The coecients c
2
and are dened as follows. First, dene a
k
and b
k
for k =
1, 2 by
a
k
=
1
2
_
[0,]
F
(cos )
(1)
k
() sin
2
d, k = 1, 2, (3.5)
b
k
=
1
2
_
[0,]
F
(cos )
(1)
k
() cos sin
2
d, k = 1, 2, (3.6)
where
(1)
k
are the GCIs found in Proposition 2.2. Then, introducing (
a
,
a
), (
b
,
b
)
the polar coordinates of the vectors (a
1
, a
2
) and (b
1
, b
2
), i.e.
a
1
+ ia
2
=
a
e
i
a
, b
1
+ ib
2
=
b
e
i
b
,
c
2
and are dened by
c
2
=
b
a
, =
b
a
. (3.7)
Remark 3.1. Model (3.2) and (3.3) will be referred to as the hydrodynamic model
for selfalignment interactions with precession.
Remark 3.2. We note the following identities:
(
x
) = (
x
) ,
((
x
) ) = P
(
x
).
Remark 3.3. The reason for keeping the dependence upon the speed c explicit is
that we will later investigate the case c = 0.
Proof. Letting 0 in (2.1) and using Proposition 2.1, we get that Q(f
) 0 =
Q(f
0
), and that Eq. (3.1) is satised. Now, we look for the equations satised by
(, ) and for this purpose, we use the GCI.
11400017
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
P. Degond & J.G. Liu
According to Proposition 2.2, 1 is a classical collision invariant. Therefore,
multiplying (2.1) by 1 and letting 0, we get the mass conservation Eq. (3.2).
Now, we successively multiply (2.1) by the GCIs
(k)
, k = 1, 2 associated to the
polar vector
f
. From the fact that
(k)
C
, we get that
_
S
2
Q(f
)
(k)
dv =
_
S
2
Q(f
,
f
)
(k)
dv = 0, k = 1, 2,
thanks to Denition 2.1. We deduce that
_
S
2
T(f
)
(k)
dv = 0, k = 1, 2,
where Tf =
t
f +cv
x
f is the transport operator. Letting 0, we deduce that
T
(k)
:=
_
S
2
T(F
)
(k)
dv = 0, k = 1, 2. (3.8)
We note that
(1)
=
1
() cos +
2
() sin , (3.9)
(2)
=
2
() cos +
1
() sin , (3.10)
where we dene
1
=
(1)
1
and
2
=
(1)
2
for simplicity.
A simple computation
10
shows that
T(F
) = F
{
t
+ c(v
x
) + (v (
t
+ cv
x
))}.
We decompose
v = v
+ v
, v
= P
v, v
= (v ).
In spherical coordinate system, we have
v
= (0, 0, cos ).
Therefore, v
is an even
degree such polynomial. We decompose T(F
) = T
e
+ T
o
,
T
o
= F
{cv
x
+ v
(
t
+ c(v )
x
)},
(3.11)
where we have used that v
((v
x
)) = 0 because  = 1. We can write
T
o
= F
D(v ) = F
sin(cos D
1
(cos ) + sinD
2
(cos )),
with
D(v ) = c
x
+ (
t
+ c(v )
x
) (3.12)
11400018
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
Hydrodynamics of SelfAlignment Interactions
and D = (D
1
, D
2
, D
3
) are the coordinates of D in the Cartesian coordinate basis
associated to the denitions of the angles (, ).
Now, inserting (3.11), (3.12) into (3.8), and noting that the odd degree polyno
mial in vanish away upon integration with respect to [0, 2], we get,
T
(1)
=
_
[0,],[0,2]
F
(cos )(cos D
1
(cos ) + sinD
2
(cos ))
(
1
() cos +
2
() sin ) sin
2
d d,
T
(2)
=
_
[0,],[0,2]
F
(cos )(cos D
1
(cos ) + sinD
2
(cos ))
(
2
() cos +
1
() sin ) sin
2
d d.
Performing the integration leads to:
T
(1)
=
1
2
_
[0,]
F
(cos )(D
1
(cos )
1
() + D
2
(cos )
2
()) sin
2
d , (3.13)
T
(2)
=
1
2
_
[0,]
F
(cos )(D
1
(cos )
2
() + D
2
(cos )
1
()) sin
2
d. (3.14)
Now, introducing the matrices
[a] =
_
a
1
a
2
a
2
a
1
_
, [b] =
_
b
1
b
2
b
2
b
1
_
and
[A] =
_
_
_
_
a
1
a
2
0
a
2
a
1
0
0 0 0
_
_
_
_
, [B] =
_
_
_
_
b
1
b
2
0
b
2
b
1
0
0 0 0
_
_
_
_
,
with a
k
and b
k
(k = 1, 2) dened at (3.5), (3.6) and inserting (3.12) into (3.13),
(3.14) leads to
_
_
_
T
(1)
T
(2)
0
_
_
_
= [A]P
(c
x
+
t
) + c[B]P
((
x
)) = 0. (3.15)
The matrix [a] being a similitude matrix, it is invertible and we can introduce the
matrix
[c
2
] = [a]
1
[b] =
_
c
21
c
22
c
22
c
21
_
and
[C
2
] =
_
_
_
_
c
21
c
22
0
c
22
c
21
0
0 0 0
_
_
_
_
.
11400019
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
P. Degond & J.G. Liu
Multiplying the rst two lines of the vector equation (3.15) by d[a]
1
, we get:
(
t
+ c[C
2
](
x
)) + cdP
x
= 0. (3.16)
This is the momentum equation.
The equation can be transformed using the fact that [b] and consequently [c
2
]
are similitude matrices. Therefore, we can write
[c
2
] = c
2
R
, (3.17)
where c
2
and are given by (3.7) and
R
=
_
cos sin
sin cos
_
is the rotation matrix of angle . Then, (3.16) can be equivalently written according
to (3.3), which ends the proof.
4. Hyperbolicity of the Hydrodynamic Model
In this section, we investigate the hyperbolicity of the hydrodynamic model for
selfalignment interactions with precession. For this purpose, we use the spherical
coordinates associated to a xed Cartesian basis. In this basis, denoting by [0, ]
the latitude and [0, 2] the longitude, we have
= (sin cos , sin sin, cos )
T
,
and we let
and
 = 1, 
 = sin.
We will use the formulas
x
=
x
+
x
,
P
a = (
a)
+
(
a)
sin
2
,
(
x
) = ((
x
))
+ ((
x
))
,
(
x
) =
((
x
))
sin
sin((
x
))
t
=
t
+
t
,
where a is an arbitrary vector.
As in Ref. 10, we use the time rescaling t
= cc
1
t and introduce
a =
c
2
c
1
,
2
=
d
c
1
, = ln .
114000110
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
Hydrodynamics of SelfAlignment Interactions
With this change of variables and unknowns, system (3.2) and (3.3) is written
(dropping the primes on t):
t
+
x
+
x
= 0,
t
+ a(cos (
x
) + sin ((
x
))) + P
x
= 0,
or,
t
+
x
+ (
x
+
x
) = 0, (4.1)
t
+ a(cos (
x
) sin sin (
x
)) +
x
= 0, (4.2)
t
+ a(cos (
x
) +
sin
sin
(
x
)) +
x
sin
2
= 0. (4.3)
In passing, we note a mistake in formula (4.70) of Ref. 10 where the last term
should be divided by sin
2
. This mistake does not aect the eigenvalues of the
system which are correct.
Introducing
U =
_
_
_
_
_
_
,
this system is written
U
t
+ A(U)U
x
+ B(U)U
y
+ C(U)U
z
= 0,
in Cartesian coordinates x = (x, y, z). Assuming translation invariance along the z
direction, the system is reduced to
U
t
+ C(U)U
z
= 0,
with
C(U) =
_
_
_
_
_
cos sin 0
sin a cos cos a sin sin cos
0
a sin cos
sin
a cos cos
_
_
_
_
_
.
The system is hyperbolic, if and only if the eigenvalues of C(U) are real for all
values of U. The characteristic polynomial of C(U) is given by
P(X) = X
3
(1 + 2a cos ) cos X
2
+ (a(a + 2 cos ) cos
2
2
sin
2
)X
+a(
2
cos sin
2
a cos
2
) cos .
We note that in the case sin = 0, we recover the results of Ref. 10 where all
eigenvalues are real. In the present sin = 0 case, the roots of P(X) cannot be
analytically computed. However, they are analytically computable in the two cases
= 0 and = /2.
114000111
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
P. Degond & J.G. Liu
Case = /2. Then, P(X) = X(X)(X+) has real roots X = 0 and X = .
These roots are the same as in the = 0 case.
10
Case = 0. Then, P(X) = (X 1)((X a cos )
2
+ a
2
sin
2
) has one real root
X = 1 and two complex conjugate roots X = ae
i
. Therefore, as soon as sin = 0,
the system loses its hyperbolicity near = 0.
Due to the loss of hyperbolicity of the hydrodynamic model, we look for diusive
corrections by introducing a nonlocal evaluation of the alignment direction. This
task is performed in the next section.
5. Taking into Account Nonlocality in the Interaction
Now, we assume that the
f
vector is replaced by a nonlocal evaluation denoted
by
f
. So, we introduce the following kinetic model:
f
t
+ cv
x
f =
1
v
[(P
v
f
)f + d
v
f + (
f
v)f], (5.1)
where
f
=
j
f
+
2
r
f
j
f
+
2
r
f

,
j
f
=
_
(x
,v
)R
3
S
2
K
_
x
x
_
v
f(x
, v
, t)dv
dx
,
r
f
=
x
_
(x
,v
)R
3
S
2
_
x
x
_
f(x
, v
, t)dv
dx
,
is a force term. The rst term (given by j
f
) expresses the alignment interaction
(like in the Vicsek dynamics) while the second term (given by r
f
) expresses the
repulsion interaction.
We denote:
_
x
R
n
K()d = k
0
,
1
2n
_
x
R
n
K()
2
d = k,
_
x
R
n
()d = .
We can always assume that k
0
= 1. Repulsive interaction here means that we
assume 0. Dening u
f
by
f
u
f
=
_
v
S
2
f(v
)v
dv
,
114000112
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
Hydrodynamics of SelfAlignment Interactions
we have the following Taylor expansion of v
f
:
f
=
f
+
2
1
f
u
f

f
+ o(
2
),
f
:= P
f
(k(
f
u
f
)
x
f
).
Inserting this expression into the kinetic equation (2.1), we get
f
t
+ cv
x
f =
1
v
[(P
v
f
)f + d
v
f + (
f
v)f]
+
2
f
u
f

v
[(P
v
f
)f + (
f
v)f] + o
_
_
.
Now we let
2
t
+ cv
x
f
=
1
v
[(P
v
f
)f
+ d
v
f
+ (
f
v)f
]
+
1
f
u
f

v
[(P
v
f
)f
+ (
f
v)f
]
=
1
Q(f
) L(f
), (5.2)
with
Lf =
1
f
u
f

v
[(P
v
f
)f + (
f
v)f].
The following theorem establishes the formal 0 limit.
Theorem 5.1. We assume that f
f
0
as smoothly as needed. Then, we have
f
0
= F
, (5.3)
where = (x, t) and = (x, t) satisfy the following system:
t
+ cc
1
x
() = 0, (5.4)
{
t
+ cc
2
cos (
x
) + cc
2
sin ((
x
))} + cdP
+
1
c
1
{(2d + c
2
cos )P
(kc
1
()
x
)
+(c
2
sin )( (kc
1
()
x
))} = 0, (5.5)
and the coecients c
1
, c
2
and are the same as in Theorem 3.1. We restrict our
selves to the case 2d + c
2
cos 0 which is the condition for the system to be
stable.
Remark 5.1. A special case is c = 0, = 1, = 0. This leads to
t
+ k(2d + c
2
cos ) ( ) + k(c
2
sin )( ) = 0,
which is the classical LandauLifschitzGilbert equation, provided that 2d +
c
2
cos 0.
114000113
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
P. Degond & J.G. Liu
Proof. Since Lf is a divergence in velocity space, the mass conservation equation is
unaected by this additional term compared to Sec. 3. The additional contribution
of Lf to the momentum equation is a term of the form:
L
(k)
:=
_
S
2
L(F
)
(k)
dv, k = 1, 2, (5.6)
on the lefthand side of (3.15). We have
L(F
) =
1
c
1
v
[(P
v
)F
+ ( v)F
],
where
:=
F
:= P
(kc
1
()
x
).
Therefore, using Greens formula, we get:
L
(k)
=
1
c
1
_
S
2
[(P
v
) + ( v)]
v
(k)
F
dv
=
1
c
1
_
S
2
[ + ( v)]
v
(k)
F
dv = 0
=
1
c
1
__
S
2
[
v
(k)
+ (v
v
(k)
)]F
dv
_
.
Now, we use the formulas:
_
S
2
v
g dv = 2
_
S
2
vg dv,
_
S
2
(
v
g)hdv = 2
_
S
2
vghdv
_
S
2
(
v
h)g dv,
_
S
2
(v
v
g)hdv =
_
S
2
(v
v
h)g dv,
for any pair of scalar functions g, h on S
2
. We get:
L
(k)
=
1
c
1
__
S
2
[2vF
+
v
F
(v
v
F
)]
(k)
dv
_
.
Now, we note that
v
F
= (P
v
)F
, which leads to
L
(k)
=
1
c
1
__
S
2
[2v + (P
v
) (v )]
(k)
F
dv
_
,
(we used that v = v (P
v
)). We use the decomposition v = v
+ v
. Since
and P
P
v
= (v )v
, we can write:
L
(k)
=
1
c
1
__
S
2
[(2 + (v ))v
(v
)]
(k)
F
dv
_
.
114000114
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
Hydrodynamics of SelfAlignment Interactions
Introducing the coordinates = (
1
,
2
, 0) in the Cartesian basis associated to ,
and decomposing v
accordingly, we get:
L
(k)
=
1
c
1
_
S
2
[(2 + cos )(cos
1
+ sin
2
)
(sin
1
cos
2
)]
(k)
F
sin dv
=
1
c
1
_
S
2
[((2 + cos )
1
+
2
) cos
+((2 + cos )
2
1
) sin ]
(k)
F
sin dv.
Finally, using (3.9) and (3.10), we get:
L
(1)
=
1
c
1
_
S
2
[((2 + cos )
1
+
2
) cos + ((2 + cos )
2
1
) sin ]
(
1
() cos +
2
() sin )F
sin dv,
L
(2)
=
1
c
1
_
S
2
[((2 + cos )
1
+
2
) cos + ((2 + cos )
2
1
) sin ]
(
2
() cos +
1
() sin )F
sin dv,
and performing the integration with respect to [0, 2], we are led to
L
(1)
=
1
2c
1
_
0
[((2 + cos )
1
+
2
)
1
()
+((2 + cos )
2
1
)
2
()]F
sin
2
d,
L
(2)
=
1
2c
1
_
0
[((2 + cos )
1
+
2
)
2
()
+((2 + cos )
2
1
)
1
()]F
sin
2
d.
In vector notations, this is written as:
_
_
_
_
L
(1)
L
(2)
0
_
_
_
_
=
1
c
1
{(2[A] + [B]) + [A]( )} .
Finally, collecting all terms leads to the following equation:
[A]P
(c
x
+
t
) + c[B]P
((
x
))
+
1
c
1
{(2[A] + [B]) + [A]( )} = 0.
114000115
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
P. Degond & J.G. Liu
Now, multiplying the rst two lines of this vector equation by [a]
1
, we get
(
t
+ c[C
2
](
x
)) + cdP
x
+
1
c
1
{(2dId + [C
2
]) + ( )} = 0,
or, expliciting the expression of :
(
t
+ c[C
2
](
x
)) + cdP
+
1
c
1
{(2dId + [C
2
])P
(kc
1
()
x
)
+((kc
1
()
x
) )} = 0.
Using (3.17), we can also write this equation in the form (5.5), which ends the proof
of the theorem.
6. Conclusion
In this paper, we have derived the hydrodynamic limit of a kinetic model of
selfpropelled particles with alignment interaction and with precession about the
alignment direction. We have shown that the resulting system consists of a
conservative equation for the local density and a nonconservative equation for
the orientation. We have observed that this system may lose its hyperbolicity.
Then, we have provided an extension of the model including diusion terms under
the assumption of weakly nonlocal interaction. In the particular case of zero self
propelling speed, we have noted that the resulting model is nothing but the classi
cal LandauLifschitzGilbert equation. Therefore the present theory provides one
of the very few (if not the only) kinetic justication of the phenomenological
LandauLifschitzGilbert equation. Future works in this direction will include the
sensitivity analysis of the hydrodynamic model in terms of the modeling param
eters, the accounting for phase transitions, the inuence of a vision angle, and
the inclusion of the particle interactions with a surrounding uid in the perspec
tive of modeling active particles suspensions. Another research direction consists in
investigating the mathematical structure of these models, prove wellposedness and
investigate its qualitative properties.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge the hospitality of Mathematical Sciences Cen
ter and Mathematics Department of Tsinghua University where this research was
performed. The research of J.G.L. was partially supported by NSF grant DMS
1011738.
References
1. M. Aldana and C. Huepe, Phase transitions in selfdriven manyparticle systems
and related nonequilibrium models: A network approach, J. Stat. Phys. 112 (2003)
135153.
114000116
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
Hydrodynamics of SelfAlignment Interactions
2. I. Aoki, A simulation study on the schooling mechanism in sh, Bull. J. Soc. Scientic
Fisheries 48 (1982) 10811088.
3. F. Bolley, J. A. Caizo and J. A. Carrillo, Meaneld limit for the stochastic Vicsek
model, arXiv:1102.1325.
4. F. Brown, Micromagnetics (Wiley, 1963).
5. J. A. Carrillo, M. R. DOrsogna and V. Panferov, Double milling in selfpropelled
swarms from kinetic theory, Kinetic Relat. Models 2 (2009) 363378.
6. J. A. Carrillo, A. Klar, S. Martin and S. Tiwari, Selfpropelled interacting par
ticle systems with roosting force, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 20 (2010)
15331552.
7. Y.L. Chuang, M. R. DOrsogna, D. Marthaler, A. L. Bertozzi and L. S. Chayes,
State transitions and the continuum limit for a 2D interacting, selfpropelled particle
system, Physica D 232 (2007) 3347.
8. I. D. Couzin, J. Krause, R. James, G. D. Ruxton and N. R. Franks, Collective memory
and spatial sorting in animal groups, J. Theor. Biol. 218 (2002) 111.
9. P. Degond, A. Frouvelle and J. G. Liu, Macroscopic limits and phase transition in a
system of selfpropelled particles, in preparation.
10. P. Degond and S. Motsch, Continuum limit of selfdriven particles with orientation
interaction, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 18 (Suppl.) (2008) 11931215.
11. P. Degond and S. Motsch, A macroscopic model for a system of swarming agents
using curvature control, J. Stat. Phys. 143 (2011) 685714.
12. P. Degond and T. Yang, Diusion in a continuum model of selfpropelled particles with
alignment interaction, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 20 (Suppl.) (2010) 14591490.
13. M. Doi and S. F. Edwards, The Theory of Polymer Dynamics (Clarendon Press, 1999).
14. M. R. DOrsogna, Y. L. Chuang, A. L. Bertozzi and L. Chayes, Selfpropelled particles
with softcore interactions: Patterns, stability and collapse, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006)
104302.
15. A. Frouvelle, A continuous model for alignment of selfpropelled particles with
anisotropy and densitydependent parameters, arXiv:0912.0594.
16. A. Frouvelle and J. G. Liu, Dynamics, in a kinetic model of oriented particles with
phase transition, arXiv:1101.2380.
17. G. Gregoire and H. Chate, Onset of collective and cohesive motion, Phys. Rev. Lett.
92 (2004) 025702.
18. V. L. Kulinskii, V. I. Ratushnaya, A. V. Zvelindovsky and D. Bedeaux, Hydrodynamic
model for a system of selfpropelling particles with conservative kinematic constraints,
Europhys. Lett. 71 (2005) 207213.
19. W. Maier and A. Saupe, Eine einfache molekulare theorie des nematischen
kristallin ussigen Zustandes, Z. Naturforsch. 13 (1958) 564566.
20. A. Mogilner and L. EdelsteinKeshet, A nonlocal model for a swarm, J. Math. Biol.
38 (1999) 534570.
21. A. Mogilner, L. EdelsteinKeshet, L. Bent and A. Spiros, Mutual interactions, poten
tials, and individual distance in a social aggregation, J. Math. Biol. 47 (2003) 353389.
22. L. Onsager. The eects of shape on the interaction of colloidal particles, Ann. New
York Acad. Sci. 51 (1949) 627659.
23. F. Otto and A. Tzavaras, Continuity of velocity gradients in suspensions of rodlike
molecules, Commun. Math. Phys. 277 (2008) 729758.
24. V. I. Ratushnaya, D. Bedeaux, V. L. Kulinskii and A. V. Zvelindovsky, Collective
behaviour of selfpropelling particles with kinematic constraints; the relations between
the discrete and the continuous description, Physica A 381 (2007) 3946.
114000117
February 15, 2012 16:24 WSPC/103M3AS 1140001
P. Degond & J.G. Liu
25. V. I. Ratushnaya, V. L. Kulinskii, A. V. Zvelindovsky and D. Bedeaux, Hydrody
namic model for the system of selfpropelling particles with conservative kinematic
constraints; two dimensional stationary solutions, Physica A 366 (2006) 107114.
26. C. M. Topaz and A. L. Bertozzi, Swarming patterns in a twodimensional kinematic
model for biological groups, SIAM J. Appl. Math. 65 (2004) 152174.
27. C. M. Topaz, A. L. Bertozzi and M. A. Lewis, A nonlocal continuum model for
biological aggregation, Bull. Math. Biol. 68 (2006) 16011623.
28. T. Vicsek, A. Czirok, E. BenJacob, I. Cohen and O. Shochet, Novel type of phase
transition in a system of selfdriven particles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 12261229.
114000118