OFFPRINT

Synchronization conditions for master-slave

reaction diffusion systems
P. Garcı́a, A. Acosta and H. Leiva
EPL, 88 (2009) 60006

Please visit the new website

www.epljournal.org
T ARGET YOUR RESEARCH
WITH EPL

Sign up to receive the free EPL table of

contents alert.
www.epljournal.org/alerts
 December 2009
EPL, 88 (2009) 60006 www.epljournal.org
doi: 10.1209/0295-5075/88/60006

Synchronization conditions for master-slave reaction diffusion

systems
P. Garcı́a1(a) , A. Acosta2 and H. Leiva3
1
Laboratorio de Sistemas Complejos, Departamento de Fı́sica Aplicada, Facultad de Ingenierı́a,
Universidad Central de Venezuela - Caracas, Venezuela
2
Departamento de Matemática Aplicada, Facultad de Ingenierı́a, Universidad Central de Venezuela
Caracas, Venezuela
3
Departamento de Matemática, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Los Andes - Mérida, Venezuela

received 8 June 2009; accepted in final form 1 December 2009

published online 8 January 2010

PACS 05.45.-a – Nonlinear dynamics and chaos

PACS 05.45.Jn – High-dimensional chaos
PACS 05.45.Xt – Synchronization; coupled oscillators

Abstract – In this work we consider the synchronization of two linearly coupled extended chaotic
systems with mismatch parameters. We give a quantitative measure of intensity of the coupling
necessary to ensure synchronization, as a function of grade of mismatch.

c EPLA, 2009
Copyright 

Introduction. – Synchronization in dynamical master-slave scheme. The master equation

systems is a phenomenon found in a wide range of
ut = Duxx + f (µ, u), (1)
disciplines. Fireflies synchronization [1], rhythmic firing
of thousands of pacemaker cells in our hearts [2], the evolves freely and the slave system
chorusing of crickets on a warm summer evening [3–5],
vt = Dvxx + f (µ̄, v) + ν(u − v), (2)
synchronized oscillation on the nanoscale [6,7], sponta-
neous synchronization of lightning flashes in a network of is driven by the master system. Here, f goes from Rm × R2
distant thunderstorms [8] or the synchronous movement into R2 , D is a diagonal matrix with diagonal elements d1
of thousands of fish or birds [9] are examples illustrating and d2 , µ and µ̄ are vectors of parameters in Rm and ν
the above affirmation. is the coupling constant. We are interested in solutions
In each of the above-mentioned cases, synchronization u(x, t), v(x, t), with x in the interval (0, l) and t ∈ R,
is reached despite the inevitable diversity of the units of (1), (2) satisfying the boundary conditions u(0, t) =
involved. v(0, t) = 0 and u(l, t) = v(l, t) = 0. Additionally, f fulfills
On the other hand, although synchronization in iden- the conditions
tical and non-identical localized systems is as frequent as
|f (µ, u1 ) − f (µ, u2 )|  L|u1 − u2 | (3)
that observed in spatially extended systems, more research
has been carried out in the case of the former [10–14], and
above all due to the difficulties associated with the high |f (µ, u) − f (µ̄, u)|  K|µ − µ̄||u| (4)
dimensionality of the systems of the second case. for all u1 , u2 in a ball Br (0) of radius r > 0 and center zero
All these facts have led us to propose a study of in R2 and K and L = L(r, µ) are positive constants.
synchronization of non-identical spatially extended chaoticThe idea supporting our scheme to obtain synchroniza-
systems following, in this case, an approach based on semi-
tion is very simple even though some technical work is
group theory. required. We now describe it, trying to be as explicit as
possible, without showing any proof.
Setting of the problem. – We consider a system
Let u0 (x, t) be a bounded solution of (1) and
of two vector reaction diffusion equations, satisfying
consider the transformation z = u − v, with u = u0 . Then
Dirichlet boundary conditions, linearly coupled using a
system (1), (2) could be rewritten as
(a) E-mail: pedro@fisica.ciens.ucv.ve zt = Dzxx − νz + f (µ, u0 ) − f (µ̄, u0 − z). (5)

60006-p1
P. Garcı́a et al.

Next, eq. (5) can be represented in an abstract setting continuous functions defined in R and taking values in X α .
as an ordinary differential equation in a Hilbert space Cb (R, X α ) is a Banach space with the supremum norm.
It is possible to establish that Φ ∈ Cb (R, X α ) is a solution
Φ̇ + AΦ = F(µ, µ̄, Φ, t) Φ(t0 ) = Φ0 , t  t0 > 0, (6) of (13) if and only if Φ satisfies the equation

where A is a linear unbounded operator A: D(A) ⊂  t

2 2 2 2
L ((0, l), R ) → L ((0, l), R ) defined by Φ(t) = e−A(t−s) F (µ, µ̄, Φ(s), s) ds. (14)
−∞

d2
 
AΦ = −D 2 + νI Φ. (7) Now, inspired by (14) we define the operator
dx  t
The spectrum of A, consists only of eigenvalues (T Φ) (t) = e−A(t−s) F (µ, µ̄, Φ(s), s) ds.
(15)
−∞
λn,i = di (nπ/l)2 + ν, n = 1, 2, . . . , i = 1, 2. We order the
set of eigenvalues {λn,i } according to the sequence 0 < Our main result is a condition that establishes the
λ1 < λ2 < . . . , where λ1 = min{d1 , d2 }(π/l)2 + ν. Notice existence of fixed points for the operator T . Indeed, the
that in this setting we have all the eigenvalues of A condition
belonging to the right half complex plane.  1−α  
In order to deal with the nonlinear part F(µ, µ̄, Φ, t), λ1 M L̄ρ + K̄|µ − µ̄|
> Γ(1 − α) , (16)
given by 2 ρ

F(µ, µ̄, Φ, t)(.) = f (µ, u0 (., t)) − f (µ̄, u0 (., t) − Φ(.)), (8) where Γ is the well-known gamma function and M =
(2α/e)α , allows us to prove that T has a unique fixed
we require that Φ ∈ X α , α > 0, where the fractional power point in the ball of center zero and radius ρ in the space
space X α := D(Aα ) is a Banach space with the graph norm Cb (R, X α ). At this point, it is easy to introduce our
Φα :=Aα Φ, where . denotes the usual norm in L2 . notion of synchronization; if Φα < ρ, being T Φ = Φ, then
It can be proved, see for instance [15], that for 1/4 < α < 1 through the relation Φ(t)(x) = z(x, t) we obtain z Rρ.
the following inclusions are continuous: Thus, because for µ = µ̄ one cannot expect z→ 0, we say
that the system (1), (2) synchronizes when the evolution of
X α ⊂ C((0, l), ℜ2 ) and X α ⊂ L2 ((0, l), ℜ2 ). (9) the slave system closely tracks the evolution of the master
system.
Therefore, there are constants C > 1 and R > 0, such Although, the setting is formal we exhibit a explicit rela-
that tion involving the parameters in the problem, namely (16),
supx∈(0,l) |Φ(x)|  C Φ α , Φ R Φ α . (10) and this allows us to estimate the intensity of the coupling
as a function of the difference between the control para-
Let us assume that u0 (., t) ∈ X α is uniformly bounded meters of the systems and the radius of the ball where
by N > 0, that is, u0 (., t)α  N for all t ∈ R. Colloquially synchronization occurs.
speaking, with the restriction given on Φ the composition An example. – In order to show the performance of
F goes from Rm × Rm × X α × R into L2 ((0, l), R2 ). More- our technique, we use as master system, the Gray-Scott
over, F inherits from f estimations such as (3) and (4), cubic autocatalysis model,
given by
∂u1 ∂ 2 u1
F(µ, µ̄, Φ1 , t) − F(µ, µ̄, Φ2 , t) L̄  Φ1 − Φ2 α . (11) = d1 − u1 u22 + a(1 − u1 ),
∂t ∂x2
(17)
For all Φ1 , Φ2 in a ball Bρα (0) of radius ρ > 0 and center ∂u2 ∂ 2 u2 2
zero in X α and L̄ can be chosen as L̄ = RL(C(N + ρ), µ̄), = d1 + u1 u2 − (a + b)u2 .
∂t ∂x2
F(µ, µ̄, 0, t) K̄|µ − µ̄|. (12) This reaction-diffusion system corresponds to two irre-
√ versible chemical reactions and exhibits spatiotemporal
For all µ, µ̄ ∈ ℜm and K̄ can be chosen as K̄ = KCN l. chaos. Here, b is the dimensionless rate constant of the
second reaction, a, is the dimensionless feed rate and
Results. – Under the conditions imposed above, the
di , i = 1, 2, are the diffusion coefficients.
problem (6) is well posed in X α and a continuous function
α In our case, we have two of these reaction-diffusion
Φ(.): (t0 , T ) → X is solution of the integral equation
systems coupled by means of a master-slave scheme, where
 t the slave system is given by
Φ(t) = e−A(t−t0 ) Φ0 + e−A(t−s) F(µ, µ̄, Φ(s), s) ds,
t0 ∂v1 ∂ 2 v1
(13) = d1 − v1 v22 + ā(1 − v1 ) + ν(u1 − v1 ),
∂t ∂x2
(18)
if and only if Φ(.) is a solution of (6), see for instance [15]. ∂v2 ∂ 2 v2 2
= d1 + v1 v2 − (ā + b̄)v2 + ν(u2 − v2 ).
Consider now, Cb (R, X α ) the set of the bounded and ∂t ∂x2

60006-p2
 Synchronization conditions for master-slave reaction diffusion systems

ρ
0.01 0.02 0.03

0.35
ν

0.30

1.0 0.25
0.060 0.055
0.050
0.045
0.5 10 000 b

0.0
0 Fig. 2: The surface corresponding to eq. (22).
5000
1 e (t)
0.500

2
0 0.100
0.050
Fig. 1: Three-dimensional plot of component u1 , of the Gray-
2
Scott system, using an initial condition u1 (x, 0) = e−10(x−l/2) ,
2 2
u2 (x, 0) = e[−1000∗(x−l/3) ] + e[−1000∗(x−2l/3) ] and Dirichlet 0.010
conditions in x = 0 and x = 2.5. 0.005

In order to perform our numerical experiments we now

t
establish a discussion given the choices of the constants 50 100 150 200
in (16). As in reference [16], here the constants associated
with the systems of reaction-diffusion equations are chosen Fig. 3: Semi-logarithmic plot of the global error vs. the time
as: a = 0.028, b = 0.053, d2 = 10−5 , d1 = 2d2 and l = 2.5. in the case of two different coupling parameters and the same
In fig. 1, using the constants given above we exhibit the radius ρ = 0.005. Continuous and dashed lines correspond to
evolution, for an initial data given, of the first component ν = 0.26 and ν = 0.1, respectively.
of the master system.
with α = 1/2. We have selected this value for simplicity
In this particular example, the vector field f is given
in the calculations; however, it is important to mention,
by f = (f1 , f2 ), being f1 (a, b, u1 , u2 ) = −u1 u22 + a(1 − u1 )
although we do not discuss it in this work, that it would
and f2 (a, b, u1 , u2 ) = u1 u22 − (a + b)u2 . Condition (3), with
be interesting to study what happens while α varies
(u1 , u2 ) in Br (0), is satisfied if we take L = 2(4r2 + a + b);
and search if by doing this we get a better accuracy in
and condition (4) is fulfilled when a = ā , if we take K = 1.
the determination of the synchronization threshold. On
On the other hand, the constants C and R appearing in (9)
the other hand, because this accuracy is influenced by the
can be chosen, given estimates in the norm of L2 and the
estimates of the bounds L̄ and K̄, a suitable choice of these
sup norm for the operator A, as
parameters provides a better approximation of the surface
 1/2 in fig. 2. However, the optimizations mentioned before is
1 2 1
C= α , R= α. (19) a subject beyond the scope of this work.
λ1 l λ1 Notice that our theoretical result guarantees synchro-
nization for a set of 3-tuple (b̄, ρ, ν) above this surface.
Therefore, according to the expression for L̄ and K̄ given
Many discussions could arise from this result, for exam-
in (11) and (12), respectively, we obtain
ple, for a transverse cut fixing b̄ it is possible to estimate ν
2

16
 such that the slave system tracks the master system with
L̄ = 2α (N + ρ)2 + ā + b̄ , (20) a desired closeness.
λ1 5λ1
For a particular choice of the parameter µ̄ (ā = a and
√
2N b̄ = 0.049) and ρ = 0.005, fig. 3 shows a semi-logarithmic
K̄ = α . (21) plot of the global error of synchronization, which is defined
λ1
by
In order to show the dependence of the coupling inten-   2 1/2
sity with the grade of mismatch of our systems, fig. 2 shows 1 l 2
the surface corresponding to the equation e(t) = (ui (x, t) − vi (x, t)) dx , (23)
l 0 i=1
 1−α  
λ1 M L̄ρ + K̄|µ − µ̄|
= Γ(1 − α) , (22) vs. time t, for two different coupling parameters (ν = 0.26
2 ρ and ν = 0.1). The first value, i.e. ν = 0.26, of the coupling

60006-p3
P. Garcı́a et al.
was chosen in agreement with our theoretical result, and REFERENCES
the second, below to our estimate. Here we show as, for
ν = 0.26, the error (23) behaves in such a way that it
cannot be greater than the value assigned to ρ. On the
other hand, when ν = 0.1 we do not observe the same
behavior.
Concerning with the selection of the values for coupling
parameter, we consider that it is important to mention
that it is possible to select values of ν below the synchro- [5] Strogatz S. H., Sync: The Emerging Science of
nization threshold that could produce a synchronized
evolution of the systems. In our example (ρ = 0.005 and
b̄ = 0.049) the minimum threshold of synchronization was
numerically obtained as ν = 0.125 and our theoretical
prediction for that threshold is ν = 0.259.
As a final comment on this example, in the case of
ν = 0.26 the synchronization error becomes very small in
an exponential way, with an exponent greater than the
case of ν = 0.1.
Final remarks. – It is worth pointing out that, in
contrast with the studies in references [17–19], we propose
a strategy to obtain an analytical estimate of coupling
necessary to achieve the synchronization in non-identical
chaotic systems, instead of a numerical search of the
conditions to reach a synchronized motion of the systems.
Finally, although the scheme is illustrated with coupled
reaction-diffusion equations where the mismatch between
the systems is in the linear terms, the methodology is
quite general, and we do not use any condition, in the
derivation of (22), that restrict the mismatch to the linear
term. Thus, apparently the application of the method,
i.e. the determination of L̄ and K̄, becomes more cumber-
some if the mismatch in the parameters arises in the
nonlinear terms.
∗∗∗
This work was partially supported by the Consejo de
Desarrollo Cientı́fico y Humanı́stico de la Universidad
Central de Venezuela.
60006-p4
[1] Buck J., Sci. Am., 234 (1976) 74.
[2] Mirollo R. E. and Strogatz S. H., SIAM J. Appl.
Math., 50 (1990) 1645.
[3] Winfree A. T., J. Theor. Biol., 16 (1967) 15.
[4] Pikovsky A., Rosenblum M. and Kurths J.,
Synchronization: A Universal Concept in Nonlinear
Sciences (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) 2001.
Spontaneous Order (Hyperion, New York) 2003.
[6] Kaka S. F., Pufall M. R., Rippard W. H., Silva T. J.
and Russek S. E., Nature, 437 (2005) 389.
[7] Mancoff F. B., Rizzo N. D., Engel B. N. and
Tehrani S., Nature, 437 (2005) 393.
[8] Yair Y., Aviv R., Price C., Asfur M. and Ravid G.,
Geophys. Res. Abstr., 9 (2007) 03235.
[9] Adioui M., Treuil J. P. and Arino O., Ecol. Model.,
167 (2003) 19.
[10] Fujisaka H. and Yamada T., Prog. Theor. Phys.,
69 (1983) 32.
[11] Pecora L. M. and Carroll T. L., Phys. Rev. Lett.,
64 (1990) 821.
[12] Acosta A. and Garcı́a P., J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.,
34 (2001) 9143.
[13] Xie L., Teo K.-L. and Zhao Y., Chaos, Solitons Frac-
tals, 32 (2007) 234.
[14] Boccaletti S., Kurths J., Osipovd G., Valladares
D. L. and Zhouc C. S., Phys. Rep., 366 (2002) 1.
[15] Henry D., Geometric Theory of Semilinear Parabolic
Equations (Springer-Verlag, New York) 1981.
[16] Kocarev L., Tasev Z. and Parlitz U., Phys. Rev. Lett.,
79 (1997) 51.
[17] Bragard J., Boccaletti S. and Mancini H., Phys.
Rev. Lett., 91 (2003) 064103.
[18] Boccaletti S., Bragard J., Arecchi F. T.
and Mancini H., Phys. Rev. Lett., 83 (1999)
536.
[19] Amengual A., Hernandez-Garcı́a E., Montangne
R. and San Miguel M., Phys. Rev. Lett., 78 (1997)
536.