arxiv: v1 [nlin.ao] 23 Sep 2015

Transcription

1 One node driving synchronisation Chengwei Wang 1,*, Celso Grebogi 1, and Murilo S. Baptista 1 1 Institute for Comple Systems and Mathematical Biology, King s College, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, AB4 3UE, UK. * r01cw13@abdn.ac.uk arxiv: v1 [nlin.ao] 3 Sep 015 ABSTRACT Abrupt changes of behaviour in comple networks can be triggered by a single node. This work describes the dynamical fundamentals of how the behaviour of one node affects the whole network formed by coupled phase-oscillators with heterogeneous coupling strengths. The synchronisation of phase-oscillators is independent of the distribution of the natural fruencies, weakly depends on the network size, but highly depends on only one key oscillator whose ratio between its natural fruency in a rotating frame and its coupling strength is maimum. This result is based on a novel method to calculate the critical coupling strength with which the phase-oscillators emerge into fruency synchronisation. In addition, we put forward an analytical method to approimately calculate the phase-angles for the synchronous oscillators. Introduction A remarkable phenomenon in phase-oscillator networks is the emergence of collective synchronous behaviour 1 6 such as phase synchronisation or phase-locking The Kuramoto model, 1 14 a paradigmatic network to understand behaviour in comple networks, has drawn lots of attention of scientists Many incipient works about Kuramoto model have assumed an infinite amount of oscillators coupled by a homogeneous strength. In 000, Strogatz wrote: 0 As of March 000, there are no rigorous convergence results about the finite- behavior of the Kuramoto model. Since then, understanding the behaviour of networks composed by a finite number of oscillators 1 8 coupled by heterogeneously strengths 9,30 has been the goal of many recent works towards the creation of a more realistic paradigmatic model for the emergence of collective behaviour in comple networks. However, most of the works about the finite-size Kuramoto model have relied on a mean field analysis, and consuently the emergence of synchronous behaviour has been associated with the collective action of all oscillators. Little is known about the contribution of an individual oscillator into the emergence of synchronous behaviour. But emergent behaviour in real comple networks can be tripped by only one node. Understanding the mechanism behind such a phenomenon in a paradigmatic, more realistic phase-oscillator network model is a fundamental step to develop strategies to control behaviour in comple systems. Besides, no analytical work has been proposed to solve the phase-angles of the synchronous oscillators. But a solution for the phase-angles is of great importance as, for eample, they are key variables for monitoring generators in the power grids where a Kuramoto-like model is considered In this paper, we firstly provide a novel method to calculate the critical coupling strength that induces synchronisation in the finite-size Kuramoto model with heterogeneous coupling strengths. From our theory, we understand that the synchronisation of a finite number of oscillators is surprisingly independent of the distribution of their natural fruencies, weakly depends on the network size, but remarkably depends on only one key oscillator, the one maimising the ratio between its natural fruency in a rotating frame and its coupling strength. This lights a beacon for us that in order to predict, avoid and control synchronisation in a network of arbitrary size, all ruired is the knowledge of the state of only one node rather than the whole system. In addition, we put forward an analytical method to approimately calculate the phase-angles of synchronous oscillators, without imposing any restriction on the distribution of natural fruencies. This directly links the synchronous solution and the physical parameters in phase-oscillator networks. Results Critical coupling strength We use 1 ( 0 ) to denote the 1 vector with all elements ual to one (zero), I to indicate the inde set {1,,,}. Given a vector a with elements, we use a = 1 i=1 a i to denote the mean value of the elements of a. The finite-size

2 Kuramoto model with heterogeneous coupling strengths for all-to-all networks is defined as, Θ i = Ω i + α ik sin(θ j Θ i ), i I, (1) where > 0 is a finite integer number, K > 0 is the coupling strength, Ω = [Ω 1,,Ω ] T, Θ = [Θ 1,,Θ ] T, and α = [α 1,,α ] T (α i > 0, i I ), denote the vectors whose elements represent the oscillators natural fruencies, instantaneous phases, and coupling weights, respectively. Define the fruency synchronisation (FS), i.e., the phase-locking state, of the phase-oscillators described by Eq. (1) as, Θ i Θ j = 0 as t, i, j I. () Our goal is to find K C, as the oscillators emerge into FS for a large enough K with as K > K C. Let ν = Θ i, i I, indicate the instantaneous fruency of the oscillators when FS is reached. Divide by α i on both sides of Eq. (1), then sum the uation from i = 1 to, this results in ν = ( i=1 Ω i α i )/( i=1 α 1 i ). We rewrite Eq. (1) in a rotating frame, namely, let θ i Θ i νt and ω i Ω i ν, i I, such that θ = 0 as the oscillators emerge into FS, and we have, θ i = ω i + α ik Define the order parameter 1,13 by, sin(θ j θ i ), i I. (3) re iψ = 1 e iθ j, i I, (4) Multiplying e iψ on both sides of Eq. (4) and then uating its real part and imaginary part, respectively, we have r= 1 0= j=0 cos(θ j ψ)= 1 sin(θ j ψ)= j=0 sinφ j. cosφ j, (5) (6) The mean field form of Eq. (3) is θ i = ω i + α i Kr sin(ψ θ i ), i I. Let φ i = θ i ψ, and ζ i = ω i α i, i I, such that, when FS is reached, i.e., θ = 0, we have ζ i = Kr sinφ i, i I. (7) Considering cosφ i = s(i) 1 (sinφ i ), where s(i)=±1, we have, from Eqs. (5) and (7), that, r= 1 i=1 s(i) 1 ( ) ζi. Kr [ T Define a function f as f( θ) := f 1 ( θ),, f ( θ)], where fi ( θ) := 1 sin(θ j θ i ), and a setaasa:={ θ : K f( θ)= ζ} representing the solution for the synchronisation manifold of Eq. (3). From Eqs. (6) and (7), we know, ζ = 1 i=1 ζ i = 0. Verwoerd and Mason 6 proved that A /0 Eq. (8) holds with s(i)=1, i I. (9) This conclusion was obtained by a Kuramoto model with a mean field coupling strength, i.e., α i = α j = 1, i, j I. However, the conclusion in (9) is still effective for the general case where α i α j. Because the proof for this conclusion was independent of α, and the only restriction was ζ = 0, 6 which is fulfilled when α i α j. The conclusion in (9) means that if Eq. (3) has at least one FS solution, then Eq. (8) holds with with s(i) = 1, i I. This FS solution is obtained for K K C, where K C (8) /9

3 is the critical coupling strength for FS, which ensures that Eq. (8) holds with s(i) = 1, i I. 6 Our following analysis is under the restriction that s(i)=1, i I, which implies cosφ i 0, i.e., φ i [ π, π ], i I. Define the key ratio by, ζ m := ω m, m I, such that ζ m ζ i, i I, (10) meaning that ζ m is the one of ζ i possessing the maimum absolute value. We call the m-th oscillator as the key oscillator. We assume ζ m 0 by ignoring the particular case where ζ m = 0 resulting in ω i = 0 and ζ i = 0, i I. Let =sinφ m, where 0 and φ m 0 obtained from ζ m 0 and Eq. (7). Then we have, from Eq. (7), that Kr = ζ m. Substituting Kr = ζ m into Eq. (8), and considering s(i)= 1, i I, r can be calculated by r= 1 ( ) ζ j 1. (11) ζ m Because φ i [ π, π ], and ζm ζ i, i I, we have, from Eq. (7), that sinφ m sin φ i, i I. implying φ m φ i, i I. Therefore, the m-th oscillator (the key oscillator) is the most outside one of all FS oscillators spreading on a unit circle, and if we decrease K from a larger one to a smaller one, the key oscillator will lose its FS at first among all oscillators. This means that K C is the smallest K for which the key oscillator has a zero instantaneous fruency in the rotating frame, i.e., θ m = 0, resulting in Eq. (7) as i=mwith restrictions φ m [ π, π ] and φm 0. In other words, K C can be obtained by the following optimisation (OPT) problem in (1) to find the minimum K that implies K = ζ m r with the restrictions that [ 1, 1] and 0, where r is calculated by Eq. (11), namely, ζ m minimize f() = ( ), ζ 1 j (1) ζ m subject to min ma, where min = ε +, ma = 1 if ω m > 0, and min = 1, ma = ε if ω m < 0, where ε + (ε ) indicates a positive (negative) infinitesimal. OPT in (1) can be numerically solved by selecting a small step for, step, then increasing from min to ma by step, such that we get a series of values of f(). The minimum f() is K C. Eplosive synchronisation was studied in Ref. 34 using a generalised Kuramoto model, which is a particular case of the model described in Eq. (3) by setting α i = ω i, i I. In this case, we have ζ i =±1, and ζ m = Kr> 0 from Eq. (7). Then OPT in (1) can be analytically solved, and the minimum of f() is, i.e., K C = when =. This result remarkably coincides with the critical coupling strength proposed in Ref. 34 for the backward process (namely, decrease K from a larger one to a smaller one) of the eplosive behaviour. However, the critical coupling strength for the backward process is different from the one for the forward process (namely, increase K from a smaller one to a larger one) for the eplosive synchronisation. 34 In this paper, we consider network configurations for which the critical coupling strength is the same for both the backward process and the forward process, i.e., no eplosive synchronisation happens, then K C obtained by OPT in (1) is also the critical coupling strength for the onset of FS in the forward process. We further find, numerically, that OPT in (1) obtains its solution at 1. Consider ζ m = Kr > 0, an approimate K C can be analytically obtained by forcing = 1, namely, K C 1 ζ m 1 ( ζ j ζ m ) = K A. (13) Let us now numerically demonstrate the eactness of the OPT in (1) to calculate K C, and Eq. (13) to calculate K A as the approimation of K C, for different phase-oscillator networks. Let δ := ma{ θ i θ j }, i, j I, where δ = 0 (δ > 0) indicates that all oscillators (not all oscillators) are in FS. The coupling weight α i > 0, i I, is generated within [1,10], without losing generality. Figures 1 (a), (b) and (c) show the results for three networks: Fig. 1 (a), 10 oscillators with Ω following an eponential distribution; Fig. 1 (b), 50 oscillators with Ω following a normal distribution; Fig. 1 (c), 100 oscillators with Ω following a random distribution. We calculate K C by OPT in (1), and gradually decrease K from K = K C + 0. to K C 0.. The results show that if K > K C, δ = 0 with an acceptable error in numerical eperiments for all cases, meaning that the oscillators are in FS. If K < K C, δ > 0 implying that the oscillators lose FS for all cases. We note that the 3/9

4 Figure 1. (a), (b) and (c) represent the results of δ (blue solid line) and K C (red dash line) for networks formed by 10 oscillators with Ω following an eponential distribution, 50 oscillators with Ω following a normal distribution, and 100 oscillators with Ω following a random distribution, respectively. (a), (b) and (c) are plotted based on average results of 5000 simulations with different initial phase-angles, but with the same Ω and α. (d), (e) and (f) show the change of η() (blue line with circles) and η(k C ) (red line with triangles) for networks formed by ( = 3 to 00) oscillators with Ω following eponential, normal and random distributions, respectively. (d), (e) and (f) are plotted based on average results of 100 simulations for each, with different Ω and α. oscillators lose FS abruptly at K = K C. This means that our method is effective to calculate K C for all cases. Figures 1 (d), (e) and (f) demonstrate the effectiveness of Eq. (13) to analytically calculate an approimate K C by forcing = 1. Denote opt as the value of that provides K C by OPT in (1). We define the relative error between 1 and opt as η() := 1 opt opt, and the relative error between K A [Eq. (13)] and K C [OPT in (1)] as η(k C ) := K A K C K C. Figures 1 (d), (e) and (f) show the changes of η() and η(k C ) with respect to ( = 3 to 00), with Ω following eponential, normal and random distributions, respectively. The results indicate that K A is near K C, and opt is close to 1 for all cases. This means Eq. (13) works well to approimately calculate K C for networks formed by arbitrary number of oscillators with any Ω distributions. One node driving synchronisation We find that K C is independent of the Ω distribution, weakly depends on the network size, and mainly depends only on the key oscillator. We use Ω e (), Ω n () and Ω r () to denote the natural fruency vectors for oscillators whose natural fruencies following eponential, normal and random distributions, respectively, and use ζ e m(), ζ n m() and ζ r m() to indicate the key ratio (ζ m = ω m ) for the networks formed by oscillators with natural fruencies following Ω e (), Ω n () and Ω r (), respectively. umerical eperiments follows the steps: (i), generate Ω e (), Ω n (), and Ω r () with = 3 to 00; (ii), 4/9

5 randomly generate the coupling weight vectors α e (), α n () and α r (), for all the networks with natural fruency following Ω e (), Ω n () and Ω r (), respectively; (iii), find the largest one of all the key ratios [ζm(), e ζm() n and ζm()] r with = 3 to 00, and denote it by ζ m = ω m ; (iv), in order to produce comparable networks, we parameterised the values of αm(), e αm() n and αm(), r such that ωe m () αm() e = ωn m () αm() n = ωr m () αm() r = γ ω m for all from 3 to 00, where γ is a parameter varying within [1,0], but ω m remains unchanged in the parametrisation process; (v), calculate K C for each Ω distribution, each, and each γ. Figures (a), (b) and (c) show the results for networks with fruency vectors given by Ω e (), Ω n (), and Ω r (), respectively. The surfaces representing K C are similar in all panels, which means that K C is independent of the Ω distribution. We note that K C depends on when is small, but K C is almost independent of for most cases where 50. Thus, we say K C weakly depends on. However, if we keep unchanged, we observe that K C almost linearly increases with the growth of γ [i.e., the decrease of αm(), e αm() n and αm()] r for all cases. In other words, K C will increase if we decrease the coupling weight for only one key oscillator. The reason is that the key oscillator is the first one to lose FS when we decrease K, and a key oscillator with a smaller coupling weight is easier to lose FS, which in turn implies a larger K C. As a conclusion, the behaviour of the key oscillator determines the FS of all oscillators, and the key ratio ( = ω m ) is the determinant physical parameter for the emergence of FS for all oscillators. Figure. Eploring the determinant physical parameters for the emergence of the fruency synchronisation. (a), (b) and (c) show the results for networks formed by ( = 3 to 00) oscillators with Ω following eponential, normal, and random distributions, respectively. γ is the the parameter used to rescale the key ratio. The surface represents the critical coupling, K C, for different and γ. Master solution When the oscillators emerge into FS, i.e., θ = 0, the solution of Eq. (3) is θ = θ s + 1 ξ, (14) where ξ R is an arbitrary number, 1 ξ is the homogeneous solution of Eq. (3) by setting ω = 0, and θ s is a particular solution of the non-homogeneous Eq. (3). From Eq. (7), we have φ i = arcsin ζ i Kr, i I, (15) where we eclude the unstable solutions φ i = π arcsin ζ i Kr for ζ i 0 and φ i = π arcsin ζ i Kr for ζ i < 0 (see Methods). We name φ [Eq. (15)] as the master solution of Eq. (3), since it is an analytically epressible particular solution of Eq. (3), and it embodies all of other stable particular solutions, i.e., any stable particular solution θ s can be epressed by θ s = φ+ 1 ξ. ote that r in Eq. (15) needs to be numerically calculated. et, we propose an analytical method to approimately obtain the master solution. Relabel the oscillators such that ζ 1 ζ ζ, and separate the oscillators into two groups: one group includes oscillators with labels from 1 to, where = ) if is even (or odd); the other group includes the left oscillators. Denote µ 1 = 1 i=1 ζ i and µ = 1 i= +1 ζ i for the first group and second group of oscillators, respectively. From Eqs. (6) and (or 1 5/9

6 (7), we have i=1 ζ i = 0. Thus, µ 1 + µ ( )=0, implying µ 1 = µ 0. The non-negativity of µ 1 comes from the fact that ζ i ζ j for any 1 i and any + 1 j. Recall = 1 ( or ) if is even (or odd), we know = ( ) if is even (odd), implying µ 1 = µ (µ 1 µ ) if is even (odd). For simplicity, we denote µ 1 µ 0 for both cases. When the oscillators emerge into FS with a given K (K > K C ), our model treats the whole system as two fruency-synchronous oscillators coupled by a common coupling strength K, with natural fruencies µ 1 and µ, respectively. We assume that the two-oscillator system also follows the model described by Eq. (3) with coupling weights α 1 = α = 1 which results in ζ 1 = µ 1, and ζ = µ. Thus, from Eq. (7), we have { µ1 = K r sinφ 1, µ = K r (16) sinφ, where r is the order parameter of the two-oscillator system. From Eq. (7), we have cosφ i = 1 sin φ i = 1 [ζ i /(Kr)], where we eclude the case where cosφ i = 1 sin φ i (see Methods). Thus, we have r = 1 1 [ζi /(Kr)] from [ Eq. (5). Since µ 1 µ 0, we have r = 1 1 ( µ 1 ) + K r 1 ( µ ) K r ] 1 ( µ 1 ) K r whose solution is r 1 λ 1 = µ 1 K, K µ 1, (17) r 1 λ = 1 1 4µ 1 K, K µ 1, where r 1 λ 1 and r λ indicate a locally stable branch and a locally unstable branch of the FS solution for the two-oscillator model, respectively (see Methods). We only consider the stable branch (r 1 λ 1). Furthermore, we use the order parameter of the two-oscillator system to be an approimation of the order parameter [Eq. (5)] of the -oscillator system, i.e., r r λ 1. Thus, the analytical approimation ( φ ) for the master solution ( φ) in Eq. (15) is, φ i = arcsin( ζ i Kλ 1 ), i I. (18) The corresponding approimate FS solution [Eq. (14)], is θ i arcsin( ζ i Kλ 1 )+ξ, i I. (19) Figure 3 (a) shows the numerical results of the order parameter for a network with 50 oscillators where Ω follows a normal distribution and α i, i I, is a random number within [1,10]. K C is indicated by the magenta dash-dot line. When K K C, the approimate order parameter, λ 1 [Eq. (17)] is close to the numerical one, r [Eq. (5)]. This means λ 1 can effectively approimate r. Define an 1 vector, ε, with elements ε i = φ i φ i, i I representing the absolute error between φ i 1 [Eq. (18)] and φ i [Eq. (15)]. Define σ = i=1 (ε i ε) as the standard deviation of ε i ε. Figures 3 (b) and (c) show the results of the average absolute error ε and σ, respectively, at K = K C which ensures the emergence of FS. etworks are formed by ( = 3 to 00) oscillators, with Ω following eponential, normal and random distributions. ε and σ are small for all cases, which means that the error between φ i and φ i is small i I in all cases. Moreover, the larger K is, the smaller the error between λ 1 and r is [Fig. 3 (a)], which will further imply a smaller error between φ i and φ i, i I. This means our method is effective to solve the phase-angles for oscillators as they emerge into FS, for networks formed by an arbitrary number of oscillators with any Ω distribution. Discussion In this paper, we presented our studies on the synchronisation for a finite-size Kuramoto model with heterogeneous coupling strengths. We provided a novel method to accurately calculate [OPT in (1)] or analytically approimate [Eq. (13)] the critical coupling strength for the onset of synchronisation among oscillators. With this method, we find that the synchronisation of phase-oscillators is independent of the natural fruency distribution of the oscillators, weakly depends on the network size, 6/9

7 Figure 3. (a) the order parameter and its approimation for 50 oscillators. r (red line with triangles) is numerically calculated by Eq. (5) as s(i)=1. i I. λ 1 (blue line with circles) and λ (green line with squares) are calculated by Eq. (17) as K µ 1. The value of K C and µ 1 are represented by magenta dash-dot line and black dash line respectively. (b) and (c) show, for different networks, the change of the average absolute error (ε) between φ in Eq. (18) and φ in Eq. (15) and the standard deviation (σ) of ε, as a function of K, respectively. etworks with (from 3 to 00) oscillators with Ω following eponential (dash red line), normal (green solid line) and random (black line with + ) distributions, respectively. but highly depends on only one node which has the maimum proportion of its natural fruency to its coupling strength. This helps us to understand the mechanism of the one affects the whole in comple networks. In addition, we put forward a method to approimately calculate the phase-angles for the oscillators when they emerge into synchronisation. With our method, one can easily obtain the solution of phase-angles for fruency-synchronous oscillators, without numerically solving the differential uation. Methods Ecluding the unstable solutions The FS solution of Eq. (3), i.e., the solution of Eq. (7) is { φ i = arcsin ζ i Kr or φ i = π arcsin ζ i Kr, if ζ i 0, i I, φ i = arcsin ζ i Kr or φ i = π arcsin ζ i Kr, if ζ i < 0, i I. (0) A rigorous analysis for the stability of the FS solutions was given by Ref. 8 for a mean filed coupled Kuramoto model, i.e., α i = α j = 1, i, j I. From the conclusion of Ref., 8 we know that the FS solution of Eq. (3) is locally unstable if at least one s(i) = 1 in Eq.(8). In other words, if the FS solution is stable, then s(i) = 1, i I, implying that cosφ i 0, i.e., φ i [ π, ] π, i I. Therefore, we eclude the case that cosφ i = 1 sin φ i for the solution of the two-oscillator system in the paper. However, the stability analysis of the FS solution for the general case where α i α j is difficult and is still an open problem. In our numerical eperiments, the stable solution we obtained is only the one that φ i = arcsin ζ i Kr [ π, ] π, i I. Thus, we eclude the solutions that φ i = π arcsin ζ i Kr [ π, π ] for ζi 0, and that φ i = π arcsin ζ i Kr [ π, ] π for ζi < 0. The stability analysis for the two-oscillator system The two-oscillator system also follows the Kuramoto model with α 1 = α = 1, namely, θ 1 = µ 1 + K sin(θ θ 1 ), θ = µ + K sin(θ 1 θ ). (1) 7/9

8 Let θ be a FS solution of Eq. (1). Let θ = θ + θ, where θ is a small perturbation on θ. Linearise Eq. (1) around θ, we have, [ θ 1 θ ] [ ] θ1 = J, θ where the Jacobian matri J is [ cos(θ J= θ 1 ) cos(θ θ 1 ) ] cos(θ 1 θ ) cos(θ1 θ ). (3) The two eigenvalues of J are e 1 = 0 and e = [cos(θ 1 θ implying cos(θ 1 θ )>0, i.e., θ1 θ < π. We have, from Eq. (17), that λ 1 λ = µ 1 K µ λ 1 λ = r sinφ. If r λ, we have that φ 1 arcsin(λ 1 ) and φ arcsin(λ 1 ). Because () )+cos(θ θ 1 )]. If the FS solution is stable, we have e < 0 K. Substituting this condition into Eq. (16), we get λ 1λ = r sinφ 1 and λ 1 1 from Eq. (17), we approimately have 4 π φ 1 π and π φ 4 π, implying φ 1 φ π. If λ 1 grows larger as K increases from µ 1, φ 1 φ will become larger. However, φ 1 φ = θ 1 θ π implies instability of the FS solution of the two oscillators. This means that r λ describes an unstable FS solution. On the other hand, r λ 1 ensures the stability of the FS solution. References 1. Kuramoto, Y. & Battogtokh, D. Coeistence of Coherence and Incoherence in onlocally Coupled Phase Oscillators. onl. Phen. Coml. Syst. 5, (00).. Matthews, P. C. & Strogatz, S. H. Phase diagram for the collective behavior of limit-cycle oscillators. Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 1701 (1990). 3. Zheng, Z., Hu, B. & Hu, G. Collective phase slips and phase synchronizations in coupled oscillator systems. Phys. Rev. E 6, 40 (000). 4. Kori, H., Kawamura, Y., akao, H., Arai, K. & Kuramoto, Y. Collective-phase description of coupled oscillators with general network structure. Phys. Rev. E 80, (009). 5. iebur, E., Schuster, H. G. & Kammen, D. M. Collective fruencies and metastability in networks of limit-cycle oscillators with time delay. Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 753 (1991). 6. Watts, D. J. & Strogatz, S. H. Collective dynamics of small-world networks. ature 393, (1998). 7. Rosenblum, M. G., Pikovsky, A. S. & Kurths, J. Phase synchronization of chaotic oscillators. Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 1804 (1996). 8. Pikovsky, A. S., Rosenblum, M. G., Osipov, G. V. & Kurths, J. Phase synchronization of chaotic oscillators by eternal driving. Phys. D 104, (1997). 9. Teramae, J. & Tanaka, D. Robustness of the noise-induced phase synchronization in a general class of limit cycle oscillators. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, (004). 10. Glass, L. & Mackey, M. C. A simple model for phase locking of biological oscillators. J. Math. Biol. 7, (1979). 11. Strogatz, S. H. & Mirollo, R. E. Phase-locking and critical phenomena in lattices of coupled nonlinear oscillators with random intrinsic fruencies. Phys. D 31, (1988). 1. Kuramoto, Y. & Araki, H. In International symposium on mathematical problems in theoretical physics, 40 (Springer, 1975). 13. Kuramoto, Y. Chemical oscillations, turbulence and waves, vol. 19 (Springer, Berlin, 1984). 14. Kuramoto, Y. & ishikawa, I. Statistical macrodynamics of large dynamical systems. Case of a phase transition in oscillator communities. J. Stat.Phys. 49, (1987). 15. Hong, H., Choi, M. Y. & Kim, B. J. Synchronization on small-world networks. Phys. Rev. E 65, (00). 16. Politi, A. & Rosenblum, M. Equivalence of phase-oscillator and integrate-and-fire models. Phys. Rev. E 91, (015). 17. Rogge, J. A. & Aeyels, D. Stability of phase locking in a ring of unidirectionally coupled oscillators. J. Phys. A 37, (004). 8/9

9 18. Popovych, O. V., Maistrenko, Y. L. & Tass, P. A. Phase chaos in coupled oscillators. Phys. Rev. E 71, (005). 19. Leyva, I. et al. Eplosive transitions to synchronization in networks of phase oscillators. Scientific reports 3 (013). 0. Strogatz, S. H. From Kuramoto to Crawford: eploring the onset of synchronization in populations of coupled oscillators. Phys. D 143, 1 0 (000). 1. Bronski, J. C., DeVille, L. & Park, M. J. Fully synchronous solutions and the synchronization phase transition for the finite- Kuramoto model. Chaos, (01).. Lee, M. J., Yi, S. D. & Kim, B. J. Finite-Time and Finite-Size Scaling of the Kuramoto Oscillators. Phys. Rev. Lett. 11, (014). 3. Dorfler, F. & Bullo, F. On the critical coupling strength for Kuramoto oscillators. In American Control Conference, (011). 4. Belykh, V.., Petrov, V. S. & Osipov, G. V. Dynamics of the finite-dimensional Kuramoto model: Global and cluster synchronization. Regular and Chaotic Dynamics 0, (015). 5. Chakraborty, A., Ray, A. & Chowdhury, A. R. Finite Kuramoto System with Shear and Symmetry. Int. J. Phys. 1, (013). 6. Verwoerd, M. & Mason, O. Global phase-locking in finite populations of phase-coupled oscillators. SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst. 7, (008). 7. Jadbabaie, A., Motee,. & Barahona, M. On the stability of the Kuramoto model of coupled nonlinear oscillators. In American Control Conference, 004, vol. 5, (004). 8. Aeyels, D. & Rogge, J. A. Eistence of partial entrainment and stability of phase locking behavior of coupled oscillators. Prog. Theor. Phys. 11, (004). 9. Freitas, C., Macau, E. & Pikovsky, A. Partial synchronization in networks of non-linearly coupled oscillators: The Deserter Hubs Model. Chaos 5, (015). 30. Leyva, I. et al. Eplosive synchronization in weighted comple networks. Phys. Rev. E 88, (013). 31. ardelli, P. H. et al. Models for the modern power grid. Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 3, (014). 3. Carareto, R., Baptista, M. S. & Grebogi, C. atural synchronization in power-grids with anti-correlated units. Commun. onlinear Sci. umer. Simul. 18, (013). 33. Filatrella, G., ielsen, A. H. & Pedersen,. F. Analysis of a power grid using a Kuramoto-like model. Eur. Phys. J. B 61, (008). 34. Hu, X. et al. Eact solution for first-order synchronization transition in a generalized Kuramoto model. Sci. Rep. 4 (014). 9/9