Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Synchronization Phenomenon in Three-Time-Scale Systems

Navojit Dhali Pallab

TL;DR

The paper addresses synchronization in networks of heterogeneous three-time-scale oscillators with canard dynamics, proposing a relaxed near-synchrony criterion based on $V_v$ and a tolerance $\epsilon$. It develops a mathematical framework that yields a differential inequality for $V_v$, uses the change of variables $W = \sqrt{V_v}$, and applies Gronwall's lemma to obtain a bound showing how coupling strength $k$ must overcome heterogeneity $M$ and time-scale separation. The main contribution is an explicit sufficient condition on $k$, namely $k > \max\left( \frac{2M}{\sqrt{\epsilon}}, \frac{1}{\delta t_{linger}^{\min}} \ln\left( \frac{2 W_0}{\sqrt{\epsilon}} \right) \right)$, ensuring synchronization within the minimum linger time across the network. This result provides a practical design criterion for achieving stable near-synchrony in complex slow-fast networks, with implications for biological systems such as $\beta$-cell networks where coordinated bursting is essential.

Abstract

This paper investigates synchronization phenomena in networks of coupled oscillators governed by three-time-scale dynamical systems exhibiting canard dynamics. A mathematical framework has been developed to analyze the synchronization of fast variables across heterogeneous systems, deriving a sufficient condition for the synchronization error to fall below a specified threshold within the minimum linger time. This condition accounts for coupling strength, heterogeneity, and time-scale separation, ensuring stable oscillatory behavior in the network. The result, supported by rigorous mathematical analysis, advances the understanding of synchronization in complex multi-time-scale systems.

Synchronization Phenomenon in Three-Time-Scale Systems

TL;DR

The paper addresses synchronization in networks of heterogeneous three-time-scale oscillators with canard dynamics, proposing a relaxed near-synchrony criterion based on and a tolerance . It develops a mathematical framework that yields a differential inequality for , uses the change of variables , and applies Gronwall's lemma to obtain a bound showing how coupling strength must overcome heterogeneity and time-scale separation. The main contribution is an explicit sufficient condition on , namely , ensuring synchronization within the minimum linger time across the network. This result provides a practical design criterion for achieving stable near-synchrony in complex slow-fast networks, with implications for biological systems such as -cell networks where coordinated bursting is essential.

Abstract

This paper investigates synchronization phenomena in networks of coupled oscillators governed by three-time-scale dynamical systems exhibiting canard dynamics. A mathematical framework has been developed to analyze the synchronization of fast variables across heterogeneous systems, deriving a sufficient condition for the synchronization error to fall below a specified threshold within the minimum linger time. This condition accounts for coupling strength, heterogeneity, and time-scale separation, ensuring stable oscillatory behavior in the network. The result, supported by rigorous mathematical analysis, advances the understanding of synchronization in complex multi-time-scale systems.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 6 sections, 5 theorems, 45 equations.

Key Result

Theorem 2.2

Consider a network of $N$ three-time-scale dynamical systems in $\mathbb{R}^5$, defined by Equation sys:general3timescale5DNetwork, with coupling matrix $a_{ij} = \frac{1}{N}$. Let the fast ($\varepsilon=0$) critical manifold $S_i$ for each system $i$ have attracting branch $S_{a,i}$, repelling bran Let the initial synchronization error satisfy $W(0) = \sqrt{V_v(0)}\leq W_0$ for some positive cons

Theorems & Definitions (12)

  • Definition 2.1: Linger Time $t_{linger}^i$ and Synchronization Time Window
  • Theorem 2.2
  • Remark 2.3: Sufficiency and Practical Significance
  • Lemma 3.1
  • proof
  • Lemma 3.2
  • proof
  • Remark 3.3
  • Lemma 3.4
  • Lemma 3.5: Gronwall Lemma
  • ...and 2 more