↓ Skip to main content

Sounds and hydrodynamics of polar active fluids

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Materials, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sounds and hydrodynamics of polar active fluids
Published in
Nature Materials, July 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41563-018-0123-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Delphine Geyer, Alexandre Morin, Denis Bartolo

Abstract

Spontaneously flowing liquids have been successfully engineered from a variety of biological and synthetic self-propelled units1-11. Together with their orientational order, wave propagation in such active fluids has remained a subject of intense theoretical studies12-17. However, the experimental observation of this phenomenon has remained elusive. Here, we establish and exploit the propagation of sound waves in colloidal active materials with broken rotational symmetry. We demonstrate that two mixed modes, coupling density and velocity fluctuations, propagate along all directions in colloidal-roller fluids. We then show how the six material constants defining the linear hydrodynamics of these active liquids can be measured from their spontaneous fluctuation spectrum, while being out of reach of conventional rheological methods. This active-sound spectroscopy is not specific to synthetic active materials and could provide a quantitative hydrodynamic description of herds, flocks and swarms from inspection of their large-scale fluctuations18-21.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 98 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 35%
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Master 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Professor 6 6%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 14 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 41 42%
Engineering 11 11%
Materials Science 6 6%
Chemistry 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 19 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 October 2018.
All research outputs
#13,620,235
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Nature Materials
#3,465
of 4,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,847
of 327,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Materials
#60
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,001 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.4. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,941 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.