2. Group Composition (WIN-Programm)

Q2: Implementation

Q3: Algorithm



Individuals

Q4: Adaptation

Group

Ql: Group
description

Collective mechanisms

Communication

Individual specialization

Phenotypic plasticity

Distributed

Individual Processing

Competition/policing

Activation/inhibition

Feedback

Group
Maintain homeostasis
Respond to perturbation
Allocate resources
Coordinate group response
Reproduce

Environment

Figure 2. Hierarchical analysis frameworkfor collective Systems. To compare collective behavior in
different Systems, we use complementary questions: howgroups are structured (Ql), how individual behavior
is used to implement certain collective mechanisms (Q2), how multiple collective mechanisms contribute to
group function (Q3), and how both individual andgroup behavioral algorithms are adapted to the particular
environment (Q4).

contribute to the group’s response, how function is tied to environmental cha-
racteristics, and how these particular results are related to other groups, such
as different species of social insects, group-living vertebrates such as fish, and
human organizations.
Publications:
Vishwakarma, Medhavi, Basil Thurakkal, Joachim R Spatz, and Tamal Das. 2020a. “Dyna-
mic Heterogeneity Influences the Leader-Follower Dynamics during Epithelial Wound
Closure.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 375 (1807):
20190391. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0391.
Vishwakarma, Medhavi, Joachim P Spatz, and Tamal Das. 2020b. “Mechanobiology of
Leader-Follower Dynamics in Epithelial Cell Migration.” Current Opinion in Cell Bio-
logy, Cell Dynamics, 66 (October): 97 — 103. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.ceb.2020.05.007.
Davidson, Jacob D., Medhavi Vishwakarma, and Michael L. Smith. 2021. “Hierarchi-
cal Approach for Comparing Collective Behavior across Scales: Cellular Systems to
Honey Bee Colonies.” Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fevo.2021.581222.

303