MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140675764 · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/10/1/013028

Complex network analysis of state spaces for random Boolean networks

2008· article· en· W2140675764 on OpenAlexaff
Amer Shreim, Andrew M. Berdahl, Vishal Sood, Peter Grassberger, Maya Paczuski

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Journal of Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene Regulatory Network Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsMeasure (data warehouse)Degree (music)Topology (electrical circuits)Statistical physicsState (computer science)Node (physics)Sample (material)Boolean networkSuccessor cardinalBoolean functionDiscrete mathematicsCombinatoricsMathematicsQuantum mechanicsComputer scienceMathematical analysisAlgorithmData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We apply complex network analysis to the state spaces of random Boolean networks (RBNs). An RBN contains $N$ Boolean elements each with $K$ inputs. A directed state space network (SSN) is constructed by linking each dynamical state, represented as a node, to its temporal successor. We study the heterogeneity of an SSN at both local and global scales, as well as sample-to-sample fluctuations within an ensemble of SSNs. We use in-degrees of nodes as a local topological measure, and the path diversity [Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 198701 (2007)] of an SSN as a global topological measure. RBNs with $2 \leq K \leq 5$ exhibit non-trivial fluctuations at both local and global scales, while K=2 exhibits the largest sample-to-sample, possibly non-self-averaging, fluctuations. We interpret the observed ``multi scale'' fluctuations in the SSNs as indicative of the criticality and complexity of K=2 RBNs. ``Garden of Eden'' (GoE) states are nodes on an SSN that have in-degree zero. While in-degrees of non-GoE nodes for $K>1$ SSNs can assume any integer value between 0 and $2^N$, for K=1 all the non-GoE nodes in an SSN have the same in-degree which is always a power of two.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Journal of PhysicsSame topicGene Regulatory Network AnalysisFrench-language works237,207