MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413814888 · doi:10.1103/vlx8-spc6

Noise equals control

2025· article· en· W4413814888 on OpenAlexafffund
Eric DeGiuli

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. E · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene Regulatory Network Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNoise (video)AcousticsMathematicsPhysicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stochastic systems have a control-theoretic interpretation in which noise plays the role of control. In the weak-noise limit, relevant at low temperatures or in large populations, this leads to a precise mathematical mapping: The most probable trajectory between two states minimizes an action functional and corresponds to an optimal control strategy. In Langevin dynamics, the noise term itself serves as the control. For general Markov jump processes, such as chemical reaction networks or electronic circuits, we use the Doi-Peliti formalism to identify the "response" (or "momentum") field π as the control variable. This resolves a long-standing interpretational problem in the field-theoretic description of stochastic systems: Although π evolves backward in time, it has a clear physical role as the control that steers the system along rare trajectories. This implies that nature is constantly sampling control strategies. We illustrate the mapping on multistable chemical reaction networks, systems with unstable fixed points, and specifically on stochastic resonance and Brownian ratchets. The noise-control mapping justifies agential descriptions of these phenomena and builds intuition for otherwise puzzling phenomena of stochastic systems: why probabilities are generically nonsmooth functions of state out of thermal equilibrium; why biological mechanisms can work better in the presence of noise; and how agential behavior emerges naturally without recourse to mysticism.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. ESame topicGene Regulatory Network AnalysisFrench-language works237,207