MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414384776 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2423297122

Toward a unified taxonomy of information dynamics via Integrated Information Decomposition

2025· article· en· W4414384776 on OpenAlexaff
Pedro A. M. Mediano, Fernando E. Rosas, Andrea I. Luppi, Robin Carhart‐Harris, Daniel Bor, Anil K. Seth, Adam B. Barrett

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersGates Cambridge TrustEuropean CommissionWellcome Trust
KeywordsDynamical systems theoryKey (lock)Complex systemInformation systemInformation theoryTaxonomy (biology)Dynamics (music)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our ability to understand and control complex systems of many interacting parts remains limited. A key challenge is that we still do not know how best to describe-and quantify-the many-to-many dynamical interactions that characterize their complexity. To address this limitation, we introduce the mathematical framework of Integrated Information Decomposition, or [Formula: see text]ID. [Formula: see text]ID provides a comprehensive framework to disentangle and characterize the information dynamics of complex multivariate systems. On the theoretical side, [Formula: see text]ID reveals the existence of previously unreported modes of collective information flow, providing tools to express well-known measures of information transfer, information storage, and dynamical complexity as aggregates of these modes, thereby overcoming some of their known theoretical shortcomings. On the empirical side, we validate our theoretical results with computational models and examples from over 1,000 biological, social, physical, and synthetic dynamical systems. Altogether, [Formula: see text]ID improves our understanding of the behavior of widely used measures for characterizing complex systems across disciplines and leads to new more refined analyses of dynamical complexity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.441
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations14
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207