Jump to content

Stability of Boolean networks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by StarryGrandma (talk | contribs) at 07:54, 30 October 2015 (Submitted). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The stability of Boolean networks depends on the connections of their nodes. A Boolean network can exhibit stable, critical or chaotic behavior. This phenomenon is governed by a critical value of the average number of connections of nodes (), and can be characterized by the Hamming distance as distance measure. In the unstable regime, the distance between two initially close states on average grows exponentially in time, while in the stable regime it decreases exponentially. In the critical regime, the Hamming distance is small compared with the number of nodes () in the network.

In the case of Boolean networks[1], the network is

  • stable if & ,
  • critical if & ,
  • unstable if & .

The state of a given node is updated according to its truth table, whose outputs are randomly populated. denotes the probability of assigning an off output to a given series of input signals.

If for every node, the transition between the stable and chaotic range depends on . The critical value of the average number of connections is .[2]

If is not constant, and there is no correlation between the in-degrees and out-degrees, the conditions of stability is determined by [3][4][5]

The network is

  • stable if & ,
  • critical if & ,
  • unstable if & .

The conditions of stability are the same in the case of networks with scale-free topology,[6] where the in-and out-degree distribution is a power-law distribution: , and , since every out-link from a node is an in-link to another.[7]

Sensitivity shows the probability that the output of the Boolean function of a given node changes if its input changes. For random Boolean networks, . In the general case, stability of the network is governed by the largest eigenvalue of matrix , where , and is the adjacency matrix of the network.[8]

The network is

  • stable if & ,
  • critical if & ,
  • unstable if & .

References

  1. ^ Kauffman, S. A. (1969). "Metabolic stability and epigenesis in randomly constructed genetic nets". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 22 (3): 437–467. doi:10.1016/0022-5193(69)90015-0. PMID 5803332. {{cite journal}}: line feed character in |title= at position 67 (help)
  2. ^ Derrida, B; Pomeau, Y (1986-01-15). "Random Networks of Automata: A Simple Annealed Approximation". Europhysics Letters (EPL). 1 (2): 45–49. doi:10.1209/0295-5075/1/2/001.
  3. ^ Solé, Ricard V.; Luque, Bartolo (1995-01-02). "Phase transitions and antichaos in generalized Kauffman networks". Physics Letters A. 196 (5–6): 331–334. doi:10.1016/0375-9601(94)00876-Q.
  4. ^ Luque, Bartolo; Solé, Ricard V. (1997-01-01). "Phase transitions in random networks: Simple analytic determination of critical points". Physical Review E. 55 (1): 257–260. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.55.257.
  5. ^ Fox, Jeffrey J.; Hill, Colin C. (2001-12-01). "From topology to dynamics in biochemical networks". Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science. 11 (4): 809–815. doi:10.1063/1.1414882. ISSN 1054-1500.
  6. ^ Barabási, Albert-László; Albert, Réka (1999-10-15). "Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks". Science. 286 (5439): 509–512. doi:10.1126/science.286.5439.509. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 10521342.
  7. ^ Aldana, Maximino; Cluzel, Philippe (2003-07-22). "A natural class of robust networks". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 100 (15): 8710–8714. doi:10.1073/pnas.1536783100. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 166377. PMID 12853565.
  8. ^ Pomerance, Andrew; Ott, Edward; Girvan, Michelle; Losert, Wolfgang (2009-05-19). "The effect of network topology on the stability of discrete state models of genetic control". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106 (20): 8209–8214. doi:10.1073/pnas.0900142106. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 2688895. PMID 19416903.