Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 36 references

Studying self-organisation across the biosphere with process-enablement graphs

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Graph cycles give a common language for self-organisation across theories of life.

desk verdict A sound, honest formalism paper whose graph-theoretic core is correct; the real caveat is that applications depend on an enablement semantics that breaks under redundancy and on hand-drawn arrows. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.17012 v2 pith:FYCUPZTO submitted 2024-11-26 q-bio.QM

Emmy Brown , Sean T. Vittadello This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-bio.QM
keywords self-organisationorganisationalclosureprocess-enablementgraphsautopoiesis(MR)-systemsautocatalyticsetsgraphhomomorphismsconstraints
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper proposes that biological self-organisation can be studied uniformly by drawing directed graphs in which vertices are processes and an arrow $p \to q$ means that process $p$ provides a necessary condition, with direct physical contact, for process $q$ to occur. The central claim is that the self-organising parts of any system are exactly the cycles of such a process-enablement graph: every closed system contains a cycle, and a strictly closed system is nothing but a cycle. If this is right, locating organisational closure in any model reduces to finding cycles, and comparing two biological theories reduces to comparing their cycle structures with maps that preserve and reflect cycles. The paper applies the formalism to autopoiesis, $(F,A)$-systems, and autocatalytic sets, showing that two seemingly different models of the cell describe the same self-organising processes under different partitions, and that whether an autocatalytic set is closed can depend on perspective.

What carries the argument

The central object is the process-enablement graph, or pe-graph: a connected directed graph whose vertices are contemporaneous processes in a system and whose edges are direct enablements, defined by a counterfactual necessity check plus a spatiotemporal interaction check. The load-bearing identity is the theorem that a pe-graph is strictly closed if and only if it is a cycle, and the supporting notion of a homorheism, a weak graph homomorphism that both preserves cycles and reflects cycles, lets fine-grained and coarse-grained perspectives be matched cycle-for-cycle. Loops are used only as shorthand for an underlying cycle, so a loop at $S$ means a finer network of processes inside $S$ contains at least one cycle.

What would settle it

Choose a well-studied self-sustaining network, such as a prokaryotic cell, and test every candidate arrow by removing the upstream process and by checking physical interaction. If the system remains self-sustaining while some process that is necessary for the system's persistence has no incoming arrow from another process in the network, the claim that organisational closure shows up as cycles would fail for that case.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that organisational closure has a precise graph-theoretic signature: a pe-graph is closed if every process has at least one incoming and one outgoing direct enablement, and strictly closed if and only if it is a cycle (Theorem 3.4). Consequently the fundamental unit of self-organisation is the directed cycle of mutually enabling processes, not the individual process or constraint. The authors build homomorphisms of pe-graphs that preserve closure, and homorheisms that also reflect closure, so that a fine-grained model and a coarse-grained model can be certified to contain the same self-organising features even when their process boundaries differ. In the worked comparison, an intermediate graph $IP$ is constructed with homorheisms to both the fabrication-assembly model and the autopoietic model of the cell, showing that their differently arranged cycles are re-articulations of one underlying set of enablements.

Load-bearing premise

That a biologist can reliably decide, process by process, whether an arrow is a genuine direct enablement in the counterfactual sense and whether the two processes physically interact over a time interval; the paper states that focusing on direct enablements is a hypothesis it does not further justify.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim is correct, finding organisational closure in any model becomes a cycle-detection problem in a finite directed graph.
  • Two biological models that admit a homorheism are guaranteed to agree on which self-organising cycles are present, even when they partition the underlying processes differently.
  • The autopoiesis and fabrication-assembly accounts of the cell can be reconciled through an intermediate pe-graph, with every cycle in either model reflected in the other.
  • Whether an autocatalytic set is self-organising is partly perspective-dependent: one coarse-graining of the same reactions can erase a cycle while another reveals it.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • We infer that the framework yields an operational recipe: apply standard directed-graph cycle algorithms to verified direct-enablement networks and treat the resulting cycles as candidate self-organising modules for experimental perturbation.
  • We infer a testable extension: because the comparison in Section 4.2 rests on a partition the authors call somewhat arbitrary, one could search algorithmically for the coarsest partition that still yields homorheisms, turning a manual construction into a reproducible optimisation.
  • We infer that if direct enablements can be tracked over time, the same cycle-based language could record when organisational closure first appears in an evolving chemical system, connecting self-organisation to origin-of-life scenarios more directly than the static graphs in this paper.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. Brown and Vittadello introduce process-enablement graphs (pe-graphs), directed graphs in which vertices are contemporaneous processes and edges are direct enablements defined via a counterfactual-necessity condition plus a spatiotemporal-interaction condition. They define organisational closure as the condition that every vertex has both an incoming and an outgoing edge, prove that every closed pe-graph contains a cycle (Theorem 3.3) and that strictly closed pe-graphs are exactly cycles (Theorem 3.4), and develop weak graph homomorphisms that preserve and reflect cycles (homorheisms) to compare different models of the same system. The framework is applied to autopoiesis, (F,A)-systems, and RAF autocatalytic sets; in particular, an intermediate pe-graph IP is constructed to show that the (F,A)-system and autopoietic descriptions of the cell are linked by homorheisms. The paper stresses that the formalism is static and does not demarcate life from non-life.

Significance. The mathematical core is elementary, self-contained, and correct: Theorems 3.3, 3.4, and A.1–A.10 are proved in the text, and the homorheism concept gives a precise language for saying when two process-level descriptions capture the same organisational closure. The paper is also unusually explicit about its limitations, including the unproved status of the direct-enablement hypothesis (§2), the 'somewhat arbitrary' choice of the intermediate partition P (§4.2), and the high-degradation assumption in the RAF example (§4.3, footnote 1). If the enablement semantics can be made robust, the framework would be a useful tool for comparing theories of life. As it stands, however, the central claim that cycles of direct enablements capture self-organising components of real biological systems depends on a strict counterfactual semantics that erases redundant causes, a common situation in biology. The significance is therefore conditional on resolving that semantic issue.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2 (Definitions 2.5–2.6; see also §4.3, footnote 1)] The counterfactual-necessity test in Definition 2.5 is not robust to redundant enablements. If two processes p1 and p2 are substitutable causes of q (e.g., two isozymes catalysing the same reaction), then removing p1 alone does not stop q, so p1 does not enable q under the definition, even though the system may contain a real feedback cycle that includes p1. The RAF discussion in §4.3 notices one such case (B3 stockpiling) and sets it aside by assuming a high-degradation environment, but the issue is general and affects the central claim that cycles of direct enablements capture self-organising components. Please justify the strict-necessity semantics or modify Definition 2.5 to handle redundant/disjunctive causation, and revisit the applications with that modification.
  2. [§4.2 (choice of P; Theorems A.9–A.10)] The homorheism comparison between FA and A3 is constructed, not discovered: the intermediate process set P is chosen 'somewhat arbitrarily' and the arrows in IP are qualitative direct-enablement judgements. Theorems A.9 and A.10 prove that φ5 and φ6 are homorheisms only for this particular IP. If any arrow in IP or in the target graphs were drawn differently—for instance, if a more careful causal analysis judged a given interaction not to be a direct enablement—the cycle structure could change and the homorheisms could fail. The conclusion that 'FA and A3 model the same self-organising processes' is therefore conditional on the hand-chosen P and on the arrow judgements. The authors should either supply a principled method for choosing P and validating the arrows, or explicitly present the FA/A3 correspondence as a proof-of-concept illustration rather than a derived equivalence.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.4 / Definition 3.1] The status of loops is under-specified: Section 3.4 says a loop is shorthand for a finer-grained cycle, but Definition 3.1 allows loops as ordinary edges, and Theorem 3.4 calls loops cycles of length 1. Please state explicitly in Definition 3.1 or a following remark that edges of the form p→p are not direct self-enablements but shorthand for an unresolved cycle, so that the graph-theoretic and conceptual readings are consistent.
  2. [§4.2 / Figure 4] The vertex maps φ5 and φ6 are defined verbally in the text and illustrated by colourings in Figure A.1, but the main-text Figure 4 does not show the colouring. Add a sentence to the Figure 4 caption directing readers to Figure A.1, or include a small table of the maps.
  3. [§A.2.2 / Theorem A.8] Theorem A.8 gives a sufficient condition for reflection of closure, not a necessary one; the name 'Reflection test' is therefore slightly misleading. Consider renaming it 'A sufficient condition for reflection' or adding a comment that the test is sufficient only.
  4. [Abstract / §5] Consider rephrasing 'cycles within these graphs capture self-organising components' to 'cycles within these graphs represent self-organisation as defined here', since Theorems 3.3 and 3.4 are consequences of Definition 3.2 rather than independent empirical findings.
  5. [§4.3] The role of the high-degradation assumption is clear in the footnote, but the main text says 'whether reactions directly enable each other depends on the nature of molecule degradation and the rate constants' — this makes the pe-graph structure depend on empirical rate parameters. It would be helpful to state explicitly that the comparison of R1 and R2 is therefore conditional on those parameters.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the graph-theoretic results are proved from explicit definitions, and the model comparisons are clearly illustrative rather than fitted predictions.

full rationale

The paper's central formal claims are derived, not assumed. Definition 3.2 defines organisational closure as the bare degree condition that every process has an incoming and an outgoing direct enablement; Theorem 3.3 and Theorem 3.4 then prove, from that definition, that every closed pe-graph contains a cycle and that strictly closed pe-graphs are cycles. The cycle concept is not used in the definition of closed, so the equivalence is a genuine derivation rather than a self-definitional restatement. The sentence following Theorem 3.4, which interprets cycles as the 'correct' object of analysis, is presented as an interpretive consequence, not as an empirical prediction, and it is openly anchored to the prior definition of closure adopted from Montévil and Mossio. In Section 4.2, the authors explicitly call the intermediate partition P 'somewhat arbitrary' and describe the construction as 'an illustrative example'; the homorheisms φ5 and φ6 are then proved by inspection in Theorems A.9 and A.10, so the comparison is an application of the defined machinery under stated assumptions, not a fitted quantity renamed as a prediction. Section 2's admission that the choice to focus on direct enablements is a hypothesis ('we do not justify this claim further here') is a stated limitation of causal semantics, not a circular step. The only self-citations, to Vittadello and Stumpf (2021, 2022), serve as methodological provenance for representing models as simplicial complexes and are not load-bearing for the cycle theorems, the homorheism definitions, or any uniqueness claim. The paper is self-contained against external benchmarks in its graph-theoretic core, and its biological conclusions are explicitly conditional on the arrows and partitions being accurately drawn.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The framework is definitional: organisational closure is defined so that cycles are its basic units, and the applied comparisons depend on hand-selected process partitions and qualitative enablement judgements. These choices are listed as free parameters and axioms. No new physical entities are postulated; pe-graphs and homorheisms are formal tools, not entities with independent empirical handles.

free parameters (2)
  • Intermediate process partition P = {nutrient transport, membrane maintenance, protein folding, ion transport, covalent chemistry}
    Chosen by hand in Section 4.2 and admitted to be 'somewhat arbitrary'; the homorheisms phi5 and phi6 exist only for this partition, so the FA/A3 comparison depends on it.
  • RAF degradation regime = high-degradation
    Footnote 1 assumes a high-degradation environment so reactions directly enable each other; a low-degradation environment would change which of R1 or R2 is the appropriate pe-graph and hence whether organisational closure is present.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Finite directed graph theory, including walks, paths, cycles, and weak graph homomorphisms, is accepted as background.
    Used throughout Section 3 and the Appendix; no results are proved from set-theoretic first principles.
  • domain assumption Organisational closure is adequately formalised as every process having at least one incoming and one outgoing direct enablement.
    Definition 3.2 is modified from Montévil and Mossio (2015); the identification of closure with cycles follows from this definition.
  • ad hoc to paper Direct enablements are the right arrow type for studying biological organisation.
    Stated as a hypothesis in Section 2 with the sentence 'we do not justify this claim further here'.
  • domain assumption Processes can be partitioned into finite sets, and counterfactual enablement plus spatiotemporal interaction can be assessed for every arrow.
    Definitions 2.5 and 2.6 require these checks, but no measurement procedure is provided.
  • domain assumption Weak graph homomorphisms that preserve and reflect cycles capture meaningful equivalence between perspectives.
    Section 3.3 motivates this by the goal of comparing self-organising components, but does not give independent evidence.
  • ad hoc to paper The RAF example operates in a high-degradation environment.
    Footnote 1 assumes this so that reaction-to-reaction direct enablements exist; changing this assumption changes R1 and R2 and thus whether closure is present.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Studying self-organisation across the biosphere with process-enablement graphs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FYCUPZTO

@misc{pith2026241117012,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Studying self-organisation across the biosphere with process-enablement graphs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FYCUPZTO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.17012}
}
read the original abstract

At the heart of many contemporary theories of life is the concept of biological self-organisation: organisms have to continuously produce and maintain the conditions of their own existence in order to stay alive. The way in which these accounts articulate this concept, however, differs quite significantly. As a result, it can be difficult to identify self-organising features within biological systems, and to compare different descriptions of such features. In this paper, we develop a graph theoretic formalism -- process-enablement graphs -- to study the organisational structure of living systems. Cycles within these graphs capture self-organising components of a system in a general and abstract way. We build the mathematical tools needed to compare biological models as process-enablement graphs, facilitating a comparison of their corresponding descriptions of self-organisation in a consistent and precise manner. We apply our formalism to a range of classical theories of life and demonstrate exactly how these models are similar, and where they differ, with respect to their organisational structure. While our current framework does not demarcate living systems from non-living ones, it does allow us to better study systems that lie in the grey area between life and non-life.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.17012 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Both φ and ψ are weak graph homomorphisms, but ψ preserves closure whilst φ does not. Both φ and ψ map A1 7→ A, A2 7→ A, and A3 7→ A. The induced image of the cycle in the centre graph, under φ and ψ, is highlighted in blue in their respective target graphs. φ: G → H be a weak graph homomorphism that preserves closure. Then φ is a homomorphism of pe-graphs if for every process pX ∈ V (G) we have that pX is happening… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. H1, H2, and H3 are pe-graphs. Since pe-graph homomorphisms preserve closure, they exist only from H1 → H2, H1 → H3, and H2 → H3, but not from H2 → H1, H3 → H2, and H3 → H1. Of the three pe-graph homomorphisms only ψ: H2 → H3, where ψ maps each vertex in H2 to A in H3, reflects closure and it is therefore a homorheism. target graph. As such, the source graph may contain far more cycles than the tar￾get graph and ther… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Three different kinds of autopoietic systems represented as pe-graphs. MRN = metabolic reaction network. A1: minimal autopoiesis. A2: autopoiesis with an organisationally closed metabolic reaction network. A3: autopoiesis with facilitated diffusion, active transport, and endocytosis of relevant molecules. requirement that the MRN itself be organisationally closed, but in practice life has incorporated many cycles in… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A comparison of the (F, A)-system model of the cell to an autopoietic perspective using pe-graphs. FA: (F, A)-system representation. IP : intermediate pe-graph. A3: autopoietic representation. There exist homorheisms φ5 : IP ◦−→ FA and φ6 : IP ◦−→ A3, which are describ…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: A RAF set. The food set is S = {F1, F2, F3, F4}, while B1, B2, and B3 are intermediate molecules produced by the network. Dotted arrows indicate catalysis and solid arrows represent molecules entering/exiting a reaction. Modified from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Two pe-graph representations of the RAF set from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Process-enablement graph homomorphisms between autocatalytic set representations and autopoietic representations. Each arrow between graphs is a homomorphism and φ2 and φ3 are homorheisms onto their induced images. The map φ2 (respectively φ3) sends each of the reactio…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    APACrefauthors \ 2022

    chiu2022extended APACrefauthors Chiu, L. APACrefauthors \ 2022 . Extended Evolutionary Synthesis: a Review of the Latest Scientific Research Extended evolutionary synthesis: a review of the latest scientific research . John Templeton Foundation . APACrefDOI doi:10.15868/socialsector.40950 APACrefDOI

    work page doi:10.15868/socialsector.40950 2022

  2. [2]

    \ Cárdenas, M L

    cornish2020contrasting APACrefauthors Cornish-Bowden, A. \ Cárdenas, M L. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Contrasting theories of life: Historical context, current theories. I n search of an ideal theory Contrasting theories of life: Historical context, current theories. I n search of an ideal theory . Biosystems 188 104063 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1016/j.biosystems.2...

    work page arXiv 2020

  3. [3]

    \ Sterner, B

    cusimano2020objectivity APACrefauthors Cusimano, S. \ Sterner, B. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . The objectivity of organizational functions The objectivity of organizational functions . Acta Biotheoretica 68 2 253--269 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1007/s10441-019-09365-9 APACrefDOI

    work page doi:10.1007/s10441-019-09365-9 2020

  4. [4]

    APACrefauthors \ 1982

    dyson1982model APACrefauthors Dyson, F J. APACrefauthors \ 1982 . A model for the origin of life A model for the origin of life . Journal of Molecular Evolution 18 344--350 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1007/BF01733901 APACrefDOI

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01733901 1982

  5. [5]

    \ Nunes-Neto, N

    el2020life APACrefauthors El-Hani, C N. \ Nunes-Neto, N. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Life on earth is not a passenger, but a driver: explaining the transition from a physicochemical to a life-constrained world from an organizational perspective Life on earth is not a passenger, but a driver: explaining the transition from a physicochemical to a life-constrain...

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    APACrefauthors \ 2012

    frank2012natural APACrefauthors Frank, S A. APACrefauthors \ 2012 . Natural selection. IV . T he price equation Natural selection. IV . T he price equation . Journal of Evolutionary Biology 25 6 1002--1019 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2012.02498.x APACrefDOI

    work page arXiv 2012

  7. [9]

    APACrefauthors \ 2019

    hofmeyr2019basic APACrefauthors Hofmeyr, J H S. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Basic biological anticipation Basic biological anticipation . R. Poli\ ( ), Handbook of anticipation: theoretical and Applied Aspects of the Use of Future in Decision Making Handbook of anticipation: theoretical and applied aspects of the use of future in decision making \ ( \ 219--23...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-91554-8_51 2019

  8. [10]

    APACrefauthors \ 2021

    hofmeyr2021biochemically APACrefauthors Hofmeyr, J H S. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . A biochemically-realisable relational model of the self-manufacturing cell A biochemically-realisable relational model of the self-manufacturing cell . Biosystems 207 104463 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1016/j.biosystems.2021.104463 APACrefDOI

    work page arXiv 2021

Show all 36 references
  1. [11]

    \ Steel, M

    hordijk2004detecting APACrefauthors Hordijk, W. \ Steel, M. APACrefauthors \ 2004 . Detecting autocatalytic, self-sustaining sets in chemical reaction systems Detecting autocatalytic, self-sustaining sets in chemical reaction systems . Journal of Theoretical Biology 227 4 451-...

    2004 doi

  2. [12]

    , Steel, M

    hordijk2012structure APACrefauthors Hordijk, W. , Steel, M. \ Kauffman, S. APACrefauthors \ 2012 . The structure of autocatalytic sets: Evolvability, enablement, and emergence The structure of autocatalytic sets: Evolvability, enablement, and emergence . Acta Biotheoretica 60 ...

    2012 doi

  3. [13]

    , Riedl, A

    jaegernaturalizing APACrefauthors Jaeger, J. , Riedl, A. , Djedovic, A. , Vervaeke, J. \ Walsh, D. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . Naturalizing relevance realization: why agency and cognition are fundamentally not computational Naturalizing relevance realization: why agency and cognit...

    2024

  4. [14]

    \ Erni, B

    jeckelmann2020transporters APACrefauthors Jeckelmann, J M. \ Erni, B. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Transporters of glucose and other carbohydrates in bacteria Transporters of glucose and other carbohydrates in bacteria . Pfl \"u gers Archiv-European Journal of Physiology 472 1129--...

    2020 doi

  5. [15]

    APACrefauthors \ 2023

    juarrero2023context APACrefauthors Juarrero, A. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Context changes everything: How constraints create coherence Context changes everything: How constraints create coherence . MIT Press . APACrefDOI doi:10.7551/mitpress/14630.001.0001 APACrefDOI

    2023 doi

  6. [16]

    APACrefauthors \ 1986

    kauffman1986autocatalytic APACrefauthors Kauffman, S A. APACrefauthors \ 1986 . Autocatalytic sets of proteins Autocatalytic sets of proteins . Journal of Theoretical Biology 119 1 1--24 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1016/S0022-5193(86)80047-9 APACrefDOI

    1986 doi

  7. [17]

    APACrefauthors \ 2019

    kauffman2019world APACrefauthors Kauffman, S A. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . A world beyond physics: the emergence and evolution of life A world beyond physics: the emergence and evolution of life . Oxford University Press

    2019

  8. [18]

    APACrefauthors \ 1983

    lewontin1983organism APACrefauthors Lewontin, R C. APACrefauthors \ 1983 . The organism as the subject and object of evolution The organism as the subject and object of evolution . Scientia 77 18 65

    1983

  9. [19]

    \ Mont \'e vil, M

    longo2013extended APACrefauthors Longo, G. \ Mont \'e vil, M. APACrefauthors \ 2013 . Extended criticality, phase spaces and enablement in biology Extended criticality, phase spaces and enablement in biology . Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 55 64--79 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1016/j.cha...

    2013 doi

  10. [20]

    \ Fleming, L

    mariscal2018we APACrefauthors Mariscal, C. \ Fleming, L. APACrefauthors \ 2017 . Why we should care about universal biology Why we should care about universal biology . Biological Theory 13 121--130 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1007/s13752-017-0280-8 APACrefDOI

    2017 doi

  11. [21]

    APACrefauthors \ 2022

    massimi2022perspectival APACrefauthors Massimi, M. APACrefauthors \ 2022 . Perspectival realism Perspectival realism . Oxford University Press . APACrefDOI doi:10.1093/oso/9780197555620.001.0001 APACrefDOI

    2022

  12. [22]

    \ Varela, F

    maturana1980autopoiesis APACrefauthors Maturana, H R. \ Varela, F. APACrefauthors \ 1980 . Autopoiesis and cognition: the realization of the living Autopoiesis and cognition: the realization of the living . Springer Dordrecht . APACrefDOI doi:10.1007/978-94-009-8947-4 APACrefDOI

    1980 doi

  13. [24]

    \ Mossio, M

    montevil2015biological APACrefauthors Mont \'e vil, M. \ Mossio, M. APACrefauthors \ 2015 . Biological organisation as closure of constraints Biological organisation as closure of constraints . Journal of Theoretical Biology 372 179--191 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2015.02...

    2015 doi

  14. [25]

    \ Mossio, M

    moreno2015biological APACrefauthors Moreno, A. \ Mossio, M. APACrefauthors \ 2015 . Biological autonomy: a Philosophical and Theoretical Enquiry Biological autonomy: a philosophical and theoretical enquiry . Springer Dordrecht . APACrefDOI doi:10.1007/978-94-017-9837-2 APACrefDOI

    2015 doi

  15. [26]

    \ Bich, L

    mossio2017makes APACrefauthors Mossio, M. \ Bich, L. APACrefauthors \ 2017 . What makes biological organisation teleological? What makes biological organisation teleological? Synthese 194 4 1089--1114 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1007/s11229-014-0594-z APACrefDOI

    2017 doi

  16. [27]

    \ Sachs, C

    nahas2023s APACrefauthors Nahas, A. \ Sachs, C. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . What’s at stake in the debate over naturalizing teleology? A n overlooked metatheoretical debate What’s at stake in the debate over naturalizing teleology? A n overlooked metatheoretical debate . Synthese ...

    2023 doi

  17. [28]

    APACrefauthors \

    nave2025drive APACrefauthors Nave, K. APACrefauthors \ . A Drive to Survive: the free energy principle and the meaning of life A drive to survive: the free energy principle and the meaning of life . MIT Press

  18. [29]

    APACrefauthors \ 2019

    nicholson2019cell APACrefauthors Nicholson, D J. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Is the cell really a machine? Is the cell really a machine? Journal of Theoretical Biology 477 108--126 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2019.06.002 APACrefDOI

    2019 doi

  19. [30]

    APACrefauthors \ 1970

    price1970selection APACrefauthors Price, G R. APACrefauthors \ 1970 . Selection and covariance Selection and covariance . Nature 227 520--521 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1038/227520a0 APACrefDOI

    1970 doi

  20. [31]

    \ Nanjundiah, V

    rao2011jbs APACrefauthors Rao, V. \ Nanjundiah, V. APACrefauthors \ 2011 . J.B.S H aldane, E rnst M ayr and the beanbag genetics dispute J.B.S H aldane, E rnst M ayr and the beanbag genetics dispute . Journal of the History of Biology 44 233--281 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1007/s1073...

    2011 doi

  21. [32]

    APACrefauthors \ 1991

    rosen1991life APACrefauthors Rosen, R. APACrefauthors \ 1991 . Life Itself: A Comprehensive Inquiry into the Nature, Origin, and Fabrication of Life Life itself: A comprehensive inquiry into the nature, origin, and fabrication of life . Columbia University Press

    1991

  22. [33]

    APACrefauthors \ 2007

    thompson2007mind APACrefauthors Thompson, E. APACrefauthors \ 2007 . Mind in life: biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind Mind in life: biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind . Harvard University Press

    2007

  23. [34]

    APACrefauthors \ 2000

    varela2000fenomeno APACrefauthors Varela, F. APACrefauthors \ 2000 . El fen \'o meno de la vida El fen \'o meno de la vida . Dolmen Ediciones

    2000

  24. [35]

    \ Stumpf, M P

    vittadello2021model APACrefauthors Vittadello, S T. \ Stumpf, M P. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . Model comparison via simplicial complexes and persistent homology Model comparison via simplicial complexes and persistent homology . Royal Society Open Science 8 10 211361 . APACrefDOI ...

    2021 doi

  25. [36]

    \ Stumpf, M P

    vittadello2022group APACrefauthors Vittadello, S T. \ Stumpf, M P. APACrefauthors \ 2022 . A group theoretic approach to model comparison with simplicial representations A group theoretic approach to model comparison with simplicial representations . Journal of Mathematical Bi...

    2022 doi

  26. [37]

    APACrefauthors \ 1957

    waddington1957strategy APACrefauthors Waddington, C H. APACrefauthors \ 1957 . The Strategy of the Genes The strategy of the genes . Routledge

    1957

  27. [38]

    APACrefauthors \ 2018

    walsh2018objectcy APACrefauthors Walsh, D M. APACrefauthors \ 2018 . Objectcy and agency: Towards a methodological vitalism Objectcy and agency: Towards a methodological vitalism . D J. Nicholson\ J. Dupré\ ( ), Everything Flows Everything flows \ ( \ 167--185). Oxford Univers...

    2018

  28. [39]

    , Luo, G

    yang2003protein APACrefauthors Yang, H. , Luo, G. , Karnchanaphanurach, P. , Louie, T M. , Rech, I. , Cova, S. Xie, X S. APACrefauthors \ 2003 . Protein conformational dynamics probed by single-molecule electron transfer Protein conformational dynamics probed by single-molecul...

    2003 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.