Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 87 references

Physical Observers and Quantum Reconstructions

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Minimizing energy dissipation makes observers keep only predictive records.

desk verdict A clearly written, honest proposal that applies the 'least self-impediment' principle to thermodynamic bounds and relational quantum mechanics, but the central derivation is circular and the key bound is asserted beyond its proven regime; deserves a referee, not a desk reject. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.01561 v2 pith:JODCU2RP submitted 2025-06-02 quant-ph

Dorian Daimer , Susanne Still This is my paper
classification quant-ph PACS 03.65.Ta05.70.Ln89.70.Cf
keywords relationalquantummechanicsphysicalobserversthermodynamicsofpredictionpredictiveinformationenergydissipationreconstructionprocessingstrategiesmemoryrecords
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

Relational quantum mechanics is built on the premise that the state of a system is whatever predictive information an observer retains about it, but no foundational justification for that premise has been given. This paper argues that the premise follows from thermodynamics: any physical observer is a driven system, and the minimum energy it must dissipate while recording information is proportional to how much non-predictive information it stores. A rational observer that keeps this lower bound as low as possible will therefore discard everything except what helps predict the observed system, leaving a compact predictive record. The upshot is that the core assumption of relational quantum mechanics, and with it the idea of an observer-dependent state, can be derived from a physical principle rather than assumed.

What carries the argument

The central object is the strategy-dependent lower bound on average dissipation, drawn from the thermodynamics of prediction. For a physical observer modeled as a memory that is driven by interactions with an observed system, this bound says that unavoidable energy dissipation is proportional to the amount of non-predictive information stored, while fully predictive information can be retained without raising the bound. The paper's argument works by minimizing this bound over information-processing strategies: strategies that keep non-predictive information are thermodynamically dominated by strategies that discard it, so the extremizing strategy yields a predictive record. The same bound is cited for quantum systems, which is what lets the argument cover macroscopic classical observers and quantum observers alike.

What would settle it

Measure the average dissipated energy of a small memory device driven by a known stochastic input in two configurations: one storing only predictive information, the other storing the same number of bits with a controlled fraction of non-predictive information. If the non-predictive configuration does not raise the dissipation lower bound in proportion to the non-predictive information stored, the paper's central claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the defining premise of relational quantum mechanics—an observer's record contains only predictive information about the observed system—is derivable from an energetic principle. Because every physical observer is a driven system, the lower bound on the average dissipation of its memory is set by the strategy it uses to process information, and that bound is proportional to the amount of non-predictive information it retains. Minimizing the bound over strategies yields a maximally predictive model for a given memory size, so thermodynamically rational observers naturally keep compact predictive records. The paper demonstrates the mechanism on a single projective measurement of a qubit: recording one answer costs no non-predictive bits and has a dissipation bound of zero, while recording a second answer introduces non-predictive bits and raises the bound. It also notes a degeneracy: a system that records nothing at all also dissipates nothing, so the principle produces both observer-like and non-observer-like physical systems.

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on the previously proven result that for every driven system the lower bound on dissipated energy is proportional to the amount of non-predictive information it records; if that proportionality does not hold for a macroscopic classical observer coupled to a quantum system, then minimizing dissipation does not necessarily produce a predictive record.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The core premise of relational quantum mechanics—that the observer's state is a predictive record—becomes a consequence of thermodynamics instead of an additional assumption.
  • Thermodynamically rational observers will implement maximally predictive models given their available memory, making prediction an emergent physical behavior.
  • Because the dissipation bound applies to quantum as well as classical systems, the derivation covers both quantum and macroscopic classical observers.
  • The same least-self-impediment principle extends to other strategy-dependent physical limits, such as processing speed and accuracy, suggesting broader rules for how observers acquire information.
  • The degeneracy between predictive observers and systems that store nothing implies that not every physical system acts as an observer; observer status is itself an emergent outcome of the principle.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The authors do not state this, but the argument gives an operational test of the observer–system boundary: an object counts as an observer to the extent its memory tracks predictive degrees of freedom, and that tracking is measurable in principle.
  • A direct extension the paper leaves open is engineering: any autonomous sensor or agent that must minimize thermodynamic cost should allocate memory only to predictive components, a design rule the thermodynamic argument would imply.
  • If the proportionality holds in biological settings, predictive coding in neural or biochemical networks could be reinterpreted as a thermodynamic optimum; the paper mentions these domains as future directions but does not make this claim.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes that the core premise of relational quantum mechanics—that observers retain only predictive information about the observed system—can be justified by a thermodynamic principle. Specifically, it argues that physically embedded observers choose information-processing strategies that bring strategy-dependent lower bounds on dissipation as close as possible to fundamental limits, and that minimizing the lower bound on dissipation selects maximally predictive records. The paper reviews relational reconstructions of quantum theory, states that for all driven systems the lower bound on dissipation is proportional to the amount of non-predictive information recorded (citing refs. [55,56]), illustrates the idea with a single-bit example involving projective measurements on a spin-1/2 system, and introduces a 'least self-impediment principle' as a working hypothesis for extending the approach beyond prediction.

Significance. If the central claim were rigorously established, the paper would supply a foundational thermodynamic principle for the predictive-record premise of relational quantum mechanics, potentially connecting quantum foundations with the thermodynamics of information. The paper is clearly written and draws on a substantive literature on thermodynamic costs of memory and predictive filtering. However, the central claim is not established: the key proportionality between dissipation and non-predictive information is assumed from cited works without verifying its assumptions in the target regime of macroscopic classical observers measuring quantum systems, and the argument is largely circular because the bound is defined in terms of non-predictive information. As presented, the paper is best classified as a perspective or position essay rather than a derivation.

major comments (4)
  1. [A Case for Prediction] The load-bearing assertion is that 'for all driven systems, no matter how far they are driven from thermodynamic equilibrium, the lower bound on dissipation is proportional to the amount of non-predictive information the observer records about its environment [55].' This statement is not derived, precisely formulated, or justified in the manuscript. The cited results (refs. [55,56]) are applied to a macroscopic classical observer performing discrete projective measurements on a quantum system, but no argument is given that the assumptions of those results hold in that setting. In particular, the treatment omits measurement back-action and interaction-energy flows, which could add dissipation terms not captured by the informational bound. Without a statement of the domain of validity, the conclusion that minimizing the bound yields compact predictive records is not supported.
  2. [A Case for Prediction] The argument appears circular. The lower bound referenced from [54,55] is expressed in terms of mutual information between the memory and the environment, and its strategy-dependent part is precisely the non-predictive information retained. Minimizing the bound is therefore formally equivalent to minimizing non-predictive information—which is the premise the paper claims to justify. To avoid circularity, the paper would need to show independently that physical observers are compelled to minimize this specific bound (rather than, say, total dissipation or a bound including a per-measurement erasure cost), and that no other physical costs reverse the conclusion. The paper itself acknowledges the degeneracy with 'doing nothing' in the simple example, which exposes the weakness of the criterion.
  3. [A Simple Example] The only concrete example is a single projective measurement on a spin-1/2 system, where the observer records one bit that is fully predictive, and the lower bound on dissipation is zero. The paper notes that doing nothing also yields zero dissipation, a degeneracy it describes as expected. This example is too trivial to demonstrate that predictive records emerge from the thermodynamic principle: it does not distinguish prediction from non-observation, and it does not address multi-qubit systems, continuous outcomes, sequences of measurements, or the role of measurement back-action. No quantitative extension is provided, so the example does not lend support to the general claim.
  4. [A Working Hypothesis to Explore Rules on Information Acquisition Beyond Prediction] The 'least self-impediment principle' is introduced as the basis for the argument: 'Information processing strategies emerge in physical observers from allowing strategy-dependent bounds on physical quantities related to information processing to come as close as possible to the fundamental limits.' This principle is stipulated, not derived from thermodynamics or any other physical law. The paper further states it applies 'in the absence of additional constraints and considerations,' making it a counterfactual normative claim about what strategies 'emerge' rather than a testable physical principle. As a result, the paper's stated goal of justifying the core premise of relational quantum mechanics rests on an additional axiom that itself needs justification.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Author affiliation] The affiliation contains a typographical error: 'M¯ anoa' should be 'Mānoa' with the correct Hawaiian diacritic.
  2. [A Simple Example] The phrase 'one spin 1/2 system' should be 'one spin-1/2 system' or 'one spin-1/2 particle' for standard notation.
  3. [A Case for Prediction] The term 'non-predictive information' is used as a central quantity but is never formally defined in the manuscript; a precise definition would make the argument easier to evaluate.
  4. [A Case for Prediction] The sentence beginning 'In any case, one can certainly argue that...' is a normative assertion rather than a derived result; the authors may wish to flag it explicitly as a premise.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Prediction 'emerges' only because the chosen dissipation bound is proportional to non-predictive information; the central claim is a restatement of that cited bound.

  1. self definitional [Section 'A CASE FOR PREDICTION', third paragraph]
    "For all driven systems, no matter how far they are driven from thermodynamic equilibrium, the lower bound on dissipation is proportional to the amount of non-predictive information the observer records about its environment [55]. Thus, retaining predictive information to the largest degree possible will result in a potential thermodynamic advantage by making the lower bound on dissipation smaller."

    The argument's only mechanism is a bound that is proportional to non-predictive information. Minimizing that bound is therefore equivalent, by construction, to minimizing non-predictive information; with memory size fixed, this is equivalent to maximizing predictive information. The paper's conclusion that compact predictive records emerge is thus a restatement of the chosen bound, not an independent thermodynamic derivation of Rovelli's premise. The bound is imported from refs [55,56], both co-authored by present author S. Still, and is not re-derived or checked for the macroscopic-classical-observer/quantum-measurement regime.

full rationale

The paper builds its case on two inputs: (1) a least self-impediment principle, explicitly proposed by one of the authors, and (2) a cited thermodynamic result that the lower bound on dissipation is proportional to non-predictive information. The second input is the load-bearing step: once that proportionality is granted, the conclusion that minimizing dissipation yields maximally predictive records follows immediately, because non-predictive information is the complement of predictive information. This is a reduction by construction rather than a newly derived physical consequence. The cited result is published and externally falsifiable, so the self-citation alone is not circular; however, the present paper contributes no independent derivation or verification of the proportionality in the new regime of macroscopic classical observers performing quantum measurements. The simple qubit example illustrates the same logic without adding evidence. The least self-impediment principle is honestly labeled a working hypothesis, which limits the circularity, but the abstract and conclusion present the derivation as a justification of the core relational premise, and that justification reduces to the choice of the dissipation bound. Score 6 reflects partial circularity: the central prediction claim is forced by the form of the cited bound, while the paper does contain independent speculative content in the new principle and its application to quantum reconstructions.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claim rests on a small set of cited results and new principles. There are no numeric free parameters because the paper is conceptual; the key assumptions are the thermodynamic bound from prior work and the newly proposed least self-impediment principle.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The lower bound on energy dissipation is proportional to the amount of non-predictive information retained (Still et al., ref 55).
    This is a cited result, not derived in this paper, and it is the mechanism that connects dissipation to predictive records.
  • ad hoc to paper The least self-impediment principle: physical observers choose strategies that allow strategy-dependent bounds to approach fundamental limits as closely as possible.
    This principle is newly proposed in this paper, without independent evidence or derivation.
  • domain assumption Observers are physically embedded systems that must record information in memory, requiring at least two states per bit.
    Standard assumption about physical memory, but the specific accounting of predictive versus non-predictive bits is assumed.
  • domain assumption Relational quantum mechanics' premise that the state is identical to a predictive record is taken as the target; the operational axioms of relational quantum mechanics are assumed as background.
    The paper builds on Rovelli's relational quantum mechanics framework without proving its axioms.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Physical Observers and Quantum Reconstructions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JODCU2RP

@misc{pith2026250601561,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Physical Observers and Quantum Reconstructions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JODCU2RP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.01561}
}
read the original abstract

There is a multitude of interpretations of quantum mechanics, but foundational principles are lacking. Relational quantum mechanics views the observer as a physical system, which allows for an unambiguous interpretation as all axioms are purely operational, describing how observers acquire information. The approach, however, is based on the premise that the observer retains only predictive information about the observed system. Here, we justify this premise using the following principle: Physically embedded observers choose information processing strategies that provide them with the option to approach physical limits to the greatest possible extent. Applied to a lower limit on energy dissipation, the principle leads directly to a compact predictive model, thus justifying this core premise of relational quantum mechanics.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

87 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages

  1. [55]

    Thermodynamics of prediction

    Susanne Still, David A Sivak, Anthony J Bell, and Gavin E Crooks. Thermodynamics of prediction. Physi- cal review letters , 109(12):120604, 2012

    work page 2012

  2. [1]

    quantum mechanics

    Here “quantum mechanics”, “quantum theory” and “quantum physics” are used interchangeably

  3. [2]

    Principles of quantum mechanics

    Ramamurti Shankar. Principles of quantum mechanics . Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

    2012

  4. [3]

    Mathematische grundlagen der quantenmechanik, volume 38

    John Von Neumann. Mathematische grundlagen der quantenmechanik, volume 38. Springer-Verlag, 2013

    2013

  5. [4]

    Introduction to quantum mechanics

    David J Griffiths and Darrell F Schroeter. Introduction to quantum mechanics. Cambridge university press, 2019

    2019

  6. [5]

    A foundational principle for quantum mechanics

    Anton Zeilinger. A foundational principle for quantum mechanics. Foundations of Physics, 29(4):631–643, 1999

    1999

  7. [6]

    N. Bohr. The quantum postulate and the recent devel- opment of atomic theory. Nature, 121:580–590, 1928

    1928

  8. [7]

    Heisenberg

    W. Heisenberg. Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science . Harper and Row, 1958

    1958

Show all 87 references
  1. [8]

    D. Bohm. A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of” hidden” variables. i. Physical review, 85(2):166, 1952

    1952

  2. [9]

    H. Everett. The Theory of the Universal Wave Func- tion. PhD thesis, Princeton University, 1956. Reprinted in The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechan- ics, edited by B. S. DeWitt and N. Graham (Princeton University Press, 1973)

    1956

  3. [10]

    R. B. Griffiths. Consistent histories and the interpre- tation of quantum mechanics. Journal of Statistical Physics, 36(1-2):219–272, 1984

    1984

  4. [11]

    Relational quantum mechanics

    Carlo Rovelli. Relational quantum mechanics. Interna- tional journal of theoretical physics , 35:1637–1678, 1996

    1996

  5. [12]

    The logic of quantum mechanics

    John von Neumann and Garrett Birkhoff. The logic of quantum mechanics. Annals of Mathematics , 37(4):823– 843, 1936

    1936

  6. [13]

    Can hidden variables be excluded in quantum mechanics

    Josef Maria Jauch and Constantin Piron. Can hidden variables be excluded in quantum mechanics. Helv. Phys. Acta, 36(CERN-TH-324):827–837, 1963

    1963

  7. [14]

    Quantum logic and the histories approach to quantum theory

    Christopher J Isham. Quantum logic and the histories approach to quantum theory. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 35(5):2157–2185, 1994

    1994

  8. [15]

    Quantum theory from five reasonable ax- ioms

    Lucien Hardy. Quantum theory from five reasonable ax- ioms. arXiv preprint quant-ph/0101012 , 2001

    2001 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Generalized no-broadcasting theorem

    Howard Barnum, Jonathan Barrett, Matthew Leifer, and Alexander Wilce. Generalized no-broadcasting theorem. Physical review letters , 99(24):240501, 2007

    2007

  10. [17]

    Information processing in general- ized probabilistic theories

    Jonathan Barrett. Information processing in general- ized probabilistic theories. Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , 75(3):032304, 2007

    2007

  11. [18]

    Quantum theory and beyond: Is entanglement special? arXiv preprint arXiv:0911.0695, 2009

    Borivoje Dakic and Caslav Brukner. Quantum theory and beyond: Is entanglement special? arXiv preprint arXiv:0911.0695, 2009

    2009 arXiv

  12. [19]

    The observer effect

    Kenneth Baclawski. The observer effect. In 2018 ieee conference on cognitive and computational aspects of sit- uation management (cogsima), pages 83–89. IEEE, 2018

    2018

  13. [20]

    The observer concept in science as a basis for its further curricular application within the discipline- culture paradigm

    Igal Galili. The observer concept in science as a basis for its further curricular application within the discipline- culture paradigm. Science & Education , pages 1–31, 2024

    2024

  14. [21]

    Toolbox for reconstructing quan- tum theory from rules on information acquisition

    Philipp Andres H¨ ohn. Toolbox for reconstructing quan- tum theory from rules on information acquisition. Quan- tum, 1:38, 2017

    2017

  15. [22]

    Quantum theory from questions

    Philipp Andres H¨ ohn and Christopher SP Wever. Quantum theory from questions. Physical Review A , 95(1):012102, 2017

    2017

  16. [23]

    Zur elektrodynamik bewegter k¨ orper

    Albert Einstein. Zur elektrodynamik bewegter k¨ orper. Annalen der physik , 17(10):891–921, 1905

    1905

  17. [24]

    From information geometry to quantum theory

    Philip Goyal. From information geometry to quantum theory. New Journal of Physics , 12(2):023012, 2010

    2010

  18. [25]

    A derivation of quantum theory from physical requirements

    Llu ´ ıs Masanes and Markus P M¨ uller. A derivation of quantum theory from physical requirements. New Jour- nal of Physics , 13(6):063001, 2011

    2011

  19. [26]

    Quantum mechanics and hilbert space

    George W Mackey. Quantum mechanics and hilbert space. The American Mathematical Monthly , 64(8P2):45–57, 1957

    1957

  20. [27]

    Simultaneous observ- ability and the logic of quantum mechanics

    James Christopher Thomas Pool. Simultaneous observ- ability and the logic of quantum mechanics . The Univer- sity of Iowa, 1963

    1963

  21. [28]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

    G¨ unther Ludwig.Foundations of quantum mechanics I . Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

    2012

  22. [29]

    Birkhoff in R.P

    G. Birkhoff in R.P. Bilworth (ed.). Lattice Theory: Pro- ceedings of the Second Symposium in Pure Mathematics of the American Mathematical Society, April 1959 , vol- ume 2. American Mathematical Society, 1961

    1959

  23. [30]

    Why john von neumann did not like the hilbert space formalism of quantum mechanics (and what he liked instead)

    Mikl´ os R´ edei. Why john von neumann did not like the hilbert space formalism of quantum mechanics (and what he liked instead). Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of 6 Modern Physics, 27(4):493–510, 1996

    1996

  24. [31]

    Quantum logic

    Karl Svozil. Quantum logic. Springer Science & Business Media, 1998

    1998

  25. [32]

    Opera- tional quantum logic: An overview

    Bob Coecke, David Moore, and Alexander Wilce. Opera- tional quantum logic: An overview. Current Research in Operational Quantum Logic: Algebras, Categories, Lan- guages, pages 1–36, 2000

    2000

  26. [33]

    Quantum logic and probability theory

    Alexander Wilce. Quantum logic and probability theory. 2002

    2002

  27. [34]

    Informational derivation of quantum the- ory

    Giulio Chiribella, Giacomo Mauro D’Ariano, and Paolo Perinotti. Informational derivation of quantum the- ory. Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, 84(1):012311, 2011

    2011

  28. [35]

    Generalized prob- ability theories: what determines the structure of quan- tum theory? Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 47(32):323001, 2014

    Peter Janotta and Haye Hinrichsen. Generalized prob- ability theories: what determines the structure of quan- tum theory? Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 47(32):323001, 2014

    2014

  29. [36]

    Entangle- ment and thermodynamics in general probabilistic theo- ries

    Giulio Chiribella and Carlo Maria Scandolo. Entangle- ment and thermodynamics in general probabilistic theo- ries. New Journal of Physics , 17(10):103027, 2015

    2015

  30. [37]

    Quantum mechanics as quantum information (and only a little more)

    Christopher A Fuchs. Quantum mechanics as quantum information (and only a little more). arXiv preprint quant-ph/0205039, 2002

    2002 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Char- acterizing quantum theory in terms of information- theoretic constraints

    Rob Clifton, Jeffrey Bub, and Hans Halvorson. Char- acterizing quantum theory in terms of information- theoretic constraints. Foundations of Physics , 33:1561– 1591, 2003

    2003

  32. [39]

    Elements of information-theoretic derivation of the formalism of quantum theory

    Alexei Grinbaum. Elements of information-theoretic derivation of the formalism of quantum theory. Interna- tional Journal of Quantum Information , 1(03):289–300, 2003

    2003

  33. [40]

    Is information the key? Nature Physics, 1(1):2–4, 2005

    Gilles Brassard. Is information the key? Nature Physics, 1(1):2–4, 2005

    2005

  34. [41]

    Derivation of the rules of quantum me- chanics from information-theoretic axioms

    Daniel I Fivel. Derivation of the rules of quantum me- chanics from information-theoretic axioms. Foundations of Physics , 42:291–318, 2012

    2012

  35. [42]

    Existence of an information unit as a postulate of quantum theory

    Llu ´ ıs Masanes, Markus P M¨ uller, Remigiusz Augusiak, and David P´ erez-Garc ´ ıa. Existence of an information unit as a postulate of quantum theory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 110(41):16373–16377, 2013

    2013

  36. [43]

    Information invari- ance and quantum probabilities

    ˇCaslav Brukner and Anton Zeilinger. Information invari- ance and quantum probabilities. Foundations of Physics, 39:677–689, 2009

    2009

  37. [44]

    Statistical distance and hilbert space

    William K Wootters. Statistical distance and hilbert space. Physical Review D , 23(2):357, 1981

    1981

  38. [45]

    A categorical se- mantics of quantum protocols

    Samson Abramsky and Bob Coecke. A categorical se- mantics of quantum protocols. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, 2004., pages 415–425. IEEE, 2004

    2004

  39. [46]

    Quantum picturalism

    Bob Coecke. Quantum picturalism. Contemporary physics, 51(1):59–83, 2010

    2010

  40. [47]

    In this quote we replace Rovelli’s notation for the answer string, (e1, e2, e3, ...), his equation (4), with our notation, (a1, a2, a3, ...), to improve readability

  41. [48]

    Relational quantum mechanics

    Carlo Rovelli. Relational quantum mechanics. Interna- tional journal of theoretical physics , 35:1648, Footnote, 1996

    1996

  42. [49]

    The fundamen- tal physical limits of computation

    Charles H Bennett and Rolf Landauer. The fundamen- tal physical limits of computation. Scientific American, 253(1):48–57, 1985

    1985

  43. [50]

    Ultimate physical limits to computation

    Seth Lloyd. Ultimate physical limits to computation. Nature, 406(6799):1047–1054, 2000

    2000

  44. [51]

    Fundamental limit on the rate of quantum dynamics: the unified bound is tight

    Lev B Levitin and Tommaso Toffoli. Fundamental limit on the rate of quantum dynamics: the unified bound is tight. Physical review letters , 103(16):160502, 2009

    2009

  45. [52]

    ¨Uber die entropieverminderung in einem thermodynamischen system bei eingriffen intelligenter wesen

    Leo Szilard. ¨Uber die entropieverminderung in einem thermodynamischen system bei eingriffen intelligenter wesen. Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik, 53(11):840–856, 1929

    1929

  46. [53]

    Thermodynamics of information

    Juan MR Parrondo, Jordan M Horowitz, and Takahiro Sagawa. Thermodynamics of information. Nature physics, 11(2):131–139, 2015

    2015

  47. [54]

    S. Still. Thermodynamic Cost and Benefit of Memory. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 124:050601, Feb. 2020

    2020

  48. [56]

    Quantum predictive filtering

    Arne L Grimsmo and Susanne Still. Quantum predictive filtering. Physical Review A , 94(1):012338, 2016

    2016

  49. [57]

    Energy-efficient neu- ral information processing in individual neurons and neuronal networks

    Lianchun Yu and Yuguo Yu. Energy-efficient neu- ral information processing in individual neurons and neuronal networks. Journal of Neuroscience Research , 95(11):2253–2266, 2017

    2017

  50. [58]

    Energy expenditure computation of a single burst- ing neuron

    Fengyun Zhu, Rubin Wang, Xiaochuan Pan, and Zhenyu Zhu. Energy expenditure computation of a single burst- ing neuron. Cognitive Neurodynamics, 13:75–87, 2019

    2019

  51. [59]

    Macroscopic cerebral energy efficiency corresponds to neuron reorganization in awake and anesthetized mice

    Da Wang, Hui Li, Yifan Zeng, Jinggui Gao, Mengyang Xu, Binshi Bo, Mengchao Pei, Zhifeng Liang, Ning Zhou, and Garth J Thompson. Macroscopic cerebral energy efficiency corresponds to neuron reorganization in awake and anesthetized mice. bioRxiv, pages 2025–03, 2025

    2025

  52. [60]

    Light and oxygenic photosynthesis: energy dissipation as a protection mechanism against photo- oxidation

    Ildik´ o Szab´ o, Elisabetta Bergantino, and Giorgio Mario Giacometti. Light and oxygenic photosynthesis: energy dissipation as a protection mechanism against photo- oxidation. EMBO reports, 6(7):629–634, 2005

    2005

  53. [61]

    Photoprotection in an ecological context: the remarkable complexity of thermal energy dissipation

    Barbara Demmig-Adams and William W Adams III. Photoprotection in an ecological context: the remarkable complexity of thermal energy dissipation. New phytolo- gist, 172(1):11–21, 2006

    2006

  54. [62]

    Energy dissipa- tion is an essential mechanism to sustain the viability of plants: the physiological limits of improved photosyn- thesis

    Christian Wilhelm and Dirk Selmar. Energy dissipa- tion is an essential mechanism to sustain the viability of plants: the physiological limits of improved photosyn- thesis. Journal of plant physiology , 168(2):79–87, 2011

    2011

  55. [63]

    Entropy as a design princi- ple in the photosystem ii supercomplex

    Johanna L Hall, Shiun Yang Jr, David T Limmer, and Graham R Fleming. Entropy as a design princi- ple in the photosystem ii supercomplex. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.12418, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Es- cape behavior of planktonic copepods in response to hy- drodynamic disturbances: high speed video analysis

    EJ Buskey, P&HARTLINE Lenz, and DK Hartline. Es- cape behavior of planktonic copepods in response to hy- drodynamic disturbances: high speed video analysis. Ma- rine Ecology Progress Series, 235:135–146, 2002

    2002

  57. [65]

    Escape from viscosity: the kinematics and hydrodynamics of copepod foraging and escape swimming

    Luca A van Duren and John J Videler. Escape from viscosity: the kinematics and hydrodynamics of copepod foraging and escape swimming. Journal of Experimental Biology, 206(2):269–279, 2003

    2003

  58. [66]

    Swim and fly: escape strategy in neustonic and plank- tonic copepods

    Leonid Svetlichny, Poul S Larsen, and Thomas Kiørboe. Swim and fly: escape strategy in neustonic and plank- tonic copepods. Journal of Experimental Biology , 221(2):jeb167262, 2018

    2018

  59. [67]

    Thermodynamic equi- librium model in anaerobic digestion process

    Sung T Oh and Alastair D Martin. Thermodynamic equi- librium model in anaerobic digestion process. Biochemi- cal Engineering Journal , 34(3):256–266, 2007

    2007

  60. [68]

    Thermodynamics of biological processes

    Hernan G Garcia, Jane Kondev, Nigel Orme, Julie A Theriot, and Rob Phillips. Thermodynamics of biological processes. In Methods in enzymology , volume 492, pages 27–59. Elsevier, 2011. 7

    2011

  61. [69]

    Partially observable szilard engines

    Susanne Still and Dorian Daimer. Partially observable szilard engines. New Journal of Physics , 24(7):073031, 2022

    2022

  62. [70]

    Thermodynami- cally rational decision making under uncertainty

    Dorian Daimer and Susanne Still. Thermodynami- cally rational decision making under uncertainty. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.10476, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Discussed at a number of venues since 2014, e.g. [87]

    2014

  64. [72]

    The physical ob- server in a szilard engine with uncertainty.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.10580, 2023

    Dorian Daimer and Susanne Still. The physical ob- server in a szilard engine with uncertainty.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.10580, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Unsupervised learning

    Horace B Barlow. Unsupervised learning. Neural com- putation, 1(3):295–311, 1989

    1989

  66. [74]

    Metabolic cost as a unifying principle governing neuronal biophysics

    Andrea Hasenstaub, Stephani Otte, Edward Callaway, and Terrence J Sejnowski. Metabolic cost as a unifying principle governing neuronal biophysics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 107(27):12329–12334, 2010

    2010

  67. [75]

    Biophysics: searching for principles

    William Bialek. Biophysics: searching for principles . Princeton University Press, 2012

    2012

  68. [76]

    Thermodynamic theory of structure, stability and fluc- tuations

    Paul Glansdorff, Ilya Prigogine, and Robert Nyden Hill. Thermodynamic theory of structure, stability and fluc- tuations. American Journal of Physics , 41(1):147–148, 1973

    1973

  69. [77]

    Order out of chaos

    Ilya Prigogine and Isabelle Stengers. Order out of chaos . Bantam, 1984

    1984

  70. [78]

    Are organisms committed to lower their rates of entropy production?: Possible relevance to evolution of the prigogine theorem and the ergodic hy- pothesis

    Bartolom´ e Sabater. Are organisms committed to lower their rates of entropy production?: Possible relevance to evolution of the prigogine theorem and the ergodic hy- pothesis. Biosystems, 83(1):10–17, 2006

    2006

  71. [79]

    Theory of nonequi- librium free energy transduction by molecular machines

    Aidan I Brown and David A Sivak. Theory of nonequi- librium free energy transduction by molecular machines. Chemical reviews, 120(1):434–459, 2019

    2019

  72. [80]

    Entropy perspectives of molecular and evolutionary biology.International Journal of Molec- ular Sciences, 23(8):4098, 2022

    Bartolom´ e Sabater. Entropy perspectives of molecular and evolutionary biology.International Journal of Molec- ular Sciences, 23(8):4098, 2022

    2022

  73. [81]

    Game-theoretical ap- proach to minimum entropy productions in information thermodynamics

    Yuma Fujimoto and Sosuke Ito. Game-theoretical ap- proach to minimum entropy productions in information thermodynamics. Physical Review Research, 6(1):013023, 2024

    2024

  74. [82]

    Maxi- mum entropy production principle in physics, chemistry and biology

    Leonid M Martyushev and Vladimir D Seleznev. Maxi- mum entropy production principle in physics, chemistry and biology. Physics reports, 426(1):1–45, 2006

    2006

  75. [83]

    Statistical physics of adaptation

    Nikolay Perunov, Robert A Marsland, and Jeremy L Eng- land. Statistical physics of adaptation. Physical Review X, 6(2):021036, 2016

    2016

  76. [84]

    Broken detailed balance and non-equilibrium dynamics in living systems: a review

    Federico S Gnesotto, Federica Mura, Jannes Gladrow, and Chase P Broedersz. Broken detailed balance and non-equilibrium dynamics in living systems: a review. Reports on Progress in Physics , 81(6):066601, 2018

    2018

  77. [85]

    Nonequilibrium thermo- dynamics in cell biology: Extending equilibrium formal- ism to cover living systems

    Xiaona Fang and Jin Wang. Nonequilibrium thermo- dynamics in cell biology: Extending equilibrium formal- ism to cover living systems. Annual review of biophysics , 49(1):227–246, 2020

    2020

  78. [86]

    Multiple pareto- optimal solutions of the dissipation-adaptation trade-off

    Jorge Tabanera-Bravo and Aljaˇ z Godec. Multiple pareto- optimal solutions of the dissipation-adaptation trade-off. Physical Review Research, 7(1):013020, 2025

    2025

  79. [87]

    Mind Matters: Intelligence and Agency in the Physical World

    July 22, 2019. Susanne Still, Invited Talk, 6th FQXi Conference “Mind Matters: Intelligence and Agency in the Physical World”, Castelvecchio Pascoli, Italy

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.