REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 76 references
Compensating random transition-detection blackouts in Markov networks
T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read Random detection blackouts in Markov networks can be fully corrected, restoring true rates and entropy bounds.
desk verdict A genuinely useful blackout-compensation scheme for Markov-network inference, provided the no-hidden-parallel-channel assumption holds; the abstract overstates that assumption. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The central object is the four-way short-time expansion of the experimentally observed waiting-time distributions for forward and backward transitions of a link, together with the binomial-splitting picture of blackouts as a second hidden channel. The short-time linear term in ψ_{I+→I+} and ψ_{I-→I-} encodes the missed transitions of the opposite direction, which is what makes the detection probabilities identifiable from the ratios of the four limits. The post-modification step then restores thermodynamic consistency by equalizing detection probabilities, and the rational-form dependence of the TUR/MTUR estimators on the remaining common detection probability η provides the analytic bridge
What would settle it
Simulate a simple three- or four-state Markov network where, in addition to the observed link, a hidden channel (with small but finite rate) connects the same two states, while all transitions are perfectly detected. Apply Eqs. (2)–(6) to the observed waiting times: the method will report nonzero blackout probabilities and incorrect rates even though no blackouts exist. This directly tests the identifiability assumption.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The paper establishes that for a Markov network whose transitions are seen through random, time-asymmetric blackouts, the loss of information is not irretrievable. Writing the observed waiting-time densities ψ_{I+→I+}, ψ_{I+→I-}, ψ_{I-→I+}, ψ_{I-→I-} for a link I=(I+,I-), the short-time expansions contain exactly enough structure to solve for the detection probabilities η_{I±} and the bare rates k_{I±}. In particular, the ratio appearing in Eq. (6) isolates η_{I+} as t→0. With all rates and η's known, the observer can distinguish equilibrium (zero net current) from a nonequilibrium steady state, reconstruct the full generator if every link is observable, and, by randomly deleting observed tr
Load-bearing premise
The short-time waiting-time expansions assume that the two states of each observed link are connected only by that link, with no hidden transition lying on the direct path between them; if another channel connects the same two states, the inferred detection probabilities and rates become contaminated.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- If a Markov network's observable links all suffer asymmetric random blackouts, the full generator (all transition rates) can be recovered from waiting-time data alone, giving access to steady-state probabilities and to a rigorous equilibrium-versus-NESS test.
- Entropy-production bounds from thermodynamic uncertainty relations can be evaluated at their blackout-free values even though the raw trajectories never contain a single blackout-free transition.
- Post-modified trajectories remain valid input for waiting-time-based entropy estimators, which can yield a lower bound stronger than the TUR bound.
- The inference scheme requires no symmetry or homogeneity in the blackout probabilities—each link and each direction may miss events at its own arbitrary rate.
- The correction strategy transfers directly to multidimensional TUR estimates built from several observable links, including their covariance structure.
- The same post-processing idea should extend to time-dependent driving, cycle-affinity inference, and other thermodynamic estimators that share the requirement of unbiased observations.
Reading between the lines
- A natural testable extension is to apply the short-time ratio estimator to experimental single-molecule data with known ground-truth detection efficiencies (e.g., fluorophore blinking in motor-protein assays) to see whether the inferred η_{I±} match the independently measured miss rates.
- The rational-form assumption for σ_TUR(η) depends on the underlying process being a stationary, irreducible Markov network; for networks with absorbing states or multiple disconnected components, the functional form (8) may fail, and the two-point fitting procedure would need modification.
- The 'hidden parallel channel' reading of blackouts suggests a symmetry with genuine hidden states: if an observed link is in reality accompanied by a second physical pathway between the same two states, the short-time equations would absorb its rate into the blackout terms, and the inferred η would no longer be a true detection probability—an ambiguity the paper does not resolve.
- One could push the post-modification idea further: instead of discarding transitions randomly, a deterministic thinning rule that preserves higher-order statistics might allow recovery of full trajectory statistics, not just the first two cumulants used in TUR.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper considers a discrete-state Markov network in which one or more transition pairs ("links") are observed with unknown, possibly direction-dependent detection probabilities η_{I±}, so that random blackouts compromise the observed currents and thermodynamic inference. The authors propose a three-step strategy: (i) infer the detection probabilities and the true transition rates k_{I±} from the short-time limits of the four waiting-time distributions associated with a link (Eqs. 2–6); (ii) post-modify the observed trajectory by randomly discarding transitions so that the retained trajectory corresponds to a virtual dynamics with symmetric detection probability η ≤ min{η_{I+}, η_{I-}}; (iii) use these post-modified trajectories in TUR/MTUR estimators whose dependence on η is claimed to be a simple rational function (Eqs. 8–10), allowing extrapolation to η=1, i.e., to the blackout-free TUR bound. A waiting-time-based entropy estimator for the post-modified data is also proposed (Eq. 11). The claims are illustrated by analytic and simulated examples on a 4-state network (Figs. 2, 3).
Significance. If the results hold, this is a valuable contribution to thermodynamic inference from incomplete observations. The short-time waiting-time identification is elegant, and the post-modification idea—turning an asymmetric detection loss into a symmetric, thermodynamically consistent virtual dynamics—is likely to be useful beyond the specific TUR/WTD estimators considered here. The paper builds on well-established WTD and TUR frameworks (Refs. [58–70]) and provides analytic and numerical support for the main formulas. However, the significance is currently limited by two load-bearing gaps: the identification of η and k requires a structural assumption (no hidden parallel transitions between the two states of an observed link) that is not stated in the abstract, and the exact rational forms of the TUR/MTUR estimators are asserted rather than derived. Both issues are fixable in revision, but they are central to the paper's claims.
major comments (3)
- [Inference of blackouts and restoring transition rates, Eqs. (2)–(6)] The inference of η_{I±} and k_{I±} relies on the condition, stated just before Eq. (2), that the paths between I+ and I− contain no hidden transition. This condition is not highlighted as a limitation in the abstract or conclusion. If a hidden transition with rates q_{ij}, q_{ji} connects the same two states, Eq. (2) acquires an additional term q_{ji} η_{I+} k_{I+} t, and Eq. (5) acquires q_{ij} η_{I-} k_{I-} t. Equation (6) then returns η_{I+} k_{I+}/(k_{I+}+q_{ij}) rather than η_{I+}, conflating blackouts with genuine hidden channels. Since the post-modification and the TUR/WTD recovery are built on these inferred values, the central claim fails whenever such parallel channels exist. The paper should either prove identifiability under weaker conditions or, at minimum, state this assumption prominently and characterize the error when it is violated.
- [Entropy estimators, Eq. (8) (and Eqs. (9)–(10))] The universal form σ_TUR(η)=aη/(1+bη) is stated with the justification "as argued below" and "theoretically, we find these dependencies by using the first cumulants extracted from the dominant eigenvalue λ(z) of the tilted generator," but no derivation or explicit calculation is given. The entire extrapolation to the blackout-free value η=1 hinges on this exact functional form; the same applies to the multi-current form (9) and the MTUR form (10). Without a derivation (or at least a clearly stated conjecture supported by a proof sketch), the claim that σ_TUR(1) is recovered is not established. Please provide the derivation in the Letter or a supplement.
- [Entropy estimators, Eq. (11)] The claim that σ_WTD(η) is "a non-trivial lower bound" of σ_M for post-modified data is asserted. The cited WTD bound was derived for complete blackout-free observations with one pair of transitions between two adjacent states; here the post-modified process has two parallel channels (the visible channel and the hidden blackout channel) between the same states. The paper should provide a proof or a rigorous argument that the lower-bound property remains valid in this setting, or state the conditions under which it does.
minor comments (5)
- [Abstract and Conclusion] The abstract and the concluding paragraph claim that "the unknown frequency of blackouts and the true underlying transition rates can be determined" without mentioning the no-hidden-parallel-transition assumption. Please qualify these statements.
- [Figure 1 caption] The right-most network in the caption contains duplicated labels "ηI ηI" and "1 − ηI 1 − ηI"; this appears to be a typesetting error.
- [Eq. (8)] The phrase "as argued below" is misleading because no argument follows. Either remove it or place the derivation immediately after the equation.
- [Eq. (11) and surrounding text] The tilde notation in ψpm_{fJs→ eIr} is not defined clearly; please explain which transitions are reversed and how the sum over I_r J_s is meant.
- [Inference of blackouts and restoring transition rates] The sentence "Using the steady-state probabilities, e.g., obtained as the eigenvector of the generator or by p_s^i = ν_ex_{I+}/η_{I+} k_{I+}" is slightly circular: to obtain the eigenvector one already needs the full generator, which was just reconstructed. This is correct but should be phrased more carefully.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity: the blackout-parameter inference, post-modification, and TUR/WTD recovery are self-contained given the paper's explicit no-hidden-parallel-link assumption.
full rationale
The paper's central inferential step, Eqs. (2)–(6), treats the detection probabilities η_{I±} and rates k_{I±} as unknown parameters of an effective two-channel model. The short-time WTD coefficients (2)–(5) are measured quantities that depend on these parameters, and solving them for η and k is ordinary parameter inference, not a circular reduction: the four independent coefficients (η_+k_+, η_-k_-, (1−η_-)k_-·η_+k_+, (1−η_+)k_+·η_-k_-) determine the two rates and the two detection probabilities. No predicted quantity is set equal to an input by construction. The TUR recovery (8)–(10) is also not circular: the functional form σ_TUR(η)=aη/(1+bη) is derived analytically from the tilted generator, and fitting a,b at two post-modified detection probabilities and then evaluating at η=1 is an extrapolation, not a refitting of the target bound. Similarly, the post-modification randomly thins observed transitions using the previously inferred parameters; the resulting σ_WTD estimator (11) is a published lower-bound estimator applied to new data, not an input-dependent identity. The paper does cite prior work by the same group (Refs. [61,65,62]) for the WTD topological expansions and the WTD entropy estimator, but those are published, general results that do not depend on the present paper's fitted values, so they are independent support rather than load-bearing self-reference. The real caveat is the explicitly stated assumption that no hidden transition lies on the direct path between the endpoints of an observed link: 'these paths contain no hidden transition between I+=(ij) and I-=(ji)'. If such a parallel hidden channel exists, the short-time coefficients would change and Eq. (6) would identify an effective visible fraction rather than the true detection probability. This is an identifiability/scope limitation, not a circular step; the paper is transparent about the assumption, and within that stated model the derivation chain is self-contained.
Assumptions & free parameters
free parameters (3)
- blackout fractions 1−η_{I±} (per link) =
inferred from short-time WTD limits (Eqs. 2–6); example: η_{I+}=0.8, η_{I−}=0.9
- transition rates k_{I±} =
inferred from η and the full WTD limits; example rates given in Fig. 2 caption
- constants a, b; a_l, b_l, c_l, d_lm; a_1 ... a_6 of the rational TUR/MTUR forms =
not tabulated; determined from the curve or by fitting (Sec. 'Entropy estimators' and Fig. 3)
assumptions (4)
- domain assumption The observed process is a renewal process with 'effective two channels' per link; every unobserved blackout event is statistically equivalent to an independent Bernoulli deletion of each transition with probability 1−η_{I±}.
- domain assumption The short-time asymptotics of ψ_{I+→I+} and ψ_{I−→I−} receive no O(t) contribution from hidden transitions on the direct path; i.e., the only one-step hidden channel between I+ and I− is the blackout channel itself.
- domain assumption The system is in a steady state and the master equation (1) holds with equilibrium/affinity structure σ_M = Σ p_i k_ij ln(k_ij/k_ji) (Eq. 7).
- domain assumption The TUR/MTUR inequalities remain valid for the 'virtual' post-modified dynamics, and the post-modified statistics correspond to a genuine Markovian dynamics with detection probability η_I on each link.
invented entities (2)
-
The 'second channel' (blackout channel) connecting states i and j with rates (1−η_{I±}) k_{I±}
-
The 'post-modified' virtual trajectory/effective dynamics
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Compensating random transition-detection blackouts in Markov networks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KXESRD7Z
@misc{pith2026251114679,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Compensating random transition-detection blackouts in Markov networks},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KXESRD7Z}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.14679}
}
read the original abstract
In Markov networks, measurement blackouts with unknown frequency compromise observations such that thermodynamic quantities can no longer be inferred reliably. In particular, the observed currents neither discern equilibrium from non-equilibrium nor can they be used in extant estimators of entropy production. Our strategy to eliminate these effects is based on formally attributing the blackouts to a second channel connecting states. The unknown frequency of blackouts and the true underlying transition rates can be determined from the short-time limit of observed waiting-time distributions. A post-modification of observed trajectory data yields a virtual effective dynamics from which the lower bound on entropy production based on thermodynamic uncertainty relations can be recovered fully. Moreover, the post-processed data can be used in waiting-time based estimators. Crucially, our strategy does not require the blackouts to occur homogeneously or symmetrically under time-reversal.
Figures
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
Sekimoto,Stochastic Energetics, Lecture Notes in Physics (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010)
K. Sekimoto,Stochastic Energetics, Lecture Notes in Physics (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010)
2010
-
[2]
Jarzynski, Equalities and inequalities: Irreversibility and the second law of thermodynamics at the nanoscale, Ann
C. Jarzynski, Equalities and inequalities: Irreversibility and the second law of thermodynamics at the nanoscale, Ann. Rev. Cond. Mat. Phys.2, 329 (2011)
2011
-
[3]
Peliti and S
L. Peliti and S. Pigolotti,Stochastic thermodynamics. An Introduction(Princeton Univ. Press, 2021)
2021
-
[4]
Shiraishi,An Introduction to Stochastic Thermody- namics, Fundamental Theories of Physics (Springer Na- ture Singapore, Singapore, 2023)
N. Shiraishi,An Introduction to Stochastic Thermody- namics, Fundamental Theories of Physics (Springer Na- ture Singapore, Singapore, 2023)
2023
-
[5]
Seifert,Stochastic Thermodynamics(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2025)
U. Seifert,Stochastic Thermodynamics(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2025)
2025
-
[6]
J. P. Pekola, Towards quantum thermodynamics in elec- tronic circuits, Nat. Phys.11, 118 (2015)
2015
-
[7]
Ciliberto, Experiments in stochastic thermodynamics: Short history and perspectives, Phys
S. Ciliberto, Experiments in stochastic thermodynamics: Short history and perspectives, Phys. Rev. X7, 021051 (2017)
2017
-
[8]
Alemany, M
A. Alemany, M. Ribezzi-Crivellari, and F. Ritort, From free energy measurements to thermodynamic inference in nonequilibrium small systems, New J. Phys.17, 075009 (2015)
2015
Show all 76 references
-
[9]
Kolomeisky,Motor Proteins and Molecular Motors (CRC Press, 2015)
A. Kolomeisky,Motor Proteins and Molecular Motors (CRC Press, 2015)
2015
-
[10]
F. S. Gnesotto, F. Mura, J. Gladrow, and C. P. Broed- ersz, Broken detailed balance and non-equilibrium dy- namics in living systems: a review, Rep. Prog. Phys.81, 066601 (2018)
2018
-
[11]
Seifert, From stochastic thermodynamics to thermo- dynamic inference, Ann
U. Seifert, From stochastic thermodynamics to thermo- dynamic inference, Ann. Rev. Cond. Mat. Phys.10, 171 (2019)
2019
-
[12]
Esposito, Stochastic thermodynamics under coarse graining, Phys
M. Esposito, Stochastic thermodynamics under coarse graining, Phys. Rev. E85, 041125 (2012)
2012
-
[13]
Bo and A
S. Bo and A. Celani, Entropy production in stochastic systems with fast and slow time-scales, J. Stat. Phys. 154, 1325 (2014)
2014
-
[14]
D. J. Skinner and J. Dunkel, Improved bounds on en- tropy production in living systems, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.118, e2024300118 (2021)
2021
-
[15]
Kawai, J
R. Kawai, J. M. R. Parrondo, and C. Van den Broeck, Dissipation: The phase-space perspective, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 080602 (2007)
2007
-
[16]
Gomez-Marin, J
A. Gomez-Marin, J. M. R. Parrondo, and C. Van den Broeck, Lower bounds on dissipation upon coarse- graining, Phys. Rev. E78, 011107 (2008)
2008
-
[17]
Rold´ an and J
E. Rold´ an and J. M. R. Parrondo, Estimating dissipation from single stationary trajectories, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 150607 (2010)
2010
-
[18]
Dechant, J
A. Dechant, J. Garnier-Brun, and S.-i. Sasa, Thermody- namic bounds on correlation times, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 167101 (2023)
2023
-
[19]
Dieball and A
C. Dieball and A. Godec, Thermodynamic correlation inequalities for finite times and transients, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.58, 255001 (2025)
2025
-
[20]
Van Vu, V
T. Van Vu, V. T. Vo, and K. Saito, Dissipation, quan- tum coherence, and asymmetry of finite-time cross- correlations, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013273 (2024)
2024
-
[21]
Rold´ an, I
E. Rold´ an, I. Neri, M. D¨ orpinghaus, H. Meyr, and F. J¨ ulicher, Decision making in the arrow of time, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 250602 (2015)
2015
-
[22]
I. Neri, E. Rold´ an, and F. J¨ ulicher, Statistics of infima and stopping times of entropy production and appli- cations to active molecular processes, Phys. Rev. X7, 011019 (2017)
2017
-
[23]
Pigolotti, I
S. Pigolotti, I. Neri, E. Rold´ an, and F. J¨ ulicher, Generic properties of stochastic entropy production, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 140604 (2017)
2017
-
[24]
Neri and M
I. Neri and M. Polettini, Extreme value statistics of edge currents in Markov jump processes and their use for entropy production estimation, SciPost Phys.14, 131 (2023)
2023
-
[25]
Di Terlizzi, M
I. Di Terlizzi, M. Gironella, D. Herraez-Aguilar, T. Betz, F. Monroy, M. Baiesi, and F. Ritort, Variance sum rule for entropy production, Science383, 971 (2024)
2024
-
[26]
A. C. Barato and U. Seifert, Thermodynamic uncertainty relation for biomolecular processes, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 158101 (2015)
2015
-
[27]
T. R. Gingrich, J. M. Horowitz, N. Perunov, and J. L. England, Dissipation bounds all steady-state current fluctuations, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 120601 (2016)
2016
-
[28]
Hyeon and W
C. Hyeon and W. Hwang, Physical insight into the ther- modynamic uncertainty relation using Brownian motion in tilted periodic potentials, Phys. Rev. E96, 012156 (2017)
2017
-
[29]
Hwang and C
W. Hwang and C. Hyeon, Energetic costs, precision, and transport efficiency of molecular motors, J. Phys. Chem. Lett.9, 513 (2018)
2018
-
[30]
Song and C
Y. Song and C. Hyeon, Thermodynamic uncertainty re- lation to assess biological processes, J. Chem. Phys.154, 130901 (2021)
2021
-
[31]
Maggi, F
C. Maggi, F. Saglimbeni, V. C. Sosa, R. Di Leonardo, B. Nath, and A. Puglisi, Thermodynamic limits of sperm 6 swimming precision, PRX Life1, 013003 (2023)
2023
-
[32]
Proesmans and C
K. Proesmans and C. van den Broeck, Discrete-time ther- modynamic uncertainty relation, EPL119, 20001 (2017)
2017
-
[33]
Dechant, Multidimensional thermodynamic uncer- tainty relations, J
A. Dechant, Multidimensional thermodynamic uncer- tainty relations, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.52, 035001 (2018)
2018
-
[34]
D. M. Busiello and S. Pigolotti, Hyperaccurate cur- rents in stochastic thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. E100, 060102(R) (2019)
2019
-
[35]
K. Liu, Z. Gong, and M. Ueda, Thermodynamic un- certainty relation for arbitrary initial states, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 140602 (2020)
2020
-
[36]
J. M. Horowitz and T. R. Gingrich, Thermodynamic uncertainty relations constrain non-equilibrium fluctua- tions, Nat. Phys.16, 15 (2020)
2020
-
[37]
Koyuk and U
T. Koyuk and U. Seifert, Thermodynamic uncertainty re- lation for time-dependent driving, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 260604 (2020)
2020
-
[38]
Dechant and S.-i
A. Dechant and S.-i. Sasa, Fluctuation–response inequal- ity out of equilibrium, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.117, 6430 (2020)
2020
-
[39]
Dechant and S.-i
A. Dechant and S.-i. Sasa, Continuous time reversal and equality in the thermodynamic uncertainty relation, Phys. Rev. Res.3, L042012 (2021)
2021
-
[40]
S. K. Manikandan, D. Gupta, and S. Krishnamurthy, In- ferring entropy production from short experiments, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 120603 (2020)
2020
-
[41]
Otsubo, S
S. Otsubo, S. Ito, A. Dechant, and T. Sagawa, Estimat- ing entropy production by machine learning of short-time fluctuating currents, Phys. Rev. E101, 062106 (2020)
2020
-
[42]
Van Vu, V
T. Van Vu, V. T. Vo, and Y. Hasegawa, Entropy produc- tion estimation with optimal current, Phys. Rev. E101, 042138 (2020)
2020
-
[43]
Dechant and S
A. Dechant and S. I. Sasa, Improving thermodynamic bounds using correlations, Phys. Rev. X11, 041061 (2021)
2021
-
[44]
Rold´ an, J
E. Rold´ an, J. Barral, P. Martin, J. M. R. Parrondo, and F. J¨ ulicher, Quantifying entropy production in active fluctuations of the hair-cell bundle from time irreversibil- ity and uncertainty relations, New J. Phys.23, 083013 (2021)
2021
-
[45]
Otsubo, S
S. Otsubo, S. K. Manikandan, T. Sagawa, and S. Krish- namurthy, Estimating time-dependent entropy produc- tion from non-equilibrium trajectories, Commun. Phys. 5, 11 (2022)
2022
-
[46]
Dieball and A
C. Dieball and A. Godec, Direct route to thermodynamic uncertainty relations and their saturation, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 087101 (2023)
2023
-
[47]
Van Vu and K
T. Van Vu and K. Saito, Thermodynamic Unification of Optimal Transport: Thermodynamic Uncertainty Rela- tion, Minimum Dissipation, and Thermodynamic Speed Limits, Phys. Rev. X13, 011013 (2023)
2023
-
[48]
Pietzonka and F
P. Pietzonka and F. Coghi, Thermodynamic cost for pre- cision of general counting observables, Phys. Rev. E109, 064128 (2024)
2024
-
[49]
S. K. Manikandan, T. Ghosh, T. Mandal, A. Biswas, B. Sinha, and D. Mitra, Estimate of entropy production rate can spatiotemporally resolve the active nature of cell flickering, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 023310 (2024)
2024
-
[50]
Aslyamov, K
T. Aslyamov, K. Ptaszy´ nski, and M. Esposito, Nonequi- librium fluctuation-response relations: From identities to bounds, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 157101 (2025)
2025
-
[51]
Indo and Y
T. Indo and Y. Hasegawa, Thermodynamic uncertainty relation for generalized time-reversal observables (2025), arXiv:2509.01981 [cond-mat.stat-mech]
2025 arXiv
-
[52]
Yoshimura and S
K. Yoshimura and S. Ito, Thermodynamic uncertainty relation and thermodynamic speed limit in deterministic chemical reaction networks, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 160601 (2021)
2021
-
[53]
Ito, Stochastic thermodynamic interpretation of infor- mation geometry, Phys
S. Ito, Stochastic thermodynamic interpretation of infor- mation geometry, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 030605 (2018)
2018
-
[54]
Shiraishi, K
N. Shiraishi, K. Funo, and K. Saito, Speed limit for clas- sical stochastic processes, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 070601 (2018)
2018
-
[55]
V. T. Vo, T. Van Vu, and Y. Hasegawa, Unified approach to classical speed limit and thermodynamic uncertainty relation, Phys. Rev. E102, 062132 (2020)
2020
-
[56]
Falasco and M
G. Falasco and M. Esposito, Dissipation-time uncertainty relation, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 120604 (2020)
2020
-
[57]
Ito and A
S. Ito and A. Dechant, Stochastic Time Evolution, In- formation Geometry, and the Cram´ er-Rao Bound, Phys. Rev. X10, 021056 (2020)
2020
-
[58]
I. A. Mart ´ ınez, G. Bisker, J. M. Horowitz, and J. M. R. Parrondo, Inferring broken detailed balance in the ab- sence of observable currents, Nat. Commun.10, 3542 (2019)
2019
-
[59]
D. J. Skinner and J. Dunkel, Estimating entropy pro- duction from waiting time distributions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 198101 (2021)
2021
-
[60]
Ehrich, Tightest bound on hidden entropy production from partially observed dynamics, J
J. Ehrich, Tightest bound on hidden entropy production from partially observed dynamics, J. Stat. Mech.2021, 083214 (2021)
2021
-
[61]
van der Meer, B
J. van der Meer, B. Ertel, and U. Seifert, Thermodynamic inference in partially accessible markov networks: A uni- fying perspective from transition-based waiting time dis- tributions, Phys. Rev. X12, 031025 (2022)
2022
-
[62]
P. E. Harunari, A. Dutta, M. Polettini, and E. Roldan, What to learn from a few visible transitions’ statistics?, Phys. Rev. X12, 041026 (2022)
2022
-
[63]
van der Meer, J
J. van der Meer, J. Deg¨ unther, and U. Seifert, Time- resolved statistics of snippets as general framework for model-free entropy estimators, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 257101 (2023)
2023
-
[64]
K. Blom, K. Song, E. Vouga, A. Godec, and D. E. Makarov, Milestoning estimators of dissipation in sys- tems observed at a coarse resolution, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.121, e2318333121 (2024)
2024
-
[65]
A. M. Maier, J. Deg¨ unther, J. van der Meer, and U. Seifert, Inferring kinetics and entropy production from observable transitions in partially accessible, periodically driven markov networks, J. Stat. Phys.191, 104 (2024)
2024
-
[66]
P. E. Harunari, C. E. Fiore, and A. C. Barato, Infer- ence of entropy production for periodically driven sys- tems, Phys. Rev. E110, 064126 (2024)
2024
-
[67]
Kapustin, A
U. Kapustin, A. Ghosal, and G. Bisker, Utilizing time- series measurements for entropy-production estimation in partially observed systems, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 023039 (2024)
2024
-
[68]
Ertel and U
B. Ertel and U. Seifert, Estimator of entropy produc- tion for partially accessible markov networks based on the observation of blurred transitions, Phys. Rev. E109, 054109 (2024)
2024
-
[69]
Deg¨ unther, J
J. Deg¨ unther, J. van der Meer, and U. Seifert, General theory for localizing the where and when of entropy pro- duction meets single-molecule experiments, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.121, e2405371121 (2024)
2024
-
[70]
A. M. Maier, U. Seifert, and J. van der Meer, From ob- served transitions to hidden paths in markov networks, 7 Phys. Rev. Res.7, 033067 (2025)
2025
-
[71]
D. T. Gillespie, Exact stochastic simulation of coupled chemical reactions, J. Phys. Chem.81, 2340 (1977)
1977
-
[72]
Koza, General technique of calculating the drift veloc- ity and diffusion coefficient in arbitrary periodic systems, J
Z. Koza, General technique of calculating the drift veloc- ity and diffusion coefficient in arbitrary periodic systems, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.32, 7637 (1999)
1999
-
[73]
N. Ohga, S. Ito, and A. Kolchinsky, Thermodynamic bound on the asymmetry of cross-correlations, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 077101 (2023)
2023
-
[74]
Ferri-Cortes, J
M. Ferri-Cortes, J. A. Almanzaa-Marrero, R. Lopez, R. Zambrini, and G. Manzano, Conditional fluctuation theorems and entropy production for monitored quan- tum systems under imperfect detection, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.7.013077 (2025)
2025 doi
-
[75]
van der Meer and K
J. van der Meer and K. Saito, Thermodynamic bounds and error correction for faulty coarse graining (2025), arXiv:2507.02463 [cond-mat.stat-mech]
2025
-
[76]
R. Bao, N. Ohga, and S. Ito, Measuring irreversibility by counting: a random coarse-graining framework (2025), arXiv:2508.11586 [cond-mat.stat-mech]
2025
Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.