Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 43 references

Entangled criticality and irreversibility in random Markov dynamics

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a two-parameter random Markov ensemble captures both critical slowing down and broken detailed balance, and that human resting-state fMRI and EEG both sit near the predicted critical locus.

desk verdict The γ-dependent critical locus is a solid theoretical extension, but the MLE on column-normalized data is mismatched to the Q-likelihood, so the reported brain-data ε and γ may be gauge artifacts. read the letter →

arxiv 2602.04905 v2 pith:A5WCSGTA submitted 2026-02-03 cond-mat.dis-nn physics.bio-ph

Faheem Mosam , Eric De Giuli This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.dis-nnphysics.bio-ph
keywords randomMarkovmatricescriticalitybrokendetailedbalanceentropyproductionpredictiveinformationmatrixtheorybraindynamicsmaximumlikelihoodinference
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

The paper extends a previously studied random Markov ensemble to two parameters: heterogeneity ε, which controls how uneven the transition rates are, and asymmetry γ, which correlates forward and backward rates. It derives a critical locus ε_c(γ,N) at which relaxation times diverge and spectral universality breaks down. A central finding is that most observables—entropy production, predictive information, and relaxation time—depend strongly on ε but only weakly on γ, except near the symmetric limit γ→−1. Applying maximum-likelihood inference to human fMRI and EEG resting-state data, the paper finds that both modalities fall near the predicted critical locus with similar parameters, supporting a 'super-universality' of human brain dynamics. The data means are captured by the null model, but the data show substantially larger variability than the ensemble predicts, indicating subject-specific structure beyond random expectations.

What carries the argument

The central object is the two-parameter maximum-entropy ensemble on transition matrices, with Q_ab log-normally distributed and pairwise correlation γ between Q_ab and Q_ba; heterogeneity is measured by h(Q) = (1/N²)Σ log²(Q_ab/Q) and log-asymmetry by a(Q). The argument for criticality is carried by the spectral-edge formula λ* (Eq. 15), obtained by mapping the fluctuations of M to a Gaussian random matrix ensemble with an elliptical law, using a law-of-large-numbers approximation M_ab ≈ Q_ab/(N⟨Q⟩) and a shift lemma showing that the rank-one shift in M does not change eigenvalues. The empirical application uses maximum-likelihood equations for ε, γ, and q, solved by iteration, to infer para

What would settle it

Compute the finite-N spectral edge of the log-normal ensemble for γ≠0 in the small-ε phase (e.g., N=64, ε=0.1 ε_c): if the largest real eigenvalue departs from λ* of Eq. 15 by more than O(1/N), the transferred elliptical-law bound that sets the critical locus fails. Alternatively, an independent resting-state fMRI or EEG dataset whose inferred (ε, γ) falls far from the predicted locus (e.g., γ>0 or ε log(N+1) not near 0.5) would falsify the super-universality claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper introduces a two-parameter ensemble of random discrete-time Markov models in which log transition rates are drawn from a correlated log-normal distribution, with heterogeneity ε and pairwise asymmetry γ. Using the elliptical law for Gaussian random matrices and a shift lemma, it derives the spectral-edge formula λ* (Eq. 15) and identifies the critical locus λ*=1, where the largest real part of the eigenvalues reaches unity and relaxation times diverge as ε→ε_c(γ,N). Below this locus the spectrum reorganizes into 'bicycle spokes'. The paper shows numerically and analytically that entropy production, predictive information, and mean relaxation time are controlled primarily by ε, with

Load-bearing premise

The predicted critical line assumes that the heavy-tailed log-normal transition-rate distribution can be replaced, for locating the spectral edge, by a Gaussian ensemble matched only in mean and pairwise correlation—an approximation the authors note is not proven in the small-ε phase.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the predicted critical locus is correct, relaxation-time divergence and spectral universality breakdown occur together in any Markov model with log-normal heterogeneity and pairwise asymmetry, giving a concrete null model for criticality.
  • Entropy production, predictive information, and relaxation times are largely set by heterogeneity ε, so empirical changes in irreversibility need not imply changes in microscopic time-asymmetry.
  • Distance from criticality and irreversibility measures are strongly correlated in this ensemble, making scalar irreversibility metrics ill-conditioned for inferring asymmetry without pairwise or cycle statistics.
  • Human resting-state fMRI and EEG both sit just to the critical side of the predicted locus with similar (ε, γ), supporting a 'super-universality' of human brain dynamics across measurement modalities.
  • Data variability exceeding ensemble expectations provides a quantitative way to detect subject-specific structure beyond the null model.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If heterogeneity, not asymmetry, drives most observables, then reports of heightened irreversibility in conscious versus unconscious states could be reinterpreted as changes in effective heterogeneity rather than stronger microscopic driving—a distinction testable by computing pairwise forward/backward statistics on inferred Markov models.
  • The same ensemble could serve as a null model for other biological time series (e.g., heart-rate dynamics, gene-regulatory networks) where criticality and nonequilibrium are both claimed; a similar collapse onto the critical locus would generalize the proposed super-universality beyond the brain.
  • The MLE framework could be extended to include subject-level covariates (age, disease, task) to test whether the residual variability correlates with phenotype; the current EEG dataset shows no systematic group differences, but the authors did not control for age or medication.
  • A rigorous distinguished limit (N→∞ with ε/ε_c fixed) would either confirm or move the predicted locus; until then, the data comparison should be read as a quantitative but approximate test.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a two-parameter ensemble of random discrete-time Markov models, extending an earlier heterogeneous ensemble by adding an asymmetry parameter γ that correlates forward and backward log-rates. The central theoretical object is the critical locus ε_c(γ,N) obtained in Eq. (15) by moment-matching the log-normal Q ensemble to the Gaussian elliptical law of Ref. [28] and using a shift lemma to transfer the spectral edge to the stochastic matrix M. The authors study relaxation times, entropy production, and predictive information across this ensemble, finding that most observables depend strongly on ε but only weakly on γ away from the symmetric limit. They then apply maximum-likelihood inference to human fMRI and EEG data, reporting that both datasets fall near the predicted critical locus with moderately negative γ (fMRI: mean ε log(N+1)≈0.53, γ≈−0.32; EEG: 0.39, −0.42), which they interpret as evidence for a "super-universality" of human resting-state brain dynamics. Numerical simulations in Figs. 2–5 validate several ensemble predictions, and the paper explicitly acknowledges that a rigorous distinguished limit for the critical locus remains to be shown.

Significance. If correct, the paper provides a useful null model that unifies critical slowing down and broken detailed balance in a single two-parameter ensemble, with falsifiable predictions about spectral reorganization, entropy production, and predictive information. The numerical validation of the critical locus (Figs. 2–3) and the observation that entropy production is controlled primarily by heterogeneity rather than by γ are valuable and extend the earlier γ=0 results in a natural way. The application to two independent neuroimaging datasets is ambitious and the claim of a common region in the ε–γ plane is provocative. However, the empirical support for this claim rests on a maximum-likelihood procedure whose identifiability is not established (Sec. II.A), and the theoretical locus itself relies on a moment-matching step whose quantitative accuracy for log-normal entries at finite N is not assessed beyond a few simulation points. The paper is transparent about the latter limitation, but the inference issue is not acknowledged and is load-bearing for the main data conclusion.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II.A, Eq. (22)] The log-likelihood is written for the primitive matrix Q, whereas the data pipeline (HMM-MAR) provides the column-normalized matrix M_ab = Q_ab / S_b with S_b = Σ_c Q_cb. The likelihood contains no integral over the N unobserved column scales S_b, and it is not invariant under Q_ab → λ_b Q_ab: the log-quadratic terms in Eq. (4) and the h, a, and d statistics in Eq. (22) all shift under x → x + log λ_b. Consequently the MLE equations (23)–(25) select a gauge for Q from M without justification. The validation sentence in Sec. II.A ("we confirmed ... reproduces imposed parameter values") does not close this gap unless the test was performed on M rather than Q. This is severe for the fMRI comparison because N≈11 and ε≈0.2 implies strong column-sum fluctuations, so the replacement S_b ≈ N⟨Q⟩ is badly violated. If the gauge choice is biased, the reported ε log(N+1)≈0.53, γ≈−0.32 (and the analo
  2. [Sec. I.B, Eqs. (14)–(15)] The critical locus is derived by applying the Gaussian elliptical law of Ref. [28] to P_ij ∝ Q_ij/⟨Q⟩ − 1 after matching only the first two moments of the log-normal entries. Ref. [28] is a Gaussian result, and log-normal entries are heavy-tailed in the small-ε phase; the paper itself notes that the law-of-large-numbers approximation M_ab ≈ Q_ab/(N⟨Q⟩) "will break down in the small-ε phase" and that a rigorous distinguished limit "remains to be shown." The numerical validation in Figs. 2–3 supports the locus at N=32 and N=64, but the empirical application uses this finite-N locus at N≈11, where heavy-tail and finite-N corrections may be substantial. The authors should quantify the sensitivity of ε_c(γ,N) to the Gaussian-moment-matching assumption, for example by comparing Eq. (15) with simulations using alternative heavy-tailed positive distributions or by a finite-N crossover analysis.
  3. [Sec. II.B, Fig. 8] The claim that human fMRI data exhibit significantly enhanced variability compared with ensemble expectations is based on width ratios at 10% of the histogram maximum, computed for a single representative γ=−0.3 and without error bars or bootstrap intervals. The data points in Fig. 7 show a broad distribution of γ values, so the appropriate null model should either integrate over the fitted (ε,γ) distribution or at least report the sampling uncertainty of the width ratios. As it stands, the conclusion that the spread "does not reflect natural variability" at any putative parameter set is not quantitatively supported; part of the apparent excess variability may simply reflect the spread of γ across subjects. This concern does not affect the central theoretical construction, but it weakens one of the paper's two main empirical conclusions.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. IA, Eq. (4)] The constant q is introduced as a scale but its role is not fully specified. Eq. (2) and Eq. (3) depend on q only through scale, whereas Eq. (22) treats q as a free parameter. Please clarify whether q is identifiable from M or whether it absorbs part of the column-scale gauge in the inference procedure.
  2. [Sec. II.B] The abstract reports mean γ≈−0.32 for fMRI, while the text of Sec. II.B states "the mean value for γ lies at γ≈−0.4." These numbers should be reconciled.
  3. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption refers to "solid" and "dashed" curves but does not specify which is which. The figure legend should be reproduced in the caption for clarity.
  4. [Eq. (18) and Fig. 4] The large-ε estimate ⟨Σ̇⟩/k_B ≈ (1+γ)/(2ε) should state explicitly that it assumes π_i≈1/N and M_ij≈Q_ij/(N⟨Q⟩), and that the limit is ε≫1 at fixed γ. The figure comparison at ε≈ε_c includes substantial corrections, and the dotted lines might be misinterpreted as a general formula.
  5. [References] Refs. [17] and [40] appear to be the same paper (Vidaurre et al., NeuroImage 2018). Please deduplicate. Also, the duplicate NeuroImage citation in [40] should be checked.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: critical locus derives from external RMT and is validated by simulation; self-citations to [14] are prior, non-load-bearing support.

full rationale

The central derivation is not circular by construction. Eq.15 is obtained by matching the first two moments of the normalized primitive matrix P (Eq.14) to the Gaussian ensemble of Ref.[28] — an external, non-overlapping RMT result — and by a stated law-of-large-numbers replacement M_ab ≈ Q_ab/(N⟨Q⟩); the resulting γ-dependent locus is then checked against direct numerical simulation (Figs.2-3), so it is not an input fitted to the data. The γ=0 limit reduces to the earlier result of Ref.[14], a distinct prior publication by overlapping authors, but the new γ-dependence does not reduce to that citation, and the base case is independently reproducible. The empirical section infers (ε,γ) from data by MLE and compares against the theoretically computed λ*=1 locus; this is a genuine prediction test, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The manuscript itself flags the main non-circular limitations: after Eq.15 it states the rigorous distinguished limit 'remains to be shown,' and the likelihood in Eq.22 is written for the primitive matrix Q while the data pipeline supplies column-normalized transition matrices M=Q/S_b, with no integration over the unobserved column scales S_b; as the accompanying skeptic notes, this identification/gauge issue could bias the reported empirical (ε,γ) values. Those are correctness and identification concerns, not cases where the output equals the input by definition, so they do not raise the circularity score above the 0-2 band.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on two fitted parameters (ε and γ), a gauge scale q, and several modeling assumptions. No new physical entities are introduced. The most fragile inputs are the RMT universality assumption and the Markovian representation of brain data.

free parameters (3)
  • epsilon (heterogeneity) = fMRI ε≈0.21 (ε log(N+1)=0.53, N≈11.4); EEG ε≈0.076 (ε log(N+1)=0.39, N≈165)
    Central ensemble parameter controlling the spread of transition rates; inferred from data by MLE and used to evaluate proximity to the predicted critical locus.
  • gamma (asymmetry) = fMRI γ≈-0.32; EEG γ≈-0.42
    Correlation between forward and backward transition rates; inferred from data by MLE and used to locate each subject in the ε–γ plane.
  • q (log-scale reference) = not reported
    Appears in the likelihood and is fitted via Eq.25, but the overall scale drops out of M; it is a gauge parameter rather than a physically meaningful constant.
assumptions (4)
  • ad hoc to paper The Gaussian elliptical law of Ref.[28] applies to the log-normal Q ensemble after matching first and second moments.
    Sec.I.B: 'We will apply the result of [28] to the matrix P...' and the moment-matching at Eq.14–15. The authors acknowledge the rigorous distinguished limit remains to be shown.
  • ad hoc to paper The law-of-large-numbers approximation M_ab ≈ Q_ab/(N⟨Q⟩) is valid near the transition.
    Sec.I.B: 'by the law of large numbers... This will break down in the small-ϵ phase but is sufficient to locate the transition point from above.' This approximation enters the critical-locus derivation.
  • domain assumption The discrete-time entropy production formula with M in place of W is a meaningful measure of broken detailed balance.
    Sec.I.C: the authors note that Eq.17 has a strict interpretation only under stochastic thermodynamics, but they use it as a convenient measure for any Markov process.
  • domain assumption HMM-MAR state sequences from fMRI and EEG provide faithful discrete-time Markov models of brain dynamics.
    Sec.II.A–II.C: the entire empirical application assumes that the inferred state sequences and transition matrices adequately represent the underlying neural dynamics.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Entangled criticality and irreversibility in random Markov dynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/A5WCSGTA

@misc{pith2026260204905,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Entangled criticality and irreversibility in random Markov dynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/A5WCSGTA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2602.04905}
}
abstract

We introduce a two-parameter ensemble of random discrete-time Markov models that simultaneously captures critical slowing down and broken detailed balance. Extending a previously studied heterogeneous Markov ensemble, we incorporate correlations between forward and backward transition rates through a single asymmetry parameter $\gamma$, while heterogeneity is controlled by $\epsilon$. Using results from random matrix theory, we identify a critical locus $\epsilon_c(\gamma,N)$ at which relaxation times diverge and spectral universality breaks down, in Markov models with $N$ states. We characterize the behavior of entropy production, predictive information, and relaxation dynamics across the ensemble, showing that many observables depend strongly on heterogeneity but only weakly on asymmetry, except near the symmetric limit. Applying maximum-likelihood inference to human fMRI and EEG data, we find that both modalities operate near the predicted critical locus and occupy a similar region of the $\epsilon-\gamma$ plane, supporting a super-universality of human brain dynamics. While ensemble averages are well captured by the null model, empirical data exhibit substantially enhanced variability, indicating subject-specific structure beyond random expectations. Our results unify criticality and nonequilibrium measures within a single framework and clarify their intertwined role in the analysis of complex biological dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.04905 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Predicted critical locus at which long relaxation times [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Transition rate spectra at varying [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Expected value of relaxation time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Expected value of entropy production rate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Predictive information as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Probability distributions at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Phase space plot of human fMRI data, taken at wake [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Probability distributions obtained from human fMRI data. (a) Relaxation time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Phase space plot of human EEG data, taken at wake [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Probability distributions obtained from human EEG data. (a) Relaxation time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [28]

    Spectrum of large random asymmetric ma- trices,

    H. J. Sommers, A. Crisanti, H. Sompolinsky, and Y. Stein, “Spectrum of large random asymmetric ma- trices,”Physical review letters, vol. 60, no. 19, p. 1895, 1988

    1988

  2. [1]

    Broken detailed balance and non-equilibrium dy- namics in living systems: a review,

    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,”Reports on Progress in Physics, vol. 81, no. 6, p. 066601, 2018

    2018

  3. [2]

    Nonequilibrium physics in biology,

    X. Fang, K. Kruse, T. Lu, and J. Wang, “Nonequilibrium physics in biology,”Reviews of Modern Physics, vol. 91, no. 4, p. 045004, 2019

    2019

  4. [3]

    Nonequilibrium brain dynamics as a signature of consciousness,

    Y. Sanz Perl, H. Bocaccio, C. Pallavicini, I. P´ erez- Ipi˜ na, S. Laureys, H. Laufs, M. Kringelbach, G. Deco, and E. Tagliazucchi, “Nonequilibrium brain dynamics as a signature of consciousness,”Phys. Rev. E, vol. 104, p. 014411, Jul 2021

    2021

  5. [4]

    The lack of temporal brain dynamics asymmetry as a signature of impaired consciousness states,

    E. G-Guzm´ an, Y. S. Perl, J. Vohryzek, A. Escrichs, D. Manasova, B. T¨ urker, E. Tagliazucchi, M. Kringel- bach, J. D. Sitt, and G. Deco, “The lack of temporal brain dynamics asymmetry as a signature of impaired consciousness states,”Interface Focus, vol. 13, no. 3, p. 20220086, 2023

    2023

  6. [5]

    Broken detailed balance and entropy pro- duction in the human brain,

    C. W.Lynn, E. J. Cornblath, L. Papadopoulos, and D. S. Bassett, “Broken detailed balance and entropy pro- duction in the human brain,”Biophysics and computa- tional biology, 2021

    2021

  7. [6]

    The criticality hypothesis: how local cor- tical networks might optimize information processing,

    J. M. Beggs, “The criticality hypothesis: how local cor- tical networks might optimize information processing,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, vol. 366, pp. 329–343, 2007

    2007

  8. [7]

    Self-organized criticality as a fun- damental property of neural systems,

    J. Hesse and T. Gross, “Self-organized criticality as a fun- damental property of neural systems,”Frontiers in sys- tems neuroscience, vol. 8, p. 166, 09 2014

    2014

Show all 43 references
  1. [8]

    Quasicritical brain dynamics on a nonequilib- rium widom line,

    R. V. Williams-Garc ´ ıa, M. Moore, J. M. Beggs, and G. Ortiz, “Quasicritical brain dynamics on a nonequilib- rium widom line,”Phys. Rev. E, vol. 90, p. 062714, Dec 2014

    2014

  2. [9]

    Evidence for quasicritical brain dynamics,

    L. J. Fosque, R. V. Williams-Garc ´ ıa, J. M. Beggs, and G. Ortiz, “Evidence for quasicritical brain dynamics,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 126, p. 098101, Mar 2021

    2021

  3. [10]

    Fad- ing signatures of critical brain dynamics during sustained wakefulness in humans,

    C. Meisel, E. Olbrich, O. Shriki, and P. Achermann, “Fad- ing signatures of critical brain dynamics during sustained wakefulness in humans,”Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 33, no. 44, pp. 17363–17372, 2013

    2013

  4. [11]

    Chaos in random neural networks,

    H. Sompolinsky, A. Crisanti, and H.-J. Sommers, “Chaos in random neural networks,”Physical review letters, vol. 61, no. 3, p. 259, 1988

    1988

  5. [12]

    Transition to chaos in random networks with cell-type-specific connec- tivity,

    J. Aljadeff, M. Stern, and T. Sharpee, “Transition to chaos in random networks with cell-type-specific connec- tivity,”Physical review letters, vol. 114, no. 8, p. 088101, 2015

    2015

  6. [13]

    Transition to chaos in random neuronal networks,

    J. Kadmon and H. Sompolinsky, “Transition to chaos in random neuronal networks,”Physical Review X, vol. 5, no. 4, p. 041030, 2015

    2015

  7. [14]

    Breakdown of random matrix universality in markov models,

    F. Mosam, D. Vidaurre, and E. De Giuli, “Breakdown of random matrix universality in markov models,”Phys. Rev. E, vol. 104, p. 024305, Aug 2021

    2021

  8. [15]

    Brain network dynamics are hierarchically organized in time,

    D. Vidaurre, S. M. Smith, and M. W. Woolrich, “Brain network dynamics are hierarchically organized in time,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 114, no. 48, pp. 12827– 12832, 2017

    2017

  9. [16]

    Characterizing and differen- tiating brain state dynamics via hidden markov models,

    J. Ou, L. Xie, C. Jin, X. Li, D. Zhu, R. Jiang, Y. Chen, J. Zhang, L. Li, and T. Liu, “Characterizing and differen- tiating brain state dynamics via hidden markov models,” Brain Topography, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 666–679, 2015

    2015

  10. [18]

    Discovery of key whole-brain transitions and dynamics during hu- man wakefulness and non-rem sleep,

    A. B. A. Stevner, D. Vidaurre, J. Cabral, K. Rapuano, S. F. V. Nielsen, E. Tagliazucchi, H. Laufs, P. Vu- ust, G. Deco, and M. L. Kringelbach, “Discovery of key whole-brain transitions and dynamics during hu- man wakefulness and non-rem sleep,”Nature Commu- nications, vol. 10,...

    2019

  11. [19]

    Using hidden markov models to uncover underlying states in neu- roimaging data for a design ideation task,

    K. Goucher-Lambert and C. McComb, “Using hidden markov models to uncover underlying states in neu- roimaging data for a design ideation task,”Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engi- neering Design, vol. 1, pp. 1873–1882, 2019

    2019

  12. [20]

    A new model for simultaneous dimension- ality reduction and time-varying functional connectivity estimation,

    D. Vidaurre, “A new model for simultaneous dimension- ality reduction and time-varying functional connectivity estimation,”PLOS Computational Biology, vol. 17, pp. 1– 20, 2021

    2021

  13. [21]

    Stochastic thermodynamics under coarse graining,

    M. Esposito, “Stochastic thermodynamics under coarse graining,”Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, vol. 85, no. 4, p. 041125, 2012

    2012

  14. [22]

    Local detailed balance across scales: From diffusions to jump processes and be- yond,

    G. Falasco and M. Esposito, “Local detailed balance across scales: From diffusions to jump processes and be- yond,”Physical Review E, vol. 103, no. 4, p. 042114, 2021

    2021

  15. [23]

    Violation of local detailed bal- ance upon lumping despite a clear timescale separation,

    D. Hartich and A. Godec, “Violation of local detailed bal- ance upon lumping despite a clear timescale separation,” Physical Review Research, vol. 5, no. 3, p. L032017, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    Complex systems: a physicist’s viewpoint,

    G. Parisi, “Complex systems: a physicist’s viewpoint,” Physica A, vol. 263, pp. 557–564, 1999

    1999

  17. [25]

    Circular law theorem for random markov matrices,

    C. Bordenave, P. Caputo, and D. Chafa ¨ ı, “Circular law theorem for random markov matrices,”Probability The- ory and Related Fields, vol. 152, no. 3-4, pp. 751–779, 2012

    2012

  18. [26]

    Circular law,

    V. L. Girko, “Circular law,”Theory of Probability & Its Applications, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 694–706, 1985

    1985

  19. [27]

    Random matrices: the circular law,

    T. Tao and V. Vu, “Random matrices: the circular law,” Communications in Contemporary Mathematics, vol. 10, no. 02, pp. 261–307, 2008

    2008

  20. [29]

    Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation the- orems and molecular machines,

    U. Seifert, “Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation the- orems and molecular machines,”Reports on progress in physics, vol. 75, no. 12, p. 126001, 2012

    2012

  21. [30]

    A solution to the reversible embedding problem for finite markov chains,

    C. Jia, “A solution to the reversible embedding problem for finite markov chains,”Statistics & Probability Letters, vol. 116, pp. 122–130, 2016

    2016

  22. [31]

    The embedding problem for markov matri- ces,

    M. Casanellas, J. Fern´ andez-S´ anchez, and J. Roca- Lacostena, “The embedding problem for markov matri- ces,”Publicacions matematiques, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 411– 445, 2023

    2023

  23. [32]

    Fermionic the- ory of nonequilibrium steady states,

    E. De Giuli and M. Shimada, “Fermionic the- ory of nonequilibrium steady states,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.10744, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  24. [33]

    Complexity through nonextensivity,

    W. Bialek, I. Nemenman, and N. Tishby, “Complexity through nonextensivity,”Physica A: Statistical Mechan- ics and its Applications, vol. 302, no. 1-4, pp. 89–99, 2001

    2001

  25. [34]

    Predictability, complexity, and learning,

    W. Bialek, I. Nemenman, and N. Tishby, “Predictability, complexity, and learning,”Neural computation, vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 2409–2463, 2001

    2001

  26. [35]

    HMM-MAR: Hidden markov model with multivariate autoregressive (HMM-MAR)

    D. Viduarre, “HMM-MAR: Hidden markov model with multivariate autoregressive (HMM-MAR).” GitHub, n.d. 11

  27. [36]

    Resting-state fmri in the human connectome project,

    S. M. Smith, C. F. Beckmann, J. Andersson, E. J. Auer- bach, J. Bijsterbosch, G. Douaud, E. Duff, D. A. Fein- berg, L. Griffanti, M. P. Harms, M. Kelly, T. Laumann, K. L. Miller, S. Moeller, S. Petersen, J. Power, G. Salimi- Khorshidi, A. Z. Snyder, A. T. Vu, M. W. Woolrich, J...

    2013

  28. [37]

    A dataset of scalp eeg recordings of alzheimer’s disease, frontotemporal dementia and healthy subjects from rou- tine eeg,

    A. Miltiadous, K. D. Tzimourta, T. Afrantou, P. Ioanni- dis, N. Grigoriadis, D. G. Tsalikakis, P. Angelidis, M. G. Tsipouras, E. Glavas, N. Giannakeas, and A. T. Tzallas, “A dataset of scalp eeg recordings of alzheimer’s disease, frontotemporal dementia and healthy subjects fr...

    2023

  29. [38]

    A dataset of eeg recordings from: Alzheimer’s disease, frontotemporal dementia and healthy subjects (version 1.0.7)

    OpenNeuro Dataset ds004504, “A dataset of eeg recordings from: Alzheimer’s disease, frontotemporal dementia and healthy subjects (version 1.0.7).”https:// openneuro.org/datasets/ds004504/versions/1.0.7, 2023

    2023

  30. [39]

    Spectrally re- solved fast transient brain states in electrophysiological data,

    D. Vidaurre, A. J. Quinn, A. P. Baker, D. Dupret, A. Tejero-Cantero, and M. W. Woolrich, “Spectrally re- solved fast transient brain states in electrophysiological data,”NeuroImage, vol. 126, pp. 81–95, 2016

    2016

  31. [40]

    Discovering dynamic brain networks from big data in rest and task,

    D. Vidaurre, R. Abeysuriya, R. Becker, A. J. Quinn, F. Alfaro-Almagro, S. M. Smith, and M. W. Woolrich, “Discovering dynamic brain networks from big data in rest and task,”NeuroImage, vol. 180, pp. 646–656, 2018

    2018

  32. [41]

    A new model for simultaneous dimension- ality reduction and time-varying functional connectivity estimation,

    D. Vidaurre, “A new model for simultaneous dimension- ality reduction and time-varying functional connectivity estimation,”PLOS Computational Biology, vol. 17, no. 6, p. e1008580, 2021

    2021

  33. [42]

    Spon- taneous cortical activity transiently organises into fre- quency specific phase-coupling networks,

    D. Vidaurre, L. T. Hunt, A. J. Quinn, B. A. E. Hunt, M. J. Brookes, A. C. Nobre, and M. W. Woolrich, “Spon- taneous cortical activity transiently organises into fre- quency specific phase-coupling networks,”Nature Com- munications, vol. 9, p. 2987, 2018

    2018

  34. [43]

    Temporally unconstrained decoding re- veals consistent but time-varying stages of stimulus pro- cessing,

    D. Vidaurre, N. Myers, M. Stokes, A. C. Nobre, and M. W. Woolrich, “Temporally unconstrained decoding re- veals consistent but time-varying stages of stimulus pro- cessing,”Cerebral Cortex, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 863–874, 2019

    2019

  35. [44]

    Task-evoked dynamic net- work analysis through hidden Markov modeling,

    A. J. Quinn, D. Vidaurre, R. Abeysuriya, R. Becker, A. C. Nobre, and M. W. Woolrich, “Task-evoked dynamic net- work analysis through hidden Markov modeling,”Fron- tiers in Neuroscience, vol. 12, p. 603, 2018

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.