Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 69 references

Lower bounds on entropy production from dynamical correlation functions

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The entropy production rate is bounded from below by the time-asymmetry of two-time correlation functions.

desk verdict Two solid new correlation-based lower bounds on entropy production, with a fixable algebra error in the optimization formula (Eq. 54) that must be corrected. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.03619 v1 pith:ZXOWNAPQ submitted 2026-08-04 cond-mat.stat-mech

Paul Raux , Alexander M. Maier , Udo Seifert This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mech
keywords entropyproductionthermodynamicinferencecoarse-grainingcorrelationfunctionsnon-equilibriumsteadystatestochasticthermodynamicsMarkovprocessesoverdampedLangevindynamics
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 proves that the entropy production rate of any system with Markovian underlying dynamics, including overdamped Langevin dynamics, is bounded from below by a simple ratio built from the time-asymmetry of two-time correlation functions of two arbitrary coarse-grained observables. In a nonequilibrium steady state the bound holds for every correlation lag; for time-dependent processes it holds in the vanishing-lag limit. Because correlation functions are routinely accessible in experiments, this gives a model-free, operational estimate of irreversibility in partially observed systems. The bound can be tightened by applying constant shifts to the observables, and its quality is illustrated on a coarse-grained Markov network and an overdamped Brownian particle on a ring.

What carries the argument

The argument rewrites the correlation asymmetry $\chi_{A,B}(t,\tau)$ as a sum over current-like quantities $J_{\alpha\beta}$ between observed mesostates, then applies a chain of inequalities: Cauchy-Schwarz to separate the asymmetry from a correlation-derived denominator $D_{A,B}$, the elementary inequality $(a-b)/(a+b)\le \ln(a/b)/2$ to connect these currents to a Kullback-Leibler divergence, and the log-sum inequality to coarse-grain this divergence down to the observable level. In the steady state, the final divergence equals $\tau\sigma$ by the path-weight fluctuation theorem; for time-dependent processes, the short-time expansion of the propagator makes the same divergence equal to $\sigma(t)$ in the limit $\tau\to0$.

What would settle it

Simulate a three-state Markov network with known transition rates and a coarse-grained pair of observables; compute the two-time correlations exactly or with high statistics, evaluate $\hat\sigma_{A,B}(\tau)$, and compare it with the true entropy production rate. Any case with $\hat\sigma_{A,B}(\tau)>\sigma$ (or $\hat\sigma_{A,B}(t)>\sigma(t)$ in the time-dependent limit) would refute the bound.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that for any Markov process satisfying local detailed balance, the estimator $\hat\sigma_{A,B}(\tau) = \frac{2}{\tau}\frac{\chi_{A,B}(\tau)^2}{D_{A,B}(\tau)}$ — where $\chi_{A,B}$ is the antisymmetric part of the two-time correlation function $\langle A(0)B(\tau)\rangle$ and $D_{A,B}$ is an accessible combination of correlation functions — is a lower bound on the mean entropy production rate $\sigma$ in a non-equilibrium steady state for arbitrary lag $\tau$. For time-dependent processes, the same estimator in the limit $\tau\to0$ bounds the instantaneous entropy production rate $\sigma(t)$. This result holds whether the observed states are fully resolved or coarse-grained into mesostates, and it requires no knowledge of the hidden dynamics.

Load-bearing premise

The hidden microscopic dynamics must be a Markov process obeying local detailed balance, so that the entropy production formula and the path-weight fluctuation theorem apply.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In a nonequilibrium steady state, a lower bound on entropy production follows from correlation functions at any single lag, so experimental data with limited sampling rates still yield a valid bound.
  • For time-dependent relaxation or periodic driving, the bound holds instantaneously in the vanishing-lag limit, requiring only the short-time slope of correlation functions.
  • Constant shifts of the observables leave the correlation asymmetry invariant while the denominator has a unique global minimum, so the bound can be optimized analytically by a computed shift (Eq. 53).
  • The bound applies to discrete Markov chains and to overdamped Langevin dynamics, including partially observed or coarse-grained versions, because the latter arise as limits of the former.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The vanishing-lag estimator is essentially a differential measurement of time-reversal asymmetry; this suggests that experiments with fast sampling, such as fluorescence correlation spectroscopy or single-molecule tracking, could extract dissipation from the slope of correlation functions without resolving hidden states.
  • The optimization over constant shifts hints that the tightest bound for given observables may not come from zero-mean observables, and that a data-driven scan over shifts could be a practical protocol for tightening thermodynamic estimates.
  • Because the proof only needs the path-weight structure at the underlying level, analogous bounds might hold for other divergence-based irreversibility measures or for higher-order correlation functions, though the paper does not claim this.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript derives two lower bounds on the entropy production rate (EPR) of a partially observed Markovian system in terms of the time-asymmetry of two-time correlation functions of two arbitrary coarse-grained observables A and B. In a non-equilibrium steady state (NESS), Eq. (30) gives σ̂_{A,B}(τ)=(2/τ)χ_{A,B}(τ)^2/D_{A,B}(τ) ≤ σ for any lag τ; for time-dependent processes, the short-lag limit of the same expression bounds the instantaneous EPR, Eq. (34). The derivation combines Cauchy-Schwarz, a logarithmic inequality, the log-sum inequality, and the path-weight fluctuation theorem. The paper also analyzes tightness, proposes an analytic optimization of the NESS bound by constant shifts of the observables, and illustrates the bounds on a four-state Markov network and an overdamped Langevin particle on a ring.

Significance. If correct, the two inequalities are attractive additions to the thermodynamic-inference toolbox: they require only two-time correlation functions, allow coarse-grained observables, and need no fitting parameters. The NESS bound holding for arbitrary lag and the time-dependent bound being available for relaxation and driven processes are genuinely useful. The derivations of Eqs. (30) and (34) are transparent and the short-time expansion leading to Eq. (38) is clean. The discussion of tightness, in particular the observation that saturation of the component inequalities forces equilibrium, is a valuable caveat. However, the optimization section contains algebraic errors that must be corrected before the results there can be used.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. IV.B, Eq. (54)] Eq. (54) is not a valid consequence of the preceding minimization. From Eq. (46), D_{A',B'}(τ)=D_{A,B}(τ)+(1/2)s^T H(τ)s+(1/2)s^T V(τ). Minimizing with respect to s gives s* = −H^{-1}V/2 and D_min = D_{A,B} − (1/8) V^T H^{-1}V, not the denominator with the coefficient 3/8 printed in Eq. (54). Since V^T H^{-1}V ≥ 0 for positive definite H, the printed denominator is too small; the printed optimized estimator can therefore exceed the true EPR and violates the very bound it is supposed to optimize. The coefficient must be 1/8.
  2. [Sec. IV.B, Eqs. (45) and (49)] Expanding (d'_{αβ})^2 directly gives the cross term −2 s_A s_B ΔA_{αβ}ΔB_{αβ}. The matrix h_{αβ} in Eq. (45) has off-diagonal entry −2ΔB_{αβ}ΔA_{αβ}, so s^T h s contains −4 s_A s_B ΔAΔB, overcounting this term by a factor of two. Consequently the Hessian entry in Eq. (49) should be H_2(τ)=2(C_{A,B}+C_{B,A}−2⟨AB⟩), not 4(C_{A,B}+C_{B,A}−2⟨AB⟩). The quadratic form (46), the optimal shift (53), and the optimized bound (54) are all built on this incorrect cross term. Both this factor and the coefficient error in Eq. (54) must be corrected, and the illustrative optimization results in Fig. 1(e,f) should be re-examined.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III.B, Eq. (30)] The statement that the NESS bound holds 'for any lag τ≥0' should be qualified to τ>0 (or to the limiting interpretation at τ=0), since at τ=0 both numerator and denominator vanish and the estimator is indeterminate.
  2. [Sec. IV.B] The claim that the Hessian H(τ) is positive definite for τ>0 is not always guaranteed; for example, if one of the observables is constant on the observed meso-states, H has a zero eigenvalue. Positive semidefiniteness suffices for the minimization argument, but the uniqueness statement needs qualification.
  3. [Sec. III.A] The heading 'upper bound on the correlation asymmetry' is somewhat misleading because the intermediate result (Eq. (25)) is immediately used as a lower bound on the EPR; retitling the subsection would improve readability.
  4. [Various] There are several typographical issues, including 'indepedent' in Sec. III.B, 'intervalls' in the caption of Fig. 3, and inconsistent ordering of C_{A^2,B^2} and C_{B^2,A^2} in Eq. (38) compared with Eq. (22).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the bounds are derived from stated Markov/local-detailed-balance assumptions via standard inequalities; the flagged Eq. (54) issue is an algebraic error, not a circular step.

full rationale

The derivation chain starts from the definition of the EPR (Eq. 5), the correlation asymmetry (Eqs. 8-18), and the accessible denominator D_{A,B} (Eqs. 20-22). Inequality (25) is obtained by Cauchy-Schwarz and Jensen/log-sum inequalities; the NESS bound (30) and the time-dependent bound (34) then follow from the standard path-weight fluctuation theorem (Eq. 29) or the small-lag expansion (Eqs. 31-33). No fitted parameter is introduced and no estimator is substituted back into the derivation as an input. The constant-shift optimization in Sec. IV B is an analytic maximization of a bound that is valid for every shift, so even the optimized estimator remains a legitimate consequence of (30); optimizing a proven bound over a free parameter is not circular. The printed Eq. (54) does contain an apparent algebraic error: completing the square in (46) with the optimal shift (53) gives D_min = D_{A,B} - (1/8) V^T H^{-1} V, not the -3/8 printed, so the displayed optimized estimator is too large and should be corrected. This error affects only the optimization subsection and not the central inequalities (30) and (34); it is a correctness defect, not a circularity. Self-citations in the reference list are to standard textbook identities or to the authors' prior inference frameworks, and no load-bearing step is justified solely by those citations. No uniqueness theorem imported from the authors is invoked, and no ansatz is smuggled in through a citation. The main assumptions (Markovianity, local detailed balance, differentiability at zero lag for time-dependent processes) are stated as hypotheses rather than derived from the target result. I therefore find no self-definitional, fitted-input, or self-citation circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The derivation uses only standard mathematical inequalities and the standard stochastic thermodynamics framework. No free parameters are introduced to make the bounds work; the observable shifts in Sec. IV are optimization variables, not fitted constants. The main domain assumption is Markovianity with local detailed balance on the hidden level, which is the standard setting for EPR in stochastic thermodynamics.

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption The hidden microscopic dynamics is Markovian with local detailed balance: transition rates k_ij(t) satisfy k_ij > 0 iff k_ji > 0.
    Invoked in Sec. II; the EPR definition (Eq. 5) and the fluctuation theorem (Eq. 29) require this.
  • domain assumption In a NESS, the process is stationary and time-translation invariant.
    Needed for the NESS bound (Eq. 30) to hold for arbitrary lag; used in Eqs. (26)-(29).
  • domain assumption For time-dependent processes, the short-time expansion P_ji(t,tau) = delta_ji + k_ij(t) tau + O(tau^2) is valid.
    Eq. (31) underpins the vanishing-lag limit and the time-dependent bound (Eq. 34).
  • standard math The path-weight KL divergence equals the average entropy production in a NESS: D_KL(P[gamma] || P_tilde[gamma_tilde]) = tau * sigma.
    Standard fluctuation theorem result, used in Eq. (29).
  • standard math Inequality (a-b)/(a+b) <= (1/2) ln(a/b) for positive a,b.
    Used in Eq. (23) to bound F.
  • standard math Log-sum inequality and Cauchy-Schwarz inequality.
    Used in Eqs. (19), (24), (29).
  • domain assumption Overdamped Langevin dynamics can be obtained as a continuous-state-space limit of a discrete Markov process, so the bounds carry over.
    Sec. II and Sec. V B; the transfer is argued but not fully proven.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Lower bounds on entropy production from dynamical correlation functions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZXOWNAPQ

@misc{pith2026260803619,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Lower bounds on entropy production from dynamical correlation functions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZXOWNAPQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.03619}
}
read the original abstract

Entropy production is a key property in stochastic thermodynamics. For partially observed and coarse-grained systems, its inference is challenging and typically rests on proven lower bounds. We derive two versions of such bounds based on the asymmetry of experimentally accessible two-time correlation functions of coarse-grained state observables. For non-equilibrium steady states, the bound is valid for arbitrary correlation lag. For time-dependent processes, it requires the limit of vanishing lag. These bounds hold true for any system that follows either a Markovian dynamics or a coupled set of overdamped Langevin equations on some underlying, unobservable level of description. We illustrate the bounds for both types of dynamics and discuss their optimization and potential tightness.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.03619 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Inferring entropy production in the NESS for a coarse-grained Markov network. (a) Four-state network in which [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Inferring entropy production for the pe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Estimating the entropy production for an overdamped Langevin particle on a one-dimensional ring with unit length [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Since the value of the bound ˆσA,B(τ) changes under this transformation, we can opti- mize the estimator (30) as a function of these shifts

    Constant shifts We define the shifted observables A′≡A−s A1(40) 5 and B′≡B−s B1,(41) wheres A ands B are real. Since the value of the bound ˆσA,B(τ) changes under this transformation, we can opti- mize the estimator (30) as a function of these shifts. In- deed, we now show that the correlation asymmetry (18) is unchanged under the transformation whereas t...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Since we have seen in Sec

    Finite lag The estimator can also be optimised as a function of τ. Since we have seen in Sec. IV A that being close to equilibrium is part of the saturation conditions of the inequalities leading to the lower bound (30) we expect the estimator there to be best in the limitτ→0. Far from equilibrium, optimizing the estimator as a function ofτmay lead to a m...

    work page

  3. [3]

    1(a) with cyclesC 1 = 1→2→3→1 andC 2 = 1→4→3→1

    Non-equilibrium steady state Consider stationary driving of the Markov network in Fig. 1(a) with cyclesC 1 = 1→2→3→1 andC 2 = 1→4→3→1. We vary the cycle affinitiesA C1 and AC2 using the rates k23 = exp(AC1/2), k 32 = exp(−AC1/2), k43 = exp(AC2/2), k 34 = exp(−AC2/2).(58) The remaining rates are constants independent ofA C1 andAC2. Furthermore, we assume t...

    work page

  4. [4]

    1(a) to be fully observable and driven periodically in time

    Time-dependent driving We now assume the four-state Markov network in Fig. 1(a) to be fully observable and driven periodically in time. The system thus reaches a periodic stationary state in the long-time limit, for which we use the bound (38) to get a time-dependent lower bound on the instantaneous EPR as shown in Fig. 2. Since we assume all states to be...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Sekimoto,Stochastic Energetics, Lecture Notes in Physics (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010)

    K. Sekimoto,Stochastic Energetics, Lecture Notes in Physics (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010)

    2010

  6. [6]

    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)

    work page 2011

  7. [7]

    Peliti and S

    L. Peliti and S. Pigolotti,Stochastic thermodynamics. An Introduction(Princeton Univ. Press, 2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    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)

    work page 2023

Show all 69 references
  1. [9]

    Seifert,Stochastic Thermodynamics(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2025)

    U. Seifert,Stochastic Thermodynamics(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2025)

    2025

  2. [10]

    Esposito, Stochastic thermodynamics under coarse graining, Phys

    M. Esposito, Stochastic thermodynamics under coarse graining, Phys. Rev. E85, 041125 (2012)

    2012

  3. [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

  4. [12]

    Pietzonka, A

    P. Pietzonka, A. C. Barato, and U. Seifert, Universal bounds on current fluctuations, Phys. Rev. E93, 052145 (2016)

    2016

  5. [13]

    N. Ohga, S. Ito, and A. Kolchinsky, Thermodynamic bound on the asymmetry of cross-correlations, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 077101 (2023)

    2023

  6. [14]

    Liang and S

    S. Liang and S. Pigolotti, Thermodynamic bounds on time-reversal asymmetry, Phys. Rev. E108, L062101 (2023)

    2023

  7. [15]

    A. M. Maier, U. Seifert, and J. van der Meer, From ob- served transitions to hidden paths in markov networks, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 033067 (2025)

    2025

  8. [16]

    X. Zhao, D. E. Makarov, and A. Godec, Towards markov- state holography, New Journal of Physics27, 125002 (2025)

    2025

  9. [17]

    Seifert, Universal bounds on entropy production from fluctuating coarse-grained trajectories, Nature Reviews Physics8, 493 (2026)

    U. Seifert, Universal bounds on entropy production from fluctuating coarse-grained trajectories, Nature Reviews Physics8, 493 (2026)

    2026

  10. [18]

    Ghosal and G

    A. Ghosal and G. Bisker, Identification and quantifi- 9 cation of irreversibility in stochastic systems, Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics28, 9840 (2026)

    2026

  11. [19]

    A. C. Barato and U. Seifert, Thermodynamic uncertainty relation for biomolecular processes, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 158101 (2015)

    2015

  12. [20]

    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

  13. [21]

    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

  14. [22]

    Dechant, Multidimensional thermodynamic uncer- tainty relations, J

    A. Dechant, Multidimensional thermodynamic uncer- tainty relations, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.52, 035001 (2018)

    2018

  15. [23]

    A. C. Barato, R. Chetrite, A. Faggionato, and D. Gabrielli, A unifying picture of generalized thermody- namic uncertainty relations*, Journal of Statistical Me- chanics: Theory and Experiment2019, 084017 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    Koyuk and U

    T. Koyuk and U. Seifert, Thermodynamic uncertainty re- lation for time-dependent driving, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 260604 (2020)

    2020

  17. [25]

    K. Liu, Z. Gong, and M. Ueda, Thermodynamic un- certainty relation for arbitrary initial states, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 140602 (2020)

    2020

  18. [26]

    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

  19. [27]

    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

  20. [28]

    Song and C

    Y. Song and C. Hyeon, Thermodynamic uncertainty re- lation to assess biological processes, J. Chem. Phys.154, 130901 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    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

  22. [30]

    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

  23. [31]

    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

  24. [32]

    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

  25. [33]

    D. J. Skinner and J. Dunkel, Estimating entropy pro- duction from waiting time distributions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 198101 (2021)

    2021

  26. [34]

    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

  27. [35]

    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

  28. [36]

    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

  29. [37]

    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

  30. [38]

    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

  31. [39]

    Dechant and S

    A. Dechant and S. I. Sasa, Improving thermodynamic bounds using correlations, Phys. Rev. X11, 041061 (2021)

    2021

  32. [40]

    Dechant, Thermodynamic constraints on the power spectral density in and out of equilibrium (2023), arXiv:2306.00417 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    A. Dechant, Thermodynamic constraints on the power spectral density in and out of equilibrium (2023), arXiv:2306.00417 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2023 arXiv

  33. [41]

    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

  34. [42]

    L. T. Stutzer, C. Dieball, and A. Godec, Stochas- tic calculus for pathwise observables of markov-jump processes: Unification of diffusion and jump dynamics (2025), arXiv:2508.04647

    2025 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Dechant, J

    A. Dechant, J. Garnier-Brun, and S.-i. Sasa, Thermody- namic bounds on correlation times, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 167101 (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    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

  37. [45]

    Gu, Spectral fluctuation-dissipation-response inequal- ities (2026), arXiv:2604.20362 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    J. Gu, Spectral fluctuation-dissipation-response inequal- ities (2026), arXiv:2604.20362 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2026 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Cheng, R

    Y. Cheng, R. Bao, and Z. Hou, Hierarchical reconstruc- tion of time-arrow from multi-time correlations (2026), arXiv:2604.25749 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2026 arXiv

  39. [47]

    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

  40. [48]

    Pietzonka and F

    P. Pietzonka and F. Coghi, Thermodynamic cost for pre- cision of general counting observables, Phys. Rev. E109, 064128 (2024)

    2024

  41. [49]

    Di Terlizzi, Force-free kinetic inference of entropy pro- duction, Phys

    I. Di Terlizzi, Force-free kinetic inference of entropy pro- duction, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 237101 (2025)

    2025

  42. [50]

    Zwanzig, Time-correlation functions and transport coefficients in statistical mechanics, Annual Review of Physical Chemistry16, 67 (1965)

    R. Zwanzig, Time-correlation functions and transport coefficients in statistical mechanics, Annual Review of Physical Chemistry16, 67 (1965)

    1965

  43. [51]

    E. L. Elson, Fluorescence correlation spectroscopy: Past, present, future, Biophysical Journal101, 2855 (2011)

    2011

  44. [52]

    T. S. Grigera, Correlation functions as a tool to study col- lective behaviour phenomena in biological systems, Jour- nal of Physics: Complexity2, 045016 (2021)

    2021

  45. [53]

    O. V. Angelsky, A. Y. Bekshaev, C. Y. Zenkova, D. I. Ivansky, and J. Zheng, Correlation optics, co- herence and optical singularities: Basic concepts and practical applications, Frontiers in Physics10, 10.3389/fphy.2022.924508 (2022)

    2022

  46. [54]

    Nettels, N

    D. Nettels, N. Galvanetto, M. T. Ivanovi´ c, M. N¨ uesch, T. Yang, and B. Schuler, Single-molecule fret for prob- ing nanoscale biomolecular dynamics, Nature Reviews Physics6, 587 (2024)

    2024

  47. [55]

    E. K. R. Mackay, S. Marbach, B. Sprinkle, and A. L. Thorneywork, The countoscope: Measuring self and col- lective dynamics without trajectories, Phys. Rev. X14, 041016 (2024)

    2024

  48. [56]

    Franosch, Fundamental problems in statistical physics xiv: Lecture on correlation and response functions in sta- tistical physics (2026), arXiv:2603.29481 [cond-mat.stat- mech]

    T. Franosch, Fundamental problems in statistical physics xiv: Lecture on correlation and response functions in sta- tistical physics (2026), arXiv:2603.29481 [cond-mat.stat- mech]. 10

    2026

  49. [57]

    Cont, Empirical properties of asset returns: stylized facts and statistical issues, Quantitative Finance1, 223 (2001)

    R. Cont, Empirical properties of asset returns: stylized facts and statistical issues, Quantitative Finance1, 223 (2001)

    2001

  50. [58]

    G. E. P. Box, G. M. Jenkins, G. C. Reinsel, and G. M. Ljung,Time Series Analysis: Forecasting and Control, 4th ed. (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2008)

    2008

  51. [59]

    Chakraborti, I

    A. Chakraborti, I. M. Toke, M. Patriarca, and F. Abergel, Econophysics: Empirical facts and agent- based models (2010), arXiv:0909.1974 [q-fin.GN]

    2010 arXiv

  52. [60]

    M. R. Cohen and A. Kohn, Measuring and interpret- ing neuronal correlations, Nature Neuroscience14, 811 (2011)

    2011

  53. [61]

    Stetefeld, S

    J. Stetefeld, S. A. McKenna, and T. R. Patel, Dynamic light scattering: a practical guide and applications in biomedical sciences, Biophysical Reviews8, 409 (2016)

    2016

  54. [62]

    A. E. Yuan and W. Shou, A rigorous and versatile statis- tical test for correlations between stationary time series, PLOS Biology22, e3002758 (2024)

    2024

  55. [63]

    Axler,Linear Algebra Done Right, Undergraduate Texts in Mathematics (Springer International Publish- ing, Cham, 2015)

    S. Axler,Linear Algebra Done Right, Undergraduate Texts in Mathematics (Springer International Publish- ing, Cham, 2015)

    2015

  56. [64]

    Frishman and P

    A. Frishman and P. Ronceray, Learning force fields from stochastic trajectories, Phys. Rev. X10, 021009 (2020)

    2020

  57. [65]

    Das and S

    B. Das and S. K. Manikandan, Localising entropy pro- duction along non-equilibrium trajectories, Commun. Phys.9, 237 (2026)

    2026

  58. [66]

    Hartich and A

    D. Hartich and A. Godec, Emergent memory and kinetic hysteresis in strongly driven networks, Phys. Rev. X11, 041047 (2021)

    2021

  59. [67]

    Meyberg, J

    E. Meyberg, J. Deg¨ unther, and U. Seifert, Entropy pro- duction from waiting-time distributions for overdamped Langevin dynamics, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.57, 25LT01 (2024)

    2024

  60. [68]

    van der Meer and K

    J. van der Meer and K. Saito, Thermodynamic bounds and error correction for faulty coarse graining, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 043260 (2025)

    2025

  61. [69]

    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

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.