Theoretical Analysis of Resource-Induced Phase Transitions in Estimation Strategies

Takehiro Tottori; Tetsuya J. Kobayashi

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 64 references

Theoretical Analysis of Resource-Induced Phase Transitions in Estimation Strategies

T0 review · 2 major / 4 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 switch between memoryless and memory-based estimation is governed by two dimensionless parameters, β = E/D and δ = QD/MF, with a necessary condition Θ_Q ≥ 1 and a sufficient condition Θ_M ≥ 1.

desk verdict The analytical bounds are real, but they locate where nonzero strategies first appear, not where they become optimal — the paper's central claim outruns its own math. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.10184 v1 pith:3BVMPF2X submitted 2025-11-13 physics.bio-ph math.OCq-bio.NCq-bio.SC

Takehiro Tottori , Tetsuya J. Kobayashi This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.bio-phmath.OCq-bio.NCq-bio.SC

keywords resource-limitedestimationphasetransitionsoptimalcontroltheorylinear-quadratic-GaussianinternalmemorysensoryreliabilitydimensionlessparametersRiccatiequation

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

Organisms estimating a fluctuating environment must decide whether to store past observations in an internal memory—a decision that costs energy and is subject to internal noise. This paper analyzes a minimal linear-Gaussian model of that decision and claims that the optimal strategy is determined by two dimensionless numbers: $\beta = E/D$, the ratio of sensory noise to environment volatility, and $\delta = QD/MF$, the ratio of energy availability to memory cost and memory noise. The paper derives a necessary condition ($\Theta_Q \geq 1$) and an approximate sufficient condition ($\Theta_M \geq 1$) for memory use, which bracket the exact phase boundary $\Theta_T$ and reproduce three numerical features: the transition is discontinuous, it is nonmonotonic in sensory noise (memory is optimal only at intermediate noise), and the boundary obeys the scaling $Q/MF$. A sympathetic reader would care because these are parameter-free predictions that can be tested against biological experiments on when organisms switch between reactive and memory-based behavior.

What carries the argument

The central object is the reformulated memory control law $v_\Phi(y,z) = -\Phi_{zy} y - \Phi_{zz} z$, where $\Phi_{zy}$ is the gain that encodes the current observation into memory and $\Phi_{zz}$ is a negative-feedback gain that stabilizes the memory state. The proof mechanism is the decomposition of the objective $J$ into estimation error $J_Q$ and control cost $J_M$, together with the observation that the stationary equations $\partial J_Q / \partial \Phi_{zz} = 0$ and $\partial J_M / \partial \Phi_{zz} = 0$ respectively provide upper and lower bounds for the true stationary equation $\partial J / \partial \Phi_{zz} = 0$. Because the true equation is analytically intractable, these bounds convert the problem into two tractable intersection conditions, yielding the necessary discriminant $\Theta_Q$ and t

What would settle it

Solve the full observation-based Riccati equation over a dense grid of $(\beta, \delta)$, and check whether any point with $\Theta_Q < 1$ still exhibits nonzero memory gains, or any point with $\Theta_M \geq 1$ still exhibits zero gains; either violation would falsify the bracketing claim. In the ambiguous middle band, a global minimization of $J$ over $(\Phi_{zy}, \Phi_{zz})$ should reveal whether the nonzero stationary point is ever beaten by the boundary $\Phi_{zz} = 0$—if so, the stationarity criterion is the weak link.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that resource-induced phase transitions in optimal estimation strategies are analytically tractable in a minimal linear-quadratic-Gaussian model. By rewriting the memory control as a linear function $v_\Phi = -\Phi_{zy} y - \Phi_{zz} z$ and optimizing the two gains jointly, the paper shows that the emergence of nonzero memory gains is governed by the dimensionless parameters $\beta = E/D$ and $\delta = QD/MF$. The exact phase boundary $\Theta_T$, defined by the simultaneous stationarity conditions $\partial J / \partial \Phi_{zy} = 0$ and $\partial J / \partial \Phi_{zz} = 0$, is bracketed by two explicit discriminants: $\Theta_Q = \frac{2\beta^2 \delta}{(1+2\beta)^2 (1+4\beta)}$ is a necessary condition (memory cannot appear when $\Theta_Q < 1$), and $\Theta_M \approx \frac{\beta^2 \delta}{(1+2\beta)^2 \left(1+6\beta + \sqrt{4\beta(4+13\beta)}\right)}$ i

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the onset of memory use coincides with the existence of a stationary point of the cost $J$ that is jointly optimal in both memory gains, and that the sufficient condition can be captured by a quadratic truncation of a quartic equation; if the true optimum lies at a boundary or the approximation fails, the claimed phase boundary shifts.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The phase boundary is fully determined by β and δ; any change in Q, M, D, or F affects the boundary only through these two combinations, which is why the numerical boundaries collapse onto a single Q/MF curve.
Memory gains emerge discontinuously at the transition because the simultaneous stationarity condition for the two gains (Φ_zy, Φ_zz) has no continuous zero-crossing branch—the intersections appear at nonzero Φ_zy values.
The discriminants predict that memory is used only for intermediate sensory noise: when E is much smaller or much larger than D, Θ_Q and Θ_M fall below 1 and memoryless estimation wins.
Increasing environmental volatility ε is equivalent to replacing δ by δ/ε, so the framework predicts a monotonic transition from memory-based to memoryless as volatility increases, matching experiments.
The bracketing Θ_Q ≥ Θ_T ≥ Θ_M means that, for a given organism or circuit, measuring β and δ immediately tells whether memory cannot be optimal (Θ_Q < 1) or must be optimal (Θ_M ≥ 1); only in the narrow middle band is the exact answer ambiguous.

Reading between the lines

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

The discriminants could serve as a design rule for synthetic cellular circuits or neural controllers—choose parameters so that Θ_M ≥ 1 to favor memory integration, and stay below Θ_Q < 1 to keep the system reactive; this extends the paper's diagnostic to an engineering prescription.
The sufficient discriminant Θ_M rests on a quadratic truncation (Supp. Eq. S73); a natural test is to compute higher-order corrections or numerically map the exact Θ_T surface to see whether the approximation degrades for extreme β (very large or very small E/D), which the paper does not address.
The paper identifies memory use with a stationary point of J, but the LQG cost is nonconvex; if for some parameters the global optimum lies on the boundary Φ_zz = 0 or at a non-stationary point, the predicted phase boundary would shift, and a careful global optimization of (Φ_zy, Φ_zz) could detect this.
Because the model is LQG with quadratic costs, the same β–δ structure may extend to delayed prediction or tracking; replacing (x_t − \hat{x}_t)² with a prediction error at lag τ might simply renormalize the effective δ, which would be a concrete testable extension.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: this is a solid piece of analysis worth taking seriously, but the abstract overstates what the theory actually pins down. The authors derive exact expressions for the cost J and for the optimal Φzy at fixed Φzz, and they prove a useful scaling relation (phase behavior depends only on β = E/D and δ = QD/MF). The necessary condition ΘQ ≥ 1 and the approximate sufficient condition ΘM ≥ 1 are genuine analytical results, and the paper is honest about the exact boundary ΘT being intractable. That is real progress over the earlier numerical work, and the bracket ΘQ > ΘT > ΘM is a useful mechanistic statement: the discontinuity comes from the simultaneous optimization of two gains, and the nonmonotonicity in sensory noise is visible in the discriminants themselves.

The soft spot is exactly what the stress-test note says. The discriminants are conditions for the intersection of stationarity equations, i.e., for the existence of nonzero stationary solutions of the nonconvex objective. They are not conditions for those solutions to be optimal. The main text says it in passing: as Q increases, the nonzero branch emerges while the zero solution remains optimal, and only later does the optimum switch. So ΘQ and ΘM bracket a spinodal, not the coexistence curve. The numerical phase boundaries in Fig. 2(c) — the actual optimality switch — live inside the 'ambiguous' green region of Fig. 5(b), where the paper offers no analytical control. The quadratic approximation in Supp. Eq. (S73) is a secondary issue; even an exact ΘT would only give the spinodal.

This is a significant gap, but not a fatal one. The paper's mechanistic claims — discontinuity from simultaneous optimization, scaling, nonmonotonicity of the discriminants — survive. What does not survive is the abstract's phrasing that the conditions for resource limitations to alter estimation strategies have been identified. The authors identify conditions for memory-based strategies to exist as candidate optima. The actual switch requires a J-crossing analysis that is not here.

My advice: send it to peer review, but ask for a revised abstract and a clear statement distinguishing existence from optimality. If the authors can also show numerically that the J-crossing obeys the same scaling and nonmonotonicity (or prove it in a corner of parameter space), the paper would be much stronger. As it stands, this is a useful partial theory for people working on resource-rational analysis and information bottlenecks, and a good reading-group piece on how spinodals and coexistence curves can be conflated in optimization problems.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies a one-dimensional LQG estimation model with a scalar memory z and a quadratic control cost M v^2. The authors reformulate the controller as linear in observation and memory with gains Φzy and Φzz, derive the exact stationary cost J(Φzy, Φzz), and obtain the optimal Φzy for fixed Φzz in closed form (Eq. 9), with a discriminant Θ (Eq. 10). For simultaneous optimization, they introduce dimensionless variables β=E/D and δ=QD/MF and derive a necessary condition ΘQ≥1 (Eq. 14) and an approximate sufficient condition ΘM≥1 (Eq. 15) for the existence of nonzero stationary solutions, bracketing an exact but intractable threshold ΘT. They claim this analytically explains the discontinuous, nonmonotonic, and Q/MF-scaling features of the phase transition between memoryless and memory-based optimal estimation.

Significance. If the optimality interpretation were justified, the paper would be a valuable analytical counterpart to previous numerical work, providing a simple two-parameter description and falsifiable boundaries. Strengths include the exact derivation of J and Φzy*, the analytical proof of the Q/MF scaling in the simultaneous problem (Supp. IV A), and the clear mechanism for discontinuity via simultaneous stationarity. The numerical validation uses an independent Riccati solver from prior work, so the analytical expressions are not fitted. However, the paper's principal claim about optimal strategies currently overreaches what the stationary-point analysis proves.

major comments (2)

[Numerical Results; Theoretical Analysis after Eq. (10)] The discriminants ΘQ, ΘM, and ΘT are conditions for the existence of simultaneous stationary points of the nonconvex cost J, not for the global optimality of the memory-based branch. The paper itself states in the Numerical Results that as Q increases, nonzero gains 'emerge discontinuously, while Πzx=Πzz=0 remains optimal' and only later does the optimal solution switch. Thus ΘQ/ΘM/ΘT locate the spinodal, not the coexistence curve where J(nonzero)=J(zero). The abstract's claim of characterizing 'phase transitions in optimal estimation strategies' is therefore not established. Please either re-scope the claims to stationary-strategy emergence or add a global-optimality analysis (e.g., comparing J on the two branches) to connect ΘT to the actual optimal boundary.
[Supp. Sec. IV D, Eq. (S73)] The sufficient condition ΘM is based on a second-order Taylor expansion of the quartic G(Φzz) around Φzz=0. The approximation is uncontrolled; the paper only compares the approximate and exact discriminants for default parameters in Fig. S3(b). Since ΘM≥1 defines the orange 'memory-based' region in Fig. 5(b), a failure of the quadratic approximation elsewhere would invalidate this sufficiency claim. The authors should either provide a rigorous bound on the approximation error over the relevant β-δ domain or explicitly state the domain where the sufficient condition is proven.

minor comments (4)

[Title] The title contains a typo: 'Estimatio n Strategies' should be 'Estimation Strategies'.
[Fig. 5 caption] The caption states that black and red dots are zero and nonzero solutions of the Riccati equation, but it does not indicate which branch is optimal. Since the paper's central claim concerns optimal strategies, please mark optimality explicitly or clarify that the figure only shows stationary solutions.
[Supp. Sec. IV B-C] The bracketing argument uses the inequality (S55) that the solution of ∂J/∂Φzz=0 lies between the solutions of ∂JQ/∂Φzz=0 and ∂JM/∂Φzz=0 for fixed Φzy. The step from this inequality to the claim that intersection with the middle curve is equivalent to intersection with the upper/lower curves (necessary/sufficient conditions) is not fully proven in the supplement. The numerical results support the claim, but a more explicit proof would strengthen the paper.
[Eq. (15) and main text] The text uses 'ΘM ≈' in Eq. (15) but later refers to 'ΘM ≥ 1' as a definitive sufficient condition. Please clearly state that the sufficient condition is approximate, and mark the orange region in Fig. 5(b) accordingly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the discriminants are derived from stationarity conditions, not fitted; minor self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The analytical core is self-contained: after reformulating the control as vΦ = −Φzy y − Φzz z, the objective J is computed in closed form (Supp. Eqs. S26–S31), and the discriminants ΘQ and ΘM are obtained by intersecting ∂J/∂Φzy = 0 with ∂JQ/∂Φzz = 0 and ∂JM/∂Φzz = 0 (Supp. Secs. IV C–D), rather than by fitting to numerical phase boundaries. The necessary/sufficient statements are explicitly about simultaneous stationary points of J, and the paper acknowledges the distinction between emergence of nonzero stationary gains and global optimality (“Πzx, Πzz ≠ 0 emerge discontinuously, while Πzx = Πzz = 0 remains optimal”), so the bracket ΘQ ≥ ΘT ≥ ΘM is a derived inequality, not a fitted prediction. The numerical validation uses the authors' earlier Riccati solver, but that is an independent benchmark rather than an input to the derivation; the same optimality conditions are re-derived in Supp. Sec. I. The main residual concern—that ΘQ/ΘM characterize stationary-point existence rather than the J-crossing phase boundary, and that ΘM uses a quadratic approximation (Supp. Eq. S73)—is a correctness or interpretation issue, not circularity. Minor self-citations appear but are not load-bearing; the central derivation does not reduce to its inputs by construction.

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

The central claim rests on the LQG model and on stationarity conditions for a nonconvex objective; no parameters are fitted, but the sufficient phase-boundary condition depends on an unproven approximation.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption The optimal estimator is the conditional mean E[x|y,z] and the optimal control is linear in (y,z), from the LQG separation structure.
Used when reformulating v as linear in y and z and setting x̂ to the optimal Bayesian filter; Eq. (S13) relies on the previous work's Riccati solution.
standard math The long-time average objective can be evaluated with the stationary Gaussian distribution of (x,z) and the observation model; the zero-mean steady state is representative.
Sec. II B Eqs. (S22)–(S23); requires stability/ergodicity of the closed-loop dynamics.
ad hoc to paper Stationarity conditions ∂J/∂Φzy=0 and ∂J/∂Φzz=0 characterize the optimum; global optimum lies among the simultaneous stationary points.
The objective J is nonconvex, and the paper never proves global optimality of the identified stationary solutions; the phase boundary in the intermediate region is resolved numerically.
ad hoc to paper The quartic G(Φzz) can be approximated by its second-order Taylor expansion around Φzz=0 for determining the sufficient condition ΘM.
Supplemental Sec. IV D Eq. (S73)–(S80); the approximation is validated numerically but is not exact, so the sufficient condition is approximate.
domain assumption Φzz ≥ 0 and Φzy ∈ R, with the memory control restricted to linear feedback of the observation and memory variables.
Reformulation Eq. (8)/(S12); if the optimal controller required nonlinear feedback in the full problem, this reduction would miss it.
domain assumption The environment is an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process with observation noise and memory noise as described by Eqs. (1)–(3).
The entire model is based on this linear-Gaussian structure; the phase transitions are analyzed only within this model.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Theoretical Analysis of Resource-Induced Phase Transitions in Estimation Strategies." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3BVMPF2X

@misc{pith2026251110184,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Theoretical Analysis of Resource-Induced Phase Transitions in Estimation Strategies},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3BVMPF2X}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.10184}
}

read the original abstract

Organisms adapt to volatile environments by integrating sensory information with internal memory, yet their information processing is constrained by resource limitations. Such limitations can fundamentally alter optimal estimation strategies in biological systems. For example, recent experiments suggest that organisms exhibit nonmonotonic phase transitions between memoryless and memory-based estimation strategies depending on sensory reliability. However, an analytical understanding of these resource-induced phase transitions is still missing. This Letter presents an analytical characterization of resource-induced phase transitions in optimal estimation strategies. Our result identifies the conditions under which resource limitations alter estimation strategies and analytically reveals the mechanism underlying the emergence of discontinuous, nonmonotonic, and scaling behaviors. These results provide a theoretical foundation for understanding how limited resources shape information processing in biological systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.10184 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. (a,b) Π [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Discriminant Θ [Eq. (10)] and optimal memory [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) Red, magenta, green, and orange curves in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

[1]

T. J. Kobayashi, Implementation of Dynamic Bayesian Decision Making by Intracellular Kinetics, Physical Re- view Letters 104, 228104 (2010)

2010
[2]

Hinczewski and D

M. Hinczewski and D. Thirumalai, Cellular Signaling Networks Function as Generalized Wiener-Kolmogorov Filters to Suppress Noise, Physical Review X 4, 041017 (2014)

2014
[3]

N. B. Becker, A. Mugler, and P. R. ten Wolde, Optimal Prediction by Cellular Signaling Networks, Physical Re- view Letters 115, 258103 (2015)

2015
[4]

Mora and I

T. Mora and I. Nemenman, Physical Limit to Concentra- tion Sensing in a Changing Environment, Physical Re- view Letters 123, 198101 (2019)

2019
[5]

Nakamura and T

K. Nakamura and T. J. Kobayashi, Connection between the Bacterial Chemotactic Network and Optimal Filter- ing, Physical Review Letters 126, 128102 (2021)

2021
[6]

R. A. Heinonen, L. Biferale, A. Celani, and M. Vergas- sola, Optimal policies for Bayesian olfactory search in turbulent ﬂows, Physical Review E 107, 055105 (2023)

2023
[7]

J. Rode, M. Novak, and B. M. Friedrich, Information Theory of Chemotactic Agents Using Both Spatial and Temporal Gradient Sensing, PRX Life 2, 023012 (2024)

2024
[8]

Krishnamurthy, M

K. Krishnamurthy, M. R. Nassar, S. Sarode, and J. I. Gold, Arousal-related adjustments of perceptual biases optimize perception in dynamic environments, Nature Human Behaviour 1, 0107 (2017)

2017

Show all 64 references

[9]

A. T. Piet, A. El Hady, and C. D. Brody, Rats adopt the optimal timescale for evidence integration in a dynamic environment, Nature Communications 9, 4265 (2018)

2018
[10]

Kutschireiter, M

A. Kutschireiter, M. A. Basnak, R. I. Wilson, and J. Dru- gowitsch, Bayesian inference in ring attractor networks, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120, e2210622120 (2023)

2023
[11]

G. Lan, P. Sartori, S. Neumann, V. Sourjik, and Y. Tu, The energy–speed–accuracy trade-oﬀ in sensory adapta- tion, Nature Physics 8, 422 (2012)

2012
[12]

C. C. Govern and P. R. ten Wolde, Energy Dissipation and Noise Correlations in Biochemical Sensing, Physical Review Letters 113, 258102 (2014)

2014
[13]

C. C. Govern and P. R. ten Wolde, Optimal resource allocation in cellular sensing systems, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, 17486 (2014)

2014
[14]

A. H. Lang, C. K. Fisher, T. Mora, and P. Mehta, Ther- modynamics of Statistical Inference by Cells, Physical Review Letters 113, 148103 (2014)

2014
[15]

Ito and T

S. Ito and T. Sagawa, Maxwell’s demon in biochemical signal transduction with feedback loop, Nature Commu- nications 6, 7498 (2015)

2015
[16]

A. J. Tjalma, V. Galstyan, J. Goedhart, L. Slim, N. B. Becker, and P. R. ten Wolde, Trade-oﬀs between cost and information in cellular prediction, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120, e2303078120 (2023)

2023
[17]

S. J. Bryant and B. B. Machta, Physical Constraints in Intracellular Signaling: The Cost of Sending a Bit, Phys- ical Review Letters 131, 068401 (2023)

2023
[18]

Nicoletti and D

G. Nicoletti and D. M. Busiello, Tuning Transduction from Hidden Observables to Optimize Information Har- vesting, Physical Review Letters 133, 158401 (2024)

2024
[19]

S. B. Laughlin, R. R. de Ruyter van Steveninck, and J. C. Anderson, The metabolic cost of neural information, Nature Neuroscience 1, 36 (1998)

1998
[20]

Lennie, The Cost of Cortical Computation, Current Biology 13, 493 (2003)

P. Lennie, The Cost of Cortical Computation, Current Biology 13, 493 (2003)

2003
[21]

J. G. Burns, J. Foucaud, and F. Mery, Costs of mem- ory: lessons from ’mini’ brains, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 278, 923 (2010)

2010
[22]

Lieder and T

F. Lieder and T. L. Griﬃths, Resource-rational analysis: Understanding human cognition as the optimal use of limited computational resources, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 43, e1 (2020)

2020
[23]

Polan ´ ıa, D

R. Polan ´ ıa, D. Burdakov, and T. A. Hare, Rationality, preferences, and emotions with biological constraints: it all starts from our senses, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 28, 264 (2024)

2024
[24]

Tavoni, V

G. Tavoni, V. Balasubramanian, and J. I. Gold, What is optimal in optimal inference?, Current Opinion in Be- havioral Sciences Artiﬁcial Intelligence, 29, 117 (2019)

2019
[25]

R. Bhui, L. Lai, and S. J. Gershman, Resource-rational decision making, Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences Value based decision-making, 41, 15 (2021)

2021
[26]

Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011)

D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011)

2011
[27]

M. T. Gailliot, R. F. Baumeister, C. N. DeWall, J. K. Maner, E. A. Plant, D. M. Tice, L. E. Brewer, and B. J. Schmeichel, Self-control relies on glucose as a limited en- ergy source: Willpower is more than a metaphor., Jour- nal of Personality and Social Psychology 92, 325 (2007)

2007
[28]

Masicampo and R

E. Masicampo and R. F. Baumeister, Toward a Physiol- ogy of Dual-Process Reasoning and Judgment: Lemon- ade, Willpower, and Expensive Rule-Based Analysis, Psychological Science 19, 255 (2008)

2008
[29]

Tavoni, T

G. Tavoni, T. Doi, C. Pizzica, V. Balasubramanian, and J. I. Gold, Human inference reﬂects a normative balance of complexity and accuracy, Nature Human Behaviour 6, 1153 (2022)

2022
[30]

Tottori and T

T. Tottori and T. J. Kobayashi, Memory-Limited Par- tially Observable Stochastic Control and Its Mean-Field Control Approach, Entropy 24, 1599 (2022)

2022
[31]

Tottori and T

T. Tottori and T. J. Kobayashi, Forward-Backward Sweep Method for the System of HJB-FP Equations in 6 Memory-Limited Partially Observable Stochastic Con- trol, Entropy 25, 208 (2023)

2023
[32]

Tottori and T

T. Tottori and T. J. Kobayashi, Decentralized Stochastic Control with Finite-Dimensional Memories: A Memory Limitation Approach, Entropy 25, 791 (2023)

2023
[33]

Tottori and T

T. Tottori and T. J. Kobayashi, Resource limitations in- duce phase transitions in biological information process- ing, Physical Review Research 7, L042012 (2025)

2025
[34]

Tottori and T

T. Tottori and T. J. Kobayashi, Theory for optimal estimation and control under resource limitations and its applications to biological information processing and decision-making, Physical Review Research 7, 043048 (2025)

2025
[36]

Nisio, Stochastic Control Theory , Probability The- ory and Stochastic Modelling, Vol

M. Nisio, Stochastic Control Theory , Probability The- ory and Stochastic Modelling, Vol. 72 (Springer Japan, Tokyo, 2015)

2015
[37]

Bensoussan, Estimation and Control of Dynamical Systems, Interdisciplinary Applied Mathematics, Vol

A. Bensoussan, Estimation and Control of Dynamical Systems, Interdisciplinary Applied Mathematics, Vol. 48 (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018)

2018
[38]

Tishby, F

N. Tishby, F. C. Pereira, and W. Bialek, The information bottleneck method (2000), arXiv:physics/0004057

2000 arXiv
[39]

Chechik, A

G. Chechik, A. Globerson, N. Tishby, and Y. Weiss, In- formation Bottleneck for Gaussian Variables, Journal of Machine Learning Research 6, 165 (2005)

2005
[40]

Creutzig, A

F. Creutzig, A. Globerson, and N. Tishby, Past-future information bottleneck in dynamical systems, Physical Review E 79, 041925 (2009)

2009
[41]

Sachdeva, T

V. Sachdeva, T. Mora, A. M. Walczak, and S. E. Palmer, Optimal prediction with resource constraints using the information bottleneck, PLOS Computational Biology 17, e1008743 (2021)

2021
[42]

Galstyan, A

V. Galstyan, A. Tjalma, and P. R. t. Wolde, Intu- itive dissection of the Gaussian information bottleneck method with an application to optimal prediction (2025), arXiv:2507.05183 [q-bio]

2025 arXiv
[43]

Alon, An Introduction to Systems Biology: Design Principles of Biological Circuits , 2nd ed

U. Alon, An Introduction to Systems Biology: Design Principles of Biological Circuits , 2nd ed. (Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2019)

2019
[44]

Alon, Network motifs: theory and experimental ap- proaches, Nature Reviews Genetics 8, 450 (2007)

U. Alon, Network motifs: theory and experimental ap- proaches, Nature Reviews Genetics 8, 450 (2007)

2007
[45]

Mangan, A

S. Mangan, A. Zaslaver, and U. Alon, The Coherent Feed- forward Loop Serves as a Sign-sensitive Delay Element in Transcription Networks, Journal of Molecular Biology 334, 197 (2003)

2003
[46]

Mangan and U

S. Mangan and U. Alon, Structure and function of the feed-forward loop network motif, Proceedings of the Na- tional Academy of Sciences 100, 11980 (2003)

2003
[47]

Dekel, S

E. Dekel, S. Mangan, and U. Alon, Environmental selec- tion of the feed-forward loop circuit in gene-regulation networks, Physical Biology 2, 81 (2005)

2005
[48]

R. Milo, S. Shen-Orr, S. Itzkovitz, N. Kashtan, D. Chklovskii, and U. Alon, Network Motifs: Simple Building Blocks of Complex Networks, Science 298, 824 (2002)

2002
[49]

S. S. Shen-Orr, R. Milo, S. Mangan, and U. Alon, Net- work motifs in the transcriptional regulation network of Escherichia coli, Nature Genetics 31, 64 (2002)

2002
[50]

R. Milo, S. Itzkovitz, N. Kashtan, R. Levitt, S. Shen-Orr, I. Ayzenshtat, M. Sheﬀer, and U. Alon, Superfamilies of Evolved and Designed Networks, Science 303, 1538 (2004). 1 Supplemental Material for: Theoretical Analysis of Resource-Induced Phase Transitions in Estimatio n St...

2004
[51]

IV C and IV D, we analyze the conditions under which ∂JQ/∂Φzz = 0 and ∂JM /∂Φzz = 0 intersect with ∂J/∂ Φzy = 0, respectively

In Sec. IV C and IV D, we analyze the conditions under which ∂JQ/∂Φzz = 0 and ∂JM /∂Φzz = 0 intersect with ∂J/∂ Φzy = 0, respectively. The former gives a necessary condition under whi ch ∂J/∂ Φzz = 0 intersect with ∂J/∂ Φzy = 0, whereas the latter gives a suﬃcient condition. A...
[52]

0 0. 5 1. 0 1. 5 2. 0 Φ zz − 50 0 50 100 150 200 F β = 1. 0 δ = 10. 0 δ = 30. 0 δ = 50. 0 FIG. S2. F as a functions of Φ zz [Eq. (S58)]. Black and red dashed lines indicate F = 0 and Φ zz = 1, respectively. where F(Φzz ) := 2 β3Φ4 zz + β2 (5 + 6β) Φ3 zz + 2β (1 + β) (2 + 3β) Φ...
[53]

Tottori and T

T. Tottori and T. J. Kobayashi, Resource limitations induc e phase transitions in biological information processing, Phys ical Review Research 7, L042012 (2025)

2025
[54]

Tottori and T

T. Tottori and T. J. Kobayashi, Theory for optimal estimatio n and control under resource limitations and its applications to biological information processing and decision-making, Ph ysical Review Research 7, 043048 (2025)

2025
[55]

Bensoussan, J

A. Bensoussan, J. Frehse, and S. C. P. Yam, The Master equat ion in mean ﬁeld theory, Journal de Math´ ematiques Pures et Appliqu´ ees103, 1441 (2015)

2015
[56]

Bensoussan, J

A. Bensoussan, J. Frehse, and S. C. P. Yam, On the interpretat ion of the Master Equation, Stochastic Processes and their Applications 127, 2093 (2017)
[57]

Carmona and F

R. Carmona and F. Delarue, Probabilistic Theory of Mean Field Games with Applications I , Probability theory and stochastic modelling No. volume 83 (Springer Nature, Cham, 20 18)
[58]

Carmona and F

R. Carmona and F. Delarue, Probabilistic Theory of Mean Field Games with Applications II , Probability Theory and Stochastic Modelling, Vol. 84 (Springer International Publi shing, Cham, 2018). 14

2018
[59]

Tottori and T

T. Tottori and T. J. Kobayashi, Memory-Limited Partially Ob servable Stochastic Control and Its Mean-Field Control Approach, Entropy 24, 1599 (2022)

2022
[60]

Tottori and T

T. Tottori and T. J. Kobayashi, Forward-Backward Sweep Metho d for the System of HJB-FP Equations in Memory-Limited Partially Observable Stochastic Control, Entropy 25, 208 (2023)

2023
[61]

Tottori and T

T. Tottori and T. J. Kobayashi, Decentralized Stochastic Co ntrol with Finite-Dimensional Memories: A Memory Limitation Approach, Entropy 25, 791 (2023)

2023
[62]

Yong and X

J. Yong and X. Y. Zhou, Stochastic Controls (Springer New York, New York, NY, 1999)

1999
[63]

Nisio, Stochastic Control Theory , Probability Theory and Stochastic Modelling, Vol

M. Nisio, Stochastic Control Theory , Probability Theory and Stochastic Modelling, Vol. 72 (Spring er Japan, Tokyo, 2015)

2015
[64]

Bensoussan, Estimation and Control of Dynamical Systems , Interdisciplinary Applied Mathematics, Vol

A. Bensoussan, Estimation and Control of Dynamical Systems , Interdisciplinary Applied Mathematics, Vol. 48 (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018)

2018
[65]

Tavoni, T

G. Tavoni, T. Doi, C. Pizzica, V. Balasubramanian, and J. I . Gold, Human inference reﬂects a normative balance of complexity and accuracy, Nature Human Behaviour 6, 1153 (2022)

2022

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

T. J. Kobayashi, Implementation of Dynamic Bayesian Decision Making by Intracellular Kinetics, Physical Re- view Letters 104, 228104 (2010)

2010

[2] [2]

Hinczewski and D

M. Hinczewski and D. Thirumalai, Cellular Signaling Networks Function as Generalized Wiener-Kolmogorov Filters to Suppress Noise, Physical Review X 4, 041017 (2014)

2014

[3] [3]

N. B. Becker, A. Mugler, and P. R. ten Wolde, Optimal Prediction by Cellular Signaling Networks, Physical Re- view Letters 115, 258103 (2015)

2015

[4] [4]

Mora and I

T. Mora and I. Nemenman, Physical Limit to Concentra- tion Sensing in a Changing Environment, Physical Re- view Letters 123, 198101 (2019)

2019

[5] [5]

Nakamura and T

K. Nakamura and T. J. Kobayashi, Connection between the Bacterial Chemotactic Network and Optimal Filter- ing, Physical Review Letters 126, 128102 (2021)

2021

[6] [6]

R. A. Heinonen, L. Biferale, A. Celani, and M. Vergas- sola, Optimal policies for Bayesian olfactory search in turbulent ﬂows, Physical Review E 107, 055105 (2023)

2023

[7] [7]

J. Rode, M. Novak, and B. M. Friedrich, Information Theory of Chemotactic Agents Using Both Spatial and Temporal Gradient Sensing, PRX Life 2, 023012 (2024)

2024

[8] [8]

Krishnamurthy, M

K. Krishnamurthy, M. R. Nassar, S. Sarode, and J. I. Gold, Arousal-related adjustments of perceptual biases optimize perception in dynamic environments, Nature Human Behaviour 1, 0107 (2017)

2017