CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Philosophy of Biology and Scientific ExplanationComplex Systems and DynamicsChaos, Complexity, and Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Complexity: against systems

Open access
Chu, Dominique·2011·Theory in Biosciences
DOI 10.1007/s12064-011-0121-4
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This article assumes a specific intuitive notion of complexity as a difficulty to generate and/or assess the plausibility of models. Based on this intuitive understanding of complexity, it identifies two main causes of complexity, namely, radical openness and contextuality. The former is the idea that there are no natural systems. The modeler always needs to draw artificial boundaries around phenomena to generate feasible models. Contextuality is intimately connected to the requirement to simplify models and to leave out most aspects. Complexity occurs when contextuality and radical openness cannot be contained that is when it is not clear where the boundaries of the system are and which abstractions are the correct ones. This concept of complexity is illustrated using a number of example from evolution.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12064-011-0121-4

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Adami C (1998) Introduction to artificial life. Springer, New York · DOI · Paper page
  2. Ahl V, Allen T (1996) Hierarchy theory: a vision, vocabulary and epistemology. Columbia University Press, New York
  3. Bak P (1997) How nature works. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  4. Bedau M, Smith R (1999) Is echo a complex adaptive system?. Evol Comput 7(1):45–68 · DOI
  5. Bedau M, Snyder E., Brown T., Packard N. (1997) A comparison of evolutionary activity and artificial evolving systems in the biosphere. In: Husbands P, Harvey I (eds) In: Proceedings of the fourth European conference on artificial life.
  6. Bennett C (1986) On the nature and origin of complexity in discrete, homogeneous, locally-interacting systems. Found Physics 16(6):585–592 · DOI
  7. Buckling A, Harrison F, Vos M, Brockhurst M, Gardner A, West S, Griffin A (2007) Siderophore-mediated cooperation and virulence in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 62(2):135–141 · DOI
  8. Chu D, Ho W (2006) A category theoretical argument against the possibility of artificial life. Artif Life 12(4):117–135 · DOI
  9. Chu D, Ho W (2007) Computational realizations of living systems. Artif Life 13(4):369–381 · DOI
  10. Chu D, Ho W (2007) The localization hypothesis and machines. Artifi Life 13(3):299–302 · DOI
  11. Chu D, Strand R, Fjelland R (2003) Theories of complexity. Complexity 8(3):19–30 · DOI
  12. Chu D, Lee H, Lenaerts T (2005) Evolution of DNA uptake signal sequences. Artifi Life 11(3):317–338 · DOI
  13. Chu D, Zabet N, Mitavskiy B (2009) Models of transcription factor binding: sensitivity of activation functions to model assumptions. J Theor Biol 257(3):419–429 · DOI
  14. Edmonds B (1999) Syntactic measures of complexity. Ph.D. thesis, University of Manchester. http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/∼bruce/thesis
  15. Eigen M, Schuster P (1979) The hypercycle: a principle of natural self-organization. Springer, Berlin, HeidelBerg and New York · DOI · Paper page
  16. Stanley HS et.al (1996a) Scaling and universality in animate and inanimate systems. Physica A 231: 20–48 · DOI
  17. Stanley HS et.al (1996b) Scaling and universality in living systems. Fractals 4: 427–451 · DOI
  18. Fletcher J, Zwick M (2007) The evolution of altruism: game theory in multilevel selection and inclusive fitness. J Theor Biol 245(1):26–36 · DOI
  19. Gross D. Lenaerts T (2003) Towards a definition of dynamical hierarchies. In: Bilotta E, Smith DGT, Lenaerts T, Bullock S, Lund H, Bird J, Watson R, Pantano P, Pagliarini L, Abbass H, Standish R, Bedau M (eds) Workshop proceedings of the eighth international conference on artificial life. University of New South Wales Press, pp. 45–55
  20. Gross D, Strand R (2000) Can agent-based models assist decisions on large-scale practical problems? A philosophical analysis. Complexity 5(5):26–33 · DOI
  21. Hase K, Yamazak N (2007) Computational evolution of human bipedal walking by a neuro-musculo-skeletal model. Artif Life Robot 3(3):133–138 · DOI
  22. Hoffmeyer J (2009) Biosemiotics: an examination into the signs of life and the life of signs. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
  23. Holland J (1995) Hidden order. Addison-Weseley, Reading
  24. Holland J (1998) Emergence. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  25. Langton C (ed.) (1989) Artificial life—an overview. MIT Press, Cambridge
  26. Letelier J, Marin G, Mpodozis J (2004) Autopoietic and (M,R) systems. J Theor Biol 222:261–272 · DOI
  27. Letelier J, Soto-Andrade J, Abarzua FG, Cornish-Bowden A, Cardenas M (2006) Organizational invariance and metabolic closure: analysis in terms of (M,R) systems. J Theor Biol 238:949–961 · DOI
  28. McMullin B, Varela F (1997) Rediscovering computational autopoiesis’. In: Husbands P, Harvey I (eds) Proceedings of the fourth European conference on artificial life. MIT Press, Cambridge, http://www.eeng.dcu.ie/˜alife/bmcm-ecal97/
  29. McShea D (1996) Metazoan complexity and evolution: is there a trend?. Evolution 50:477–492 · DOI
  30. Mitchell M (1997) An introduction to genetic algorithms. A Bradford Book. 3rd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 378–387
  31. Noble D (2009) The music of life. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  32. Pickering A (1995) The mangle of practice. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago · DOI
  33. Ray T (1996) An approach to the syntheses of life, Oxford Readings in Philosophy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 111–145
  34. Rescher N (1998) Complexity—a philosophical overview. Transaction, New Brunswick, p 219
  35. Rosen R (1991) Life Itself. Columbia University Press, New York
  36. Rosen R (1999) Essays on life itself. Columbia University Press, New York
  37. Santos FC, Pacheco JM, Lenaerts T (2006) Evolutionary dynamics of social dilemmas in structured heterogeneous populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103(9): 3490–3494 · DOI
  38. Slutsky M, Kardar M, Mirny L (2004) Diffusion in correlated random potentials, with applications to DNA. Phys Rev E 69(6):061903 · DOI
  39. Sneppen K, Zochhi G (2005) Physics in molecular biology. Canbridge University Press, Cambridge
  40. Traulsen A, Nowak M (2006) Evolution of cooperation by multilevel selection. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103(29): 10952–10955 · DOI
  41. West S, Diggle S, Buckling A, Gardner A, Griffin A (2007) The Social lives of microbes. Annu Rev Ecol Evol System 38:53–77 · DOI
  42. Wild G, Gardner A, SA West (2009) Adaptation and the evolution of parasite virulence in a connected world. Nature 459(7249):983–986 · DOI
  43. Wolkenhauer O (2002) Systems biology: the reincarnation of systems theory applied to biology?. Brief Bioinform 2(3):258–270 · DOI
  44. Wolkenhauer O, Hofmeyr J (2007) An abstract cell model that describes the self-organization of cell function in living systems. J Theor Biol 246(3):461–476 · DOI
  45. Worden L, Levin S (2007) Evolutionary escape from the prisoner’s dilemma. J Theor Biol 245(3):411–422 · DOI
  46. Wunderlich Z, Mirny L (2008) Spatial effects on the speed and reliability of protein-DNA search. Nucleic Acids Res 36(11):3570–3578 · DOI
  47. Wynne B (2005) Reflexing complexity: post-genomic knowledge and reductionist returns in public science. Theory CultureSoc 22(5):133–138 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Chu, D.
Affiliations
University of Kent (GB)
Corresponding author
Chu, Dominique
ORCID
Chu, Dominique
Venue
Theory in Biosciences
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2011-02-02
Volume
130
Issue
3
Pages
229-245
ISSN
  • 1431-7613 (ISSN-L)
  • 1611-7530
DOI
10.1007/s12064-011-0121-4
OpenAlex
W2076501318
Cited by
39
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
26.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Theory in Biosciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Kent Academic Repository (University of Kent) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Universitetet i Bergen
  • Norges Forskningsråd
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Systems and Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Chaos, Complexity, and Education
Keywords
complexity, systems, radical openness, contextuality, model reduction, abstraction, model plausibility, evolution, philosophy of biology
MeSH terms
Biological Evolution, Models, Theoretical, Systems Biology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review