Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33532895›Full record

ReviewTheory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften2021

Informational architecture across non-living and living collectives.

Hyunju Kim, Gabriele Valentini, Jake Hanson, Sara Imari Walker

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. A Metric for the Entropic Purpose of a System.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Hyunju Kim *Beyond Center for Fundamental Concepts in Science, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Gabriele Valentini *School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Jake HansonBeyond Center for Fundamental Concepts in Science, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Sara Imari WalkerBeyond Center for Fundamental Concepts in Science, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA. sara.i.walker@asu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5779-2772

Funding

National Science Foundation PHY22-.31505048
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Collective behavior is widely regarded as a hallmark property of living and intelligent systems. Yet, many examples are known of simple physical systems that are not alive, which nonetheless display collective behavior too, prompting simple physical models to often be adopted to explain living collective behaviors. To understand collective behavior as it occurs in living examples, it is important to determine whether or not there exist fundamental differences in how non-living and living systems act collectively, as well as the limits of the intuition that can be built from simpler, physical examples in explaining biological phenomenon. Here, we propose a framework for comparing non-living and living collectives as a continuum based on their information architecture: that is, how information is stored and processed across different degrees of freedom. We review diverse examples of collective phenomena, characterized from an information-theoretic perspective, and offer views on future directions for quantifying living collective behaviors based on their informational structure.

Indexed as

Mass GatheringsGroup ProcessesBiological informationCollective behaviorInformation theoryLiving collectives

Identifiers

PMID33532895
PMCPMC8629804

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.