ArticleArXiv2026
Decoding molecular distributional codes through collective instabilities.
Article in ArXiv, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biological information is often encoded in molecular variants that differ in just a few chemical traits, such as the number of phosphorylated sites or ubiquitin chain length, rather than in arbitrarily distinct species. These molecular distributions carry information about cellular state, yet reading them with conventional molecular circuits requires prohibitively many distinct sensors. In contrast, we show that collective physical instabilities can naturally integrate the information encoded in such distributions. Using an information-theoretic matching condition between an encoded distribution and a physical readout, we derive a geometric condition that any good decoder must satisfy, and establish that phase separation, percolation, and membrane curvature instabilities all approach it for biologically natural distributions while simple mass-action binding does not. Using mean-field theory and lattice Monte Carlo simulations, we find that phase separation reads the shape of a distribution beyond its mean, robustly capturing its variance and, more weakly, its skewness, whereas mass-action binding detects only the mean. Near phase boundaries the readout captures nearly all the information present in the molecular population. Finite valency, through the threshold for network formation, adds discriminatory power invisible to mean-field theory. These results suggest that cells can exploit collective physical instabilities as natural, compact, yet near-optimal sensors for decoding molecular distributional codes.
Identifiers
42539144PMC13419624What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.