4.6 Article

Assessing the robustness of critical behavior in stochastic cellular automata

Journal

PHYSICA D-NONLINEAR PHENOMENA
Volume 441, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.physd.2022.133507

Keywords

Stochastic cellular automata; Criticality; Self-organization

Funding

  1. Norwegian Research Council, Norway SOCRATES project
  2. [270961]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigates the robustness of critical systems to noise by examining the robustness of stochastic cellular automata (CAs) at criticality. The findings indicate that a specific CA can remain in a critical regime even under certain levels of noise, as demonstrated by error metrics of power-law fitting. The implications of these results for future brain-inspired artificial intelligence systems are discussed.
There is evidence that biological systems, such as the brain, work at a critical regime robust to noise, and are therefore able to remain in it under perturbations. In this work, we address the question of robustness of critical systems to noise. In particular, we investigate the robustness of stochastic cellular automata (CAs) at criticality. A stochastic CA is one of the simplest stochastic models showing criticality. The transition state of stochastic CA is defined through a set of probabilities. We systematically perturb the probabilities of an optimal stochastic CA known to produce critical behavior, and we report that such a CA is able to remain in a critical regime up to a certain degree of noise. We present the results using error metrics of the resulting power-law fitting, such as Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic and Kullback-Leibler divergence. We discuss the implication of our results in regards to future realization of brain-inspired artificial intelligence systems.(c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available