4.7 Article

Perspective: Sloppiness and emergent theories in physics, biology, and beyond

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 143, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/1.4923066

关键词

-

资金

  1. NSF [DMR 1312160, IOS 1127017]
  2. John Templeton Foundation
  3. U.S. Army Research Laboratory
  4. U.S. Army Research Office [W911NF-13-1-0340]
  5. Lewis-Sigler Fellowship
  6. Division Of Materials Research
  7. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1312160] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  8. Div Of Molecular and Cellular Bioscience
  9. Direct For Biological Sciences [1127017] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Large scale models of physical phenomena demand the development of new statistical and computational tools in order to be effective. Many such models are sloppy, i.e., exhibit behavior controlled by a relatively small number of parameter combinations. We review an information theoretic framework for analyzing sloppy models. This formalism is based on the Fisher information matrix, which is interpreted as a Riemannian metric on a parameterized space of models. Distance in this space is a measure of how distinguishable two models are based on their predictions. Sloppy model manifolds are bounded with a hierarchy of widths and extrinsic curvatures. The manifold boundary approximation can extract the simple, hidden theory from complicated sloppy models. We attribute the success of simple effective models in physics as likewise emerging from complicated processes exhibiting a low effective dimensionality. We discuss the ramifications and consequences of sloppy models for biochemistry and science more generally. We suggest that the reason our complex world is understandable is due to the same fundamental reason: simple theories of macroscopic behavior are hidden inside complicated microscopic processes. (C) 2015 Author(s). All article content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据