Advertisement

On the Relation Between the Logical Structure of Systems and Their Ability to Generate Multiple Steady States or Sustained Oscillations

  • R. Thomas
Part of the Springer Series in Synergetics book series (SSSYN, volume 9)

Summary

Simple feedback loops behave in two essentially different ways depending on whether they contain an odd number of inhibitory elements (“negative” loops) or an even number of inhibitory elements (“positive” loops); for proper values of parameters or delays, the former generate sustained oscillations, the latter, multiple steady states. For more complex systems, as far as one can tell, the presence of at least one negative loop in the logical structure appears as a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for a permanent periodic behaviour, and the presence of at least one positive loop as a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for multiple steady states.

The second part of this paper deals with the cooperative use of Boolean and continuous methods in the field and with the relations between Boolean and quantitative iteration methods.

Keywords

Logical Structure Logical Equation Stable Steady State Future Production Oriented Graph 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    R. Thomas (ed.): Kinetic Logic, Lecture Notes in Biomathematics, Vol.29 (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York 1979)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. Glansdorff, I. Prigogine: Thermodynamics of Structure, Stability and Fluctuation (Wiley-Interscience, New York 1971)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    G. Nicolis, I. Prigogine: Self-Organization in Nonequilibriurn Systems (Wiley-Interscience, New York 1977)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Monod, J. Wyman, J.P. Changeux: J. Mol. Biol. 12, 88–118 (1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M.F. Perutz: Nature 228, 726–739 (1970)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    B.C. Goodwin: Adv. Enzyme Regul. 3 (1965)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H.G. Othmer: J. Math. Biol. 3, 53–78 (1976)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    J.J. Tyson: J. Chem. Phys. 62, 1010–1015 (1975)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    S.A. Kauffman: J. Theor. Biol. 22, 437–467 (1969)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Thomas: J. Theor. Biol. 42, 656–683 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Thomas: J. Theor. Biol. 73, 631–635 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. Richelle: In Ref.[1], pp.281–325Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    P. Van Ham, I. Lasters: J. Theor. Biol. 72, 269–281 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    M. Delbrück: In Unites biologiques douées de continuité génétique (Publications C.N.R.S., 1949) pp.33–35Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. Novick, M. Wiener: Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 43, 553–566 (1957)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. Cohn, K. Horibata: J. Bacteriol. 78, 601–612 (1959)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    H. Eisen, L.H. Pereira da Silva, P. Brachet, J. Jacob: Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 66, 855–862 (1970)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Z. Neubauer, E. Calef: J. Mol. Biol. 51, 1–13 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    B. Hess, A. Boiteux: Ann. Rev. Biochem. 40, 237–258 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    E.E. Sel’kov: Eur. J. Biochem. 4, 79–86 (1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    G. Gerisch, B. Hess: Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 71, 2118–2122 (1979)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Goldbeter: Nature 253, 540–542 (1975)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23a.
    W.D. Friesen, G.S. Stent: Biol. Cybernetics 28, 27–40 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 23b.
    W.D. Friesen, G.S. Stent: Ann. Rev. Biophys. Bioeng. 7, 37–61 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 24.
    G. Székely: Acta Physiol. Acad. Sci. Hung. 27, 285–289 (1965)Google Scholar
  26. 25.
    R. Thomas: In Ref. [1], pp.388–399Google Scholar
  27. 26.
    L. Glass, S.A. Kauffman: J. Theor. Biol. 39, 103–129 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 27.
    J. Florine: La Synthese des Machines Logiques (Presses Académiques Européennes, Bruxelles 1964)Google Scholar
  29. 28.
    R. Thomas: Proc. 1980 Solvay Conference in Chemistry, Adv. Chem. Phys.1982 (in press)Google Scholar
  30. 29.
    F. Robert: Rapport de recherche n°163, IMAG, Grenoble (1979)Google Scholar
  31. 30.
    P. Van Ham: Thesis, University of Brussels (1975)Google Scholar
  32. 31.
    P. Van Ham: In Ref.[l], pp.149–163Google Scholar
  33. 32.
    L. Glass: J. Chem. Phys. 63, 1325–1335 (1975)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 33.
    L. Glass: In Statistical Mechantes and Statistical Methods in Theory and Application, ed. by U. Landman (Plenum, New York 1977)Google Scholar
  35. 34.
    L. Glass, J.S. Pasternak: Bull. Math. Biol. 40, 27–44 (1978)Google Scholar
  36. 35.
    R.N. Tchuraev, V.A. Ratner: In Studies on Mathematical Genetics, ed. by V.A. Ratner (Novosibirsk Inst. Cytol. Genet. Press 1975)Google Scholar
  37. 36.
    V.A. Ratner: Molekulargenetische Steuerungssysteme (Akademie, Berlin 1977)Google Scholar
  38. 37.
    A. Rörsch, M.A.E. Groothuis, A.M.H. Schepman: In Ref.[1], pp.440–463Google Scholar
  39. 38.
    E. Goles-Chacc: Rapport de recherches n°157, IMAG, Grenoble (1979)Google Scholar
  40. 39.
    A. Leussler, P. Van Ham: In Ref.[1], pp.62–85Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Thomas
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire de GénétiqueUniversité Libre de BruxellesRhode Saint GenèseBelgium

Personalised recommendations