↓ Skip to main content

Structural determinants of criticality in biological networks

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
122 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Structural determinants of criticality in biological networks
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2015.00127
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sergi Valverde, Sebastian Ohse, Malgorzata Turalska, Bruce J. West, Jordi Garcia-Ojalvo

Abstract

Many adaptive evolutionary systems display spatial and temporal features, such as long-range correlations, typically associated with the critical point of a phase transition in statistical physics. Empirical and theoretical studies suggest that operating near criticality enhances the functionality of biological networks, such as brain and gene networks, in terms for instance of information processing, robustness, and evolvability. While previous studies have explained criticality with specific system features, we still lack a general theory of critical behavior in biological systems. Here we look at this problem from the complex systems perspective, since in principle all critical biological circuits have in common the fact that their internal organization can be described as a complex network. An important question is how self-similar structure influences self-similar dynamics. Modularity and heterogeneity, for instance, affect the location of critical points and can be used to tune the system toward criticality. We review and discuss recent studies on the criticality of neuronal and genetic networks, and discuss the implications of network theory when assessing the evolutionary features of criticality.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Taiwan 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 114 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 25%
Researcher 23 19%
Student > Master 18 15%
Professor 10 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 7%
Other 19 16%
Unknown 13 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 20%
Neuroscience 18 15%
Psychology 12 10%
Physics and Astronomy 12 10%
Computer Science 10 8%
Other 28 23%
Unknown 17 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 July 2016.
All research outputs
#6,853,883
of 25,205,864 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#3,143
of 15,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,038
of 270,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#16
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,205,864 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 270,562 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.