Response to Comments on "Simple Measure for Complexity"
JS Shiner, Matt Davison, PT Landsberg
Abstract
We respond to the comment by Crutchfield, Feldman and Shalizi and that by Binder and Perry, pointing out that there may be many maximum entropies, and therefore ``disorders'' and ``simple complexities''. Which ones are appropriate depend on the questions being addressed. ``Disorder'' is not restricted to be the ratio of a nonequilibrium entropy to the corresponding equilibrium entropy; therefore, ``simple complexity'' need not vanish for all equiibrium systems, nor must it be nonvanishing for a nonequilibrium system.
Create a lesson
Related papers
Global synchronization in time-varying directed higher-order networks
Wilfried Segnou, Timoteo Carletti, Dibakar Ghosh
How Mobile Oscillators Reshape Dynamical Robustness in Complex Networks
Sayantan Nag Chowdhury, Srilena Kundu
Stochastic resonance in adaptive dynamical networks
Vladimir V. Semenov
Collective Sensing as Emergent Bayesian Inference
Conor Heins
Dimension-dependent order parameter selection in higher-order Kuramoto dynamics on spheres: continuous versus quantized regimes
Hyungjin Huh, Dohyun Kim
Recovery Random Walks and Extreme Events on Complex Networks
Karan Singh, Narendran R. V., V. K. Chandrasekar et al.