1: \documentclass[aps,pre,twocolumn,showpacs,floatfix,superscriptaddress]{revtex4}
2: %\documentclass[aps,twocolumn]{revtex4}
3: %\usepackage{epsfig}
4: %\usepackage{pxfonts}
5: %\documentclass[aps,pre,showpacs,twocolumn,superscriptaddress]{revtex4}
6: %\usepackage[draft]{graphicx}
7: \usepackage{graphicx}
8: \usepackage{amsmath}
9: %\usepackage{amssymb}
10: \usepackage{epsfig}
11: %\bibstyle{apsrev.bib}
12: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
13: % this is how one defines new commands.
14: \newcommand{\on}{{\sc on}}
15: \newcommand{\off}{{\sc off}}
16: \newcommand{\bs}{\boldsymbol}
17:
18: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
19:
20: \begin{document}
21:
22: \title{Attractors in continuous and Boolean networks}
23:
24: \author{Johannes Norrell}
25: \author{Bj{\"o}rn Samuelsson}
26: \author{Joshua E.\ S.\ Socolar}
27: \affiliation{
28: Physics Department and Center for Nonlinear and Complex Systems,
29: Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708}
30:
31: \date{\today}
32:
33: \begin{abstract}
34: We study the stable attractors of a class of continuous dynamical
35: systems that may be idealized as networks of Boolean elements, with
36: the goal of determining which Boolean attractors, if any, are good
37: approximations of the attractors of generic continuous systems. We
38: investigate the dynamics in simple rings and rings with one
39: additional self-input. An analysis of switching characteristics and
40: pulse propagation explains the relation between attractors of the
41: continuous systems and their Boolean approximations. For simple rings,
42: ``reliable'' Boolean attractors correspond to stable continuous
43: attractors. For networks with more complex logic, the qualitative
44: features of continuous attractors are influenced by inherently
45: non-Boolean characteristics of switching events.
46: \end{abstract}
47:
48: \pacs{89.75.Hc, 05.45.--a, 02.30.Ks}
49: \maketitle
50:
51: \section{Introduction}
52: Complex networks of interacting elements arise in many biological,
53: chemical, sociological, and physical contexts. An important example
54: is the network of interactions among proteins and DNA in a cell. The
55: binding of certain proteins to each other and to promoter regions of
56: DNA can create a combinatorially complex logic of gene expression. It
57: is tempting to think of transcriptional networks and similar examples
58: as effectively Boolean in nature. In such a picture, genes are turned
59: ``on'' and ``off'' in the presence of proteins produced when other
60: genes are turned on or off \cite{Davidson:06}, and many studies of the
61: fundamental principles governing networks of interacting genes have
62: focused Boolean models. Recent work has highlighted distinctions in
63: the attractor structures as network architecture parameters are
64: varied, different distributions of Boolean functions are incorporated,
65: and/or different updating schemes are employed \cite{Aldana:03a,
66: Aldana:03b, Greil:05, Moreira:05, Kesseli:06, Paul:06,
67: Samuelsson:06}.
68:
69: The Boolean models are generally understood to be idealized
70: representations of underlying continuous and perhaps stochastic
71: processes, so it is important to understand any artifacts introduced
72: in Boolean approximations. Here we investigate some continuous,
73: deterministic systems motivated by models of transcriptional
74: interactions and designed to be good candidates for a Boolean
75: analysis. The goal is to elucidate the most important effects that
76: may lead the continuous dynamics to differ qualitatively from
77: expectations based on the Boolean models.
78:
79: We investigate the temporal structure and stability of the attractors
80: of continuous dynamical systems and those of the corresponding Boolean
81: models. Two effects are found to be crucial for understanding the
82: structure of the continuous attractors: first, when an \on-\off\
83: symmetry of typical Boolean models is broken, the possibility of
84: stable pulse propagation down a chain can be lost; and second, the
85: memory of past inputs at a given node causes shifts in the temporal
86: spacing between multiple pulses on a feedback loop. These effects
87: make it difficult to put the attractors of the continuous network into
88: correspondence with the attractors of their Boolean counterparts.
89:
90: We study rings of $N$ elements (Fig.~\ref{fig:rings}) governed by
91: delay differential equations. The delays are introduced to represent
92: intermediate steps in the process mediating the interactions between
93: elements. We employ a form developed originally as a mean-field
94: description of the dynamics of transcription factor expression
95: \cite{Andrecut:06}, though for present purposes it simply provides
96: a generic model of elements with sigmoidal responses to their inputs:
97: \begin{align}
98: \label{eqn:continuous}
99: {\dot x}_j(t) & = f_j\bs(x_{j-1}(t-\tau)\bs) - x_j(t)\,, \\
100: \label{eqn:f1in}
101: f_j(x_i) & =
102: \eta_j\biggl(\frac{1+d_i^jx_i^{\nu}}{1+b_i^j x_i^{\nu}}\biggr)\,,
103: \end{align}
104: where $\eta_j$, $b_i^j$, and $d_i^j$ are constants and $\tau$ is a
105: time required for the signal produced by $x_{j-1}$ to reach $x_j$.
106: All subscripts are taken modulo $N$. The parameters are chosen such
107: that the output of $f_j$ switches sharply between low and high values
108: as the input is smoothly varied. We assume that all $x_j$ have the
109: same decay rate (chosen to be unity) and all arguments of $f_j$ have
110: the same time delay. We also consider the effects of adding a
111: self-input to $x_1$, also with delay $\tau$:
112: \begin{align}
113: \label{eqn:selfinput}
114: {\dot x}_1(t) & = f_1\bs(x_{0}(t-\tau),x_{1}(t-\tau)\bs) - x_1(t)\,, \\
115: \label{eqn:f2in}
116: f_1(x_0,x_1) & = \eta_1\biggl(
117: \frac{1+d_0^1 x_0^{\nu}+d_1^1 x_1^{\nu}+ d_{01}^1(x_0 x_1)^{\nu/2}}{\displaystyle
118: 1+b_0^1 x_0^{\nu}+b_1^1x_1^{\nu}+ b_{01}^1(x_0 x_1)^{\nu/2}}
119: \biggr)\,.
120: \end{align}
121: A Boolean idealization is obtained in the limit in which $f_j$ is a
122: step function and the decay term $-x_j(t)$ has an infinite
123: coefficient.
124: \begin{figure}[b]
125: \includegraphics*[width=0.7\columnwidth]{rings.eps}
126: \caption{\label{fig:rings}
127: A simple ring and a self-input ring. {\bf\textsf C} indicates that
128: the element copies its input; {\bf\textsf F} indicates that the
129: element is either a copier or an inverter on the simple ring, or
130: that it performs one of the two-input logic functions on the
131: self-input element.}
132: \end{figure}
133:
134: We find that continuous systems can exhibit stable oscillations in
135: cases where Boolean reasoning would suggest otherwise and that in some
136: cases where Boolean reasoning predicts a stable attractor, the
137: corresponding continuous attractor does not have the expected
138: structure.
139:
140: \section{Boolean systems}
141: We begin by summarizing the known behavior of Boolean systems where
142: each $x_j$ is taken to be a Boolean variable and its dependence on its
143: inputs is specified by a Boolean function $F_j$. A common choice is
144: to update all the elements synchronously, setting each $x_j$ at each
145: discrete time step to the value $F_j$ returned just after the previous
146: step. Synchronously updated systems are easy to simulate, but are not
147: generic. To avoid artifacts of synchronicity, Klemm and Bornholdt
148: \cite{Klemm:05a} present a class of autonomous Boolean systems running
149: in continuous time. Here the output of each $F_j$ is fed through a
150: filter that delays the signal by a fixed time (analogous to our
151: $\tau$, which they set equal to 1) and cuts out short pulses. (See
152: Appendix~\ref{app:autonomous} for details.) These autonomous
153: networks have state cycles that correspond to the attractors of a
154: synchronously updated Boolean network. In contrast to synchronous
155: Boolean networks, however, autonomous networks permit the study of
156: infinitesimal fluctuations in the timing of switching events. One can
157: externally impose a delay in one switching event and see whether the
158: sequence of time intervals between switching events is restored by the
159: dynamics. If all possible small time delays evolve back to the same
160: sequence of switching times, the state cycle of the autonomous system
161: is stable. If, on the other hand, a subset of the switching times in
162: the cycle remain delayed compared to the others for some perturbation,
163: the state cycle is marginally stable. There are no unstable state
164: cycles, because there is no way for an infinitesimal perturbation to
165: get amplified. As a consequence, autonomous networks have an infinite
166: set of marginally stable cycles.
167:
168: Klemm and Bornholdt coined the terms ``reliable'' and ``unreliable''
169: to denote attractors in the {\em synchronous} system that correspond
170: to stable and marginal cycles, respectively, in the corresponding
171: autonomous system \cite{Klemm:05a}. In accordance with their
172: convention, we use the term ``attractor'' for any periodic state-cycle
173: in a synchronously updated network. Unreliable attractors are not
174: expected to be observed in real systems because errors in timing can
175: accumulate and eventually cause a transition to a different attractor.
176: One of our goals is to determine whether the set of reliable
177: attractors is in one-to-one correspondence with the set of attractors
178: of a continuous system.
179:
180: The dynamics of simple Boolean rings have been well characterized
181: \cite{Flyvbjerg:88, Klemm:05a, Greil:05}. In a simple ring, each
182: element either copies or inverts the state of its input. A ring with
183: an even (odd) number of inverters is dynamically equivalent to a ring
184: with zero (exactly one) inverters since a pair of inverters can be
185: transformed to copiers by redefining the meaning of {\sc on} and {\sc
186: off} for all elements between them. For a ring with no inverters,
187: there are two fixed points; the states with all elements \on\ or all
188: elements \off. For a ring with one inverter there is no fixed point
189: because at all times there must be at least one element whose value is
190: not consistent with its input. We refer to this local inconsistency
191: as a ``kink'' and we identify the kink as ``positive'' (``negative'')
192: when the element's input is \on\ (\off). A single kink traveling
193: around the ring forms a stable cycle with the kink changing its sign
194: each time it passes the inverter. For synchronous updates, the
195: separation between kinks cannot change, so every state lies on an
196: attractor; there are no transients. For the autonomous system, any
197: cycle with more than one kink is marginally stable because there is no
198: restoring mechanism for a perturbation in the time lag between two
199: kinks. The multi-kink synchronous attractors are therefore
200: unreliable.
201:
202: For rings in which element $1$ has a self-input in addition to its
203: input from element $0$, the attractor structure is nontrivial.
204: Without loss of generality, we assume that the remaining elements are
205: all copiers. There are ten possible choices of the Boolean function
206: $F_1$ at element $1$ for which both inputs are relevant. These
207: comprise five pairs that are related by an \on--\off\ symmetry. For
208: two of these pairs, the only attractors are fixed points, so there are
209: only three nontrivial cases; (I) $F_1 =$ {\sc nor}, (II) $F_1 =$ {\sc
210: xor}, and (III) $F_1 = (x_0$ {\sc and not} $x_1)$.
211:
212: For the present discussion, we restrict attention to the case $N=4$.
213: In Case I, there is a single attractor that is (surprisingly)
214: unreliable. In Cases II and III, the all-\off\ state is a fixed
215: point. Case II also has a reliable cycle containing all 15 other
216: states. Case III has two cyclic attractors, both unreliable: a
217: 4-state cycle consisting of the state $1000$ and its cyclic
218: permutations; and a 2-state cycle consisting of the states $1010$ and
219: $0101$.
220:
221: Our first important observation is that the definition of reliability
222: employed by Klemm and Bornholdt assumes the time delay for an element
223: is the same regardless of whether an input is turning \on\ or \off.
224: The breaking of this symmetry (see below) leads to different
225: propagation speeds for positive and negative kinks, which can destroy
226: or stabilize some marginally stable cycles. For example, the
227: unreliable 4-cycle in Case III is stabilized if positive kinks move
228: faster than negative kinks. Though the duration of the \on\ pulse
229: increases as it goes around the ring, it is cut back to $\tau$ each
230: time the pulse passes the self-input element.
231:
232: \section{Analysis of continuous systems}
233: We now turn to the analysis of continuous systems described by
234: Eqs.~\eqref{eqn:continuous}--\eqref{eqn:f2in}. We choose the Hill
235: coefficient (or cooperativity) $\nu=2$ corresponding to regulation
236: performed by dimers \cite{Andrecut:06}. We fix $\eta$, $b$, and $d$
237: as follows in order to observe clearly identifiable \off\ and \on\
238: states. For a single element that receives one input, we set
239: \begin{equation}
240: \label{eqn:singleinputparams}
241: \begin{array}{llll}
242: \eta=1, & b=0.001, & d=0.1 & {\textrm{\ for a copier}}; \\
243: \eta=100, & b=0.1, & d=0 & {\textrm{\ for an inverter}}.
244: \end{array}
245: \end{equation}
246: With these choices, there are three fixed points for simple rings with
247: only {\sc copy} elements: the all-\off\ state $x=1.13$; the all-\on\
248: state $x=88.9$; and the unstable {\em switching value} $x=10.0$. For
249: an {\sc invert} element, a steady \off\ input of $1.13$ produces
250: $x=88.7$ (close to the \on\ value); an \on\ input of $88.9$ produces
251: $x=0.13$ (close to the \off\ value); and $x=9.67$ is an unstable fixed
252: point. For the self-input element, the values listed in
253: Table~\ref{tab:parameters} are chosen to represent the classes of
254: functions whose Boolean idealizations would be Cases I, II, and III
255: above.
256: \begin{table}[b] \label{tab:parameters}
257: \caption{Parameter values for self-input elements.}
258: \begin{tabular}{c|ccccccc}
259: \hline
260: Case \rule[0pt]{0pt}{11pt} & $\eta$ & $b_0^1$ & $b_1^1$ & $b_{01}^1$ & $d_0^1$ & $d_1^1$ & $d_{01}^1$ \\
261: \hline
262: I & $100$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
263: II & 1 & $0.001$ & $0.001$ & $\;0.02\;$ & $\;0.1\;$ & $\;0.1\;$ & $\;0\;$ \\
264: III & $1$ & $0.001$ & $0$ & $0.02$ & $0.1$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
265: \hline
266: \end{tabular}
267: \end{table}
268:
269: To study the propagation of positive and negative kinks, we derive the
270: time it takes for a single kink to pass from one element to the next
271: in a chain of single-input elements. The expression levels are
272: denoted by $x_0(t),x_1(t),x_2(t),\ldots$, where $x_0(t)$ serves as an
273: input and the other elements obey Eq.~\eqref{eqn:continuous}.
274: For initial conditions, we
275: assume that $x_j(t)$ has the fixed value $\alpha_j$ for all $t\le0$,
276: with $\alpha_j=f_j(\alpha_{j-1})$ for $j=1,2,\ldots$.
277:
278: If $x_0$ switches values, approaching a constant value $\beta_0$ at long times, each of
279: the $x_j$ will eventually approach a new value $\beta_j$. For
280: mathematical convenience, we define rescaled quantities ${\hat x}_j(t)
281: \equiv [x_j(t) - \beta_j]/(\alpha_j - \beta_j)$ and ${\hat f}_j(x)
282: \equiv [f_j(x) - \beta_j]/(\alpha_j - \beta_j)$ with the properties
283: ${\hat x}_j(0) = 1$ and ${\hat x}_j(t)\rightarrow 0$ for large $t$.
284: We further define a specific time $s_j$ associated with the switch
285: from $\alpha_j$ to $\beta_j$ by the formula
286: \begin{equation}
287: \label{eqn:switchingdef}
288: s_j \equiv \int_0^\infty dt\,{\hat x}_j(t).
289: \end{equation}
290:
291: The formal solution of Eq.~\eqref{eqn:continuous} is
292: \begin{equation}
293: \label{eqn:dynamicsintegral}
294: x_j(t) = \int_{-\infty}^tdu\,f_j\bs(x_{j-1}(u-\tau)\bs)\,e^{u-t}
295: \end{equation}
296: for all $j\neq 0$. Substituting into Eq.~\eqref{eqn:switchingdef} and
297: subtracting $s_{j-1}$ from both sides yields an expression for the
298: time delay between the switching of elements $j-1$ and $j$:
299: \begin{equation}
300: \label{eqn:switchingdiff}
301: s_j - s_{j-1} = \tau + 1
302: + \int_0^\infty dt\,[{\hat f}_j\bs(x_{j-1}(t)\bs)-{\hat x}_{j-1}(t)].
303: \end{equation}
304: This delay is the sum of the explicit delay $\tau$, an intrinsic delay
305: of unity associated with the unit coefficient of the $-x_j$ term of
306: Eq.~\eqref{eqn:continuous}, and an additional term that depends on the
307: details of the input function ${\hat f}_j$.
308:
309: For chains of identical copiers with the parameters
310: specified above, it is straightforward to show that the additional
311: delay is positive (negative) for negative (positive) kinks and
312: therefore that positive kinks will propagate faster, which implies
313: that an \on\ pulse will expand in width and an \off\ pulse will
314: shrink and disappear. By changing the parameters $\eta$, $b$, and
315: $d$, it is possible to reverse this situation, but arranging for
316: precisely equal propagation speeds requires fine tuning.
317:
318: In the numerical simulation of Fig.~\ref{fig:kinkspeeds} it is clear
319: that the kink moves faster in its positive form than in its negative
320: form. (To bring out the asymmetry, this figure was made for $\tau =
321: 2$, a relatively short time. Though the propagation time from one
322: site to the next depends on $\tau$, the difference between propagation
323: times for positive and negative kinks does not.) The asymmetry is
324: also present in the continuous two-element rings in
325: Ref.~\cite{Klemm:05b} and in the repressilator simulation of
326: Ref.~\cite{Elowitz:00}. The electronic model with step function
327: switching in Ref.~\cite{Glass:05}, however, does not break the
328: symmetry for the case studied, in which the switching level is halfway
329: between the \on\ and \off\ voltages.
330: \begin{figure}[t]
331: \includegraphics*[width=\columnwidth]{sep.eps}
332: \caption{\label{fig:kinkspeeds}
333: Propagation of a single kink around a ring of four elements with one
334: inverter and $\tau=2$. The thick, thin, dashed, and grey lines
335: represent element 1, 2, 3, and 0, respectively. Note that
336: propagation is faster when the kink is positive and slower after the
337: inverter converts it to a negative kink. }
338: \end{figure}
339:
340: Until now, we have neglected the fact that the propagation speed of a
341: kink through a given element is influenced by kinks that have
342: previously passed through.
343: Consider now an \on\ pulse consisting of a positive kink followed by
344: a negative kink.
345: From Eq.~\eqref{eqn:dynamicsintegral}, we
346: see that $x_j(t)$ has an exponentially decaying memory of the events
347: in $x_{j-1}(t)$. Because $f_j(x)$ is monotonic, the memory of low
348: values of $x_{j-1}(t)$ before the pulse in $x_{j-1}(t)$ will speed
349: up the effect of the trailing edge. The interaction
350: shortens the pulse duration at $x_j(t)$, and monotonicity of $f_j$
351: ensures that the effect is stronger for shorter pulses. Similar
352: reasoning shows that an \off\ pulse will also be shorter than the
353: time between kinks one would predict
354: from Eq.~\eqref{eqn:switchingdiff} alone.
355:
356: In a chain of copiers, different propagation speeds of
357: positive and negative kinks will lengthen (shorten) a traveling \on\
358: (\off) pulse. In a chain that contains inverters arranged such that a
359: single pulse spends equal amounts of time in its \on\ and \off\
360: configurations, the asymmetry between positive and negative kinks
361: alone may not change the average pulse duration, but the pulse would
362: still be shortened by the memory effect.
363:
364: Because the strength of the memory effect increases as two kinks
365: approach each other, a pulse or other sequence of kinks cannot
366: propagate stably on a chain of single-input elements --- only a single
367: kink can have a stable shape as it advances. For simple rings, then,
368: stable attractors must have only zero or one kink. These two
369: possibilities correspond precisely to the fixed points and single-kink cycles that
370: are the reliable attractors of the corresponding Boolean systems.
371:
372: For rings with a self-input (Fig.~\ref{fig:rings}), the situation is
373: more complicated. First, note that the analysis of pulse propagation
374: gives a quantitative measure of the asymmetry discussed above. The
375: asymmetry enables some attractors classified as unreliable by the
376: (symmetric) Boolean analysis to be stable in the continuous system.
377: Second, memory effects associated with multiple inputs to a single
378: element can lead to repulsion between pulses and stabilization of new
379: attractors
380: related to synchronous Boolean ones but with shifts in the timing
381: between pulses.
382:
383: \section{Numerical results}
384: We studied the three cases numerically using an integration scheme
385: that takes advantage of the structure of
386: Eq.~\eqref{eqn:dynamicsintegral} as described in
387: Appendix~\ref{app:methods}. In Case I, most initial conditions
388: lead first to a long transient that corresponds to the unreliable
389: attractor observed in the synchronous Boolean network. The transient
390: eventually gives way to a stable attractor of
391: Fig.~\ref{fig:timeseries}(a), which has two pulses separated in time
392: by approximately $(5/2)(\tau + 1)$, an example of the stabilization of
393: an intermediate inter-pulse interval where the synchronous Boolean
394: attractor has pulses separated in time by alternating intervals of $2$
395: and $3$ time steps. We note in passing that the path by which the
396: continuous system arrives at the attractor is rather robust: for a
397: wide range of initial conditions, the system goes to the Boolean-like
398: transient in a short time and then gradually shifts to the attractor.
399: In some cases, however, we observe the attractor shown in
400: Fig.~\ref{fig:timeseries}(b), which has three pulses with a time
401: separation of $(5/3)(\tau + 1)$ between each pair. This attractor
402: corresponds to a marginally stable cycle of the autonomous Boolean
403: network, but the timing is incompatible with the synchronous updating
404: scheme.
405: \begin{figure}[t]
406: \includegraphics*[width=\columnwidth]{nor.eps} \\
407: \includegraphics*[width=\columnwidth]{nor3.eps} \\
408: \includegraphics*[width=\columnwidth]{xor.eps} \\
409: \includegraphics*[width=\columnwidth]{singlePulse.eps} \\
410: \includegraphics*[width=\columnwidth]{doublePulse.eps}
411: \caption{\label{fig:timeseries}
412: Time series for Cases I (a and b), II (c), and III (d and e), with
413: $\tau=10$. The thick, thin, dashed, and grey lines represent
414: element 1, 2, 3, and 0, respectively. Case I shows (a)
415: non-synchronous timing stabilization due to memory effects (with
416: time axis labels shifted by $10^6$ to account for a long transient)
417: and (b) a stable attractor that has no analogue in the corresponding
418: synchronous Boolean
419: network. Case II shows (c) an inherently non-Boolean attractor. Case
420: III shows (d) single pulse and (e) double pulse attractors, both of
421: which are unreliable in a Boolean network.}
422: \end{figure}
423:
424: We note that the appearance of attractor periods having
425: $5(\tau+1)$ as an integer multiple can be understood analytically.
426: Kaufman and Drossel have analyzed the possible attractor periods in
427: synchronous Boolean networks in rings with a single cross-link
428: \cite{Kaufman:05}. A straightforward extension of their method to the
429: autonomous networks of our ring with a {\sc nor} self-input (Case I)
430: reveals that all cycles in the autonomous model must have a period of
431: the form $5/m$, where $m$ is an integer and the time unit is the time
432: required for a kink to advance through one element. The corresponding
433: period in the continuous model is therefore $5(\tau +1)/m$.
434:
435: In Case II, two attractors are observed: the fixed point and an
436: oscillatory attractor that appears to be aperiodic. The latter
437: behavior is sensitive to intermediate variable values and is thus
438: inherently non-Boolean. In Case III, we observe one fixed point and
439: two limit cycles, corresponding to each of the three Boolean
440: attractors, with no long transients. The limit cycles are {\em
441: unreliable} in the Boolean case but {\em stable} in the continuous
442: case --- examples of stabilization due to asymmetry in kink
443: propagation speeds and a pulse-shortening self-input element.
444: This is the effect alluded to above at the end of the
445: Boolean systems section. Though the pulse has broadened in traveling
446: around the ring, a new trailing edge is generated by the self-input,
447: which occurs one delay time after the arrival of the leading edge.
448:
449: The
450: difference in pulse height in the two limit cycles is due to the
451: dependence of $f_1(x_0, x_1)$ on small variations in $x_1$ when $x_0$
452: is nominally \on\ and $x_1$ is nominally \off. The variations in the
453: \off-state of $x_1$ are caused by the delayed self-input that
454: suppresses the \off-state during a time of approximately $\tau$
455: following each pulse. In the limit cycle with two pulses, the
456: suppression is still active when the next pulse starts. This is not
457: the case for the single-pulse attractor and the slightly higher
458: \off-state leads to a suppression of the pulse height.
459:
460: The above observations remain valid for all sufficiently large values
461: of $\tau$. For small $\tau$, the systems studied have only fixed
462: point attractors. As $\tau$ is increased, the oscillatory attractors
463: are born by means of saddle-node bifurcations of cycles
464: \cite{Strogatz:00} in Cases II and III. In Case I, a subcritical
465: bifurcation to a state cycle with period near $3\times(5/2)(\tau+1)$
466: is followed by a subcritical, symmetry-restoring bifurcation with
467: period near $(5/2)(\tau+1)$. The cycle with period near
468: $3\times(5/2)(\tau+1)$ has no direct correspondence to a cycle in the
469: autonomous Boolean network.
470:
471: \section{Discussion}
472:
473: Our study of simple and single-self-input rings has elucidated some
474: important non-Boolean features of continuous systems: (i) the
475: asymmetry in the reaction time of an element when an input switches
476: \on\ or \off; (ii) deviations from nominal \on\ and \off\ values; and
477: (iii) memory effects due to the exponential decay of variables to
478: their steady state values for fixed inputs. These features are
479: crucial for the stabilization and destabilization of oscillations in
480: the systems we have investigated. In simple rings, they lead to a set
481: of stable attractors that coincides precisely with the reliable
482: attractors identified by Klemm and Bornholdt \cite{Klemm:05a}. When
483: more complex logic is introduced, as illustrated in here by adding a
484: self-input to one element in a ring, the stable continuous attractors
485: do not correspond to the reliable attractors.
486:
487: These observations are important for generalizing the well-developed
488: theory of large random Boolean networks to generic systems. We would
489: like to know, for example, whether large, complex networks exhibit a
490: well-defined dynamical phase transition similar to the ``order-chaos''
491: transition in ensembles of Boolean networks
492: \cite{Kauffman:69,Derrida:86a,Samuelsson:06}. An important feature of
493: the Boolean network transition is the rapid scaling of the number of
494: attractors with system size in the disordered regime, which suggests
495: that we should try to understand the set of attractors of large and
496: complex continuous systems.
497:
498: The non-Boolean effects discussed in this paper may also be directly
499: relevant for understanding cell cycle oscillations in yeast, where
500: there is evidence for a transcriptional oscillator and recent
501: proposals for the genes involved suggest a fundamental ring of four
502: elements with multiple feed-forward and feedback links
503: \cite{pramila:06}. We have seen, for example, that a pulse of
504: activity may propagate stably in such networks even where Boolean
505: reasoning suggests otherwise. In systems where distinct elements have
506: significantly different time delays, we expect additional deviations
507: from the dynamics in synchronous or autonomous Boolean networks.
508: Future studies along these lines should elucidate the behavior of
509: larger rings and more complex network structures.
510:
511: %% ------------------------------------------------------------------------ %%
512: % ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
513: %% ------------------------------------------------------------------------ %%
514:
515: \begin{acknowledgments}
516: We thank S.~Kauffman, A.~Ribeiro, and M.~Andrecut for stimulating
517: conversations and the U.~Calgary Inst.\ for
518: Biocomplexity and Informatics for hosting extended visits by
519: Samuelsson and Socolar. This work was supported by the National
520: Science Foundation through Grant No.~PHY-0417372 and the Graduate
521: Research Fellowship Program.
522: \end{acknowledgments}
523:
524:
525: \appendix
526:
527: \section{Autonomous dynamics}
528: \label{app:autonomous}
529:
530: For completeness, we describe the implementation of autonomous Boolean
531: systems introduced by Klemm and Bornholdt \cite{Klemm:05a}. The
532: important features are that switching times are determined by local
533: time delays and that repeated switching on times scales much shorter
534: than the delay time is suppressed. There is no external clock and
535: no stochastic rule for determining update times.
536:
537: As in Ref.~\cite{Klemm:05a}, we assume a time delay of $1$ unit
538: between the switching of a given node and the switching it induces in
539: nodes directly linked to it. At each node, a low-pass filter is
540: assumed to suppress spikes of duration much shorter than $1$. We let
541: $\epsilon$ be the minimum duration of an output pulse that passes
542: the filter (and require $0<\epsilon\ll1$). If the inputs to a given
543: node switch at times that would lead to a pulse shorter than
544: $\epsilon$, the output from that node is assumed to stay constant
545: during that time.
546:
547: For notational convenience, we write $F_j(t)$, suppressing its direct
548: dependence on its inputs. We also let the Boolean values \off\ and
549: \on, respectively, correspond to the real values $0$ and $1$. Then,
550: $x_j(t)$ is given by
551: \begin{align}\label{eqn:filter}
552: x_j(t) &= \Theta\biggl[\frac{1}{2\epsilon}
553: \int_{-\epsilon}^{\epsilon}d\delta\left(F_j(t-1+\delta) - \frac{1}{2}\right)
554: \biggr]\,,
555: \end{align}
556: where $\Theta(x)$ is the Heaviside step function; $\Theta(x) = 0$ for
557: $x<0$ and $1$ for $x\ge0$.
558:
559: When the timing of some switching events are perturbed
560: infinitesimally, $F_j$ may switch twice in rapid succession, which
561: would generate a positive or negative pulse of infinitesimal duration.
562: The filter of Eq.~\eqref{eqn:filter} suppresses such spikes, ensuring
563: that the number of switching events remains constant (for cycles in
564: which all spikes are longer than $\epsilon$ in duration) and
565: therefore that the stability of a state cycle is well defined with
566: respect to infinitesimal timing perturbations.
567:
568: \section{Numerical integration method}
569: \label{app:methods}
570:
571: Numerical integration of the time-delay equations
572: \eqref{eqn:continuous}--\eqref{eqn:f2in} was accomplished using a
573: fourth-order scheme based on the solution shown in
574: Eq.~\eqref{eqn:dynamicsintegral}. To evolve the system through a time
575: step $h$, we define values of $x$ at the time points $t = nh$ for all
576: integer $n$ and define $m\equiv \tau/h$, where $\tau$ is the delay
577: time and $h$ is chosen such that $m$ is an integer. To advance from
578: time step $n-1$ to $n$ we use the following formula (suppressing the
579: element index subscript $j$ for notational simplicity):
580: \begin{align}
581: \label{eqn:numerics}
582: x_n & = 2h\left(\frac{1}{6}f_{n-m}+\frac{2}{3}e^{-h}f_{n-m-1}+\frac{1}{6}e^{-2h}f_{n-m-2}\right) \nonumber \\
583: \ & \phantom{=}~ +\, e^{-2h}x_{n-2}\,,
584: \end{align}
585: where $f_n$ is the function defined by Eq.~\eqref{eqn:f1in}
586: [or~\eqref{eqn:f2in}] evaluated at time $t=nh$. The integrator is
587: initialized with a desired value of $x_0$, where it is
588: assumed that $x_{n} = x_0$ for all $n<0$. Integrations were carried
589: out using $h=0.1$. Decreasing $h$ to $0.01$ had no noticeable effect
590: on the results.
591:
592: Attractors were found by running from many (of order 50) different
593: initial conditions. In some cases, such as the attractor shown in
594: Fig.~\ref{fig:timeseries}(b), it was necessary to arrange initial
595: conditions in which some nodes were artificially held at constant
596: values and released at different times. The bifurcation structures as
597: a function of the time-delay parameter $\tau$ were determined by
598: performing integrations in which $h$ was increased or decreased very
599: slowly and observing transitions in the oscillation patterns of all
600: $x$'s.
601:
602: \vfill
603:
604: \bibliography{rings}
605:
606: \end{document}
607:
608:
609: