No Access Submitted: 27 February 2017 Accepted: 19 May 2017 Published Online: 06 June 2017
Chaos 27, 063105 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4984806
We investigate the logical information transmission of a synthetic gene network under Lévy flight superdiffusion by an information-based methodology. We first present the stochastic synthetic gene network model driven by a square wave signal under Lévy noise caused by Lévy flight superdiffusion. Then, to quantify the potential of logical information transmission and logical stochastic resonance, we theoretically obtain an information-based methodology of the symbol error rate, the noise entropy, and the mutual information of the logical information transmission. Consequently, based on the complementary “on” and “off” states shown in the logical information transmission for the repressive proteins, we numerically calculate the symbol error rate for logic gates, which demonstrate that the synthetic gene network under Lévy noise can achieve some logic gates as well as logical stochastic resonance. Furthermore, we calculate the noise entropy and the mutual information between the square wave signal and the logical information transmission, which reveal and quantify the potential of logical information transmission and logical stochastic resonance. In addition, we analyze the synchronization degree of the mutual information for the accomplished logical stochastic resonance of two repressive proteins of the synthetic gene network by synchronization variances, which shows that those mutual information changes almost synchronously.
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos. 11602003 and 11372247. Y. Xu acknowledges the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.
  1. 1. T. S. Gardner, C. R. Cantor, and J. J. Collins, Nature 403(6767), 339–342 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1038/35002131, Google ScholarCrossref
  2. 2. H. Kobayashi, M. Kaern, M. Araki, K. Chung, T. S. Gardner, C. R. Cantor, and J. J. Collins, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101(22), 8414–8419 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0402940101, Google ScholarCrossref
  3. 3. B. B. Mandelbrot, The Fractal Geometry of Nature. ( W.H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1982). Google Scholar
  4. 4. M. F. Shlesinger and J. Klafter, Lévy Walks Versus Lévy Flights ( Springer Netherlands, 1986). Google ScholarCrossref
  5. 5. S. G. Nurzaman, Y. Matsumoto, Y. Nakamura, K. Shirai, S. Koizumi, and H. Ishiguro, PLoS One 6(2), e16168 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016168, Google ScholarCrossref
  6. 6. A. A. Dubkov and A. A. Kharcheva, Europhys. Lett. 113(3), 30009 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/113/30009, Google ScholarCrossref
  7. 7. A. A. Dubkov, B. Spagnolo, and V. V. Uchaikin, Int. J. Bifurcation Chaos 18(9), 2649–2672 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218127408021877, Google ScholarCrossref
  8. 8. Z. Wang, Y. Xu, and H. Yang, Sci. China Technol. Sci. 59(3), 371–375 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-015-6001-2, Google ScholarCrossref
  9. 9. M. Strasser, F. J. Theis, and C. Marr, Biophys. J. 102(1), 19–29 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpj.2011.11.4000, Google ScholarCrossref
  10. 10. C. H. Zeng, T. Yang, Q. L. Han, C. Zhang, D. Tian, and H. Wang, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 28(31), 1450223 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979214502233, Google ScholarCrossref
  11. 11. J. W. Wang, J. J. Zhang, Z. J. Yuan, and T. S. Zhou, BMC Syst. Biol. 1, 50 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-0509-1-50, Google ScholarCrossref
  12. 12. Y. Xu, Y. N. Zhu, J. W. Shen, and J. B. Su, Physica A 416, 461–466 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2014.08.042, Google ScholarCrossref
  13. 13. Y. Li, Y. Xu, J. Kurths, and X. Yue, Phys. Rev. E 94(4), 042222 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.94.042222, Google ScholarCrossref
  14. 14. H. Chen, P. Thill, and J. Cao, J. Chem. Phys. 144(17), 175104 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4948461, Google ScholarScitation
  15. 15. Y. Xu, J. Feng, J. J. Li, and H. Q. Zhang, Chaos 23(1), 013110 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4775758, Google ScholarScitation
  16. 16. Y. Xu, Y. Li, H. Zhang, X. Li, and J. Kurths, Sci. Rep. 6, 31505 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep31505, Google ScholarCrossref
  17. 17. A. Daza, A. Wagemakers, S. Rajasekar, and M. A. F. Sanjuan, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. 18(2), 411–416 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2012.07.010, Google ScholarCrossref
  18. 18. A. Sharma, V. Kohar, M. D. Shrimali, and S. Sinha, Nonlinear Dyn. 76(1), 431–439 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-013-1136-9, Google ScholarCrossref
  19. 19. Y. Xu, J. Wu, H. Q. Zhang, and S. J. Ma, Nonlinear Dyn. 70(70), 531–539 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-012-0473-4, Google ScholarCrossref
  20. 20. Y. Xu, J. Wu, L. Du, and H. Yang, Chaos, Solitons Fractals 92, 91–100 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2016.09.015, Google ScholarCrossref
  21. 21. Y. Xu, X. Jin, and H. Zhang, Phys. Rev. E 88(5), 052721 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.88.052721, Google ScholarCrossref
  22. 22. E. H. Hellen, S. K. Dana, J. Kurths, E. Kehler, and S. Sinha, PLoS One 8, e76032 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0076032, Google ScholarCrossref
  23. 23. A. Dari, B. Kia, X. Wang, A. R. Bulsara, and W. Ditto, Phys. Rev. E 83(4 Pt 1), 041909 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.83.041909, Google ScholarCrossref
  24. 24. Y. Xu, X. Jin, H. Zhang, and T. Yang, J. Stat. Phys. 152(4), 753–768 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10955-013-0782-0, Google ScholarCrossref
  25. 25. K. Murali, S. Sinha, W. L. Ditto, and A. R. Bulsara, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102(10), 104101 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.104101, Google ScholarCrossref
  26. 26. A. Dari, B. Kia, A. R. Bulsara, and W. L. Ditto, Chaos 21(4), 047521 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3660159, Google ScholarScitation
  27. 27. H. Ando, S. Sinha, R. Storni, and K. Aihara, EPL 93(5), 50001 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/93/50001, Google ScholarCrossref
  28. 28. K. Hlaváčková-Schindler, M. Paluš, M. Vejmelka, and J. Bhattacharya, Phys. Rep. 441(1), 1–46 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2006.12.004, Google ScholarCrossref
  29. 29. E. Bianco-Martinez, N. Rubido, C. G. Antonopoulos, and M. S. Baptista, Chaos 26(4), 043102 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4945420, Google ScholarScitation
  30. 30. A. Janicki and A. Weron, Simulation and Chaotic Behavior of Alpha-Stable Stochastic Processes ( Marcel Dekker INC, New York, 1994). Google Scholar
  31. 31. J. Hasty, J. Pradines, M. Dolnik, and J. J. Collins, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 97(5), 2075–2080 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.040411297, Google ScholarCrossref
  32. 32. L. Z. Zeng, R. H. Bao, and B. H. Xu, J. Phys. A - Math. Theor. 40(26), 7175–7185 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/40/26/005, Google ScholarCrossref
  33. 33. M. Andrecut and S. A. Kauffman, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 20(29), 4947–4963 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1142/S021797920603576X, Google ScholarCrossref
  1. © 2017 Author(s). Published by AIP Publishing.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Proin imperdiet nibh sed ipsum molestie eu mattis justo malesuada. Curabitur id quam augue, ac eleifend justo. Integer eget metus sagittis velit semper auctor vel et nunc. Phasellus tempus felis at arcu fringilla at ndimentum libero placerat. Aenean ut imperdiet dolor. Nulla pretium mi vestibulum dui dictum sed ullamcorper tellus sodales. Duis non nibh id ipsum feugiat imperdiet id fermentum nunc. Maecenas id ultricies felis. Suspendisse lacinia rhoncus vestibulum. Vestibulum molestie vulputate convallis.Fusce et augue erat, nec mollis mi.