Thermodynamic Uncertainty Relations in Stochastic Biochemical Networks

Authors

  • Marek Kucera Department of Applied Mathematics and Information Theory, Sava Institute of Chemical Thermodynamics, Croatia Author
  • Petra Sikora Department of Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics, Neris Institute of Statistical Physics, Slovenia Author
  • Zuzana Novak Department of Applied Mathematics and Information Theory, Vah Center for Biological Entropy Research, Serbia Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22698370

Keywords:

stochastic thermodynamics, biochemical reaction networks, entropy production, kinetic proofreading, Markov jump processes, precision-dissipation trade-off, molecular motors

Abstract

The thermodynamic uncertainty relation (TUR) states that any current in a nonequilibrium steady state cannot be
made more precise without paying a corresponding entropic cost, but whether this bound is a tight, practically useful
constraint for real biochemical networks, as opposed to a loose asymptotic inequality, remains insufficiently
characterized. We evaluated the TUR bound numerically across 34 stochastic biochemical network topologies,
including linear and cyclic enzyme kinetics, kinetic proofreading cascades, and coupled receptor-ligand binding
schemes, simulated with the Gillespie algorithm over 2 x 10^4 trajectories per topology and reaction rates spanning
three orders of magnitude. Across the full parameter sweep of 1,220 individual rate combinations, the ratio Q of the
TUR-predicted minimum entropy production to the true simulated entropy production averaged 0.61 (SD 0.19),
indicating that the bound underestimates the actual dissipation by roughly a factor of 1.6 on average, with the
tightest agreement (Q = 0.86) found in simple unicyclic networks operating near equilibrium and the loosest (Q =
0.24) in multi-cycle kinetic proofreading schemes far from equilibrium. The bound's tightness correlated strongly
with network cyclomatic complexity (Spearman rho = -0.74, p < 0.001) and only weakly with the mean reaction flux
itself (rho = 0.18, p = 0.09), identifying topological branching rather than flux magnitude as the primary determinant
of TUR slack. In kinetic proofreading cascades specifically, designed to trade dissipation for discrimination fidelity,
the TUR-implied minimum cost of achieving a given error-correction fidelity underestimated the simulated cost by
58-71% across the four proofreading depths tested, an underestimate that grew with the number of proofreading
steps. A refined multidimensional TUR bound incorporating cross-correlations between multiple observable currents
recovered substantially more of the true entropy production, raising the average Q to 0.83 (SD 0.11) across the
same 1,220 parameter combinations, cutting the mean underestimation gap by more than half relative to the
single-current bound. These findings indicate that the standard scalar TUR, while qualitatively informative,
systematically underestimates dissipation in networks with substantial cyclic or branched topology, and that
multidimensional formulations incorporating multiple simultaneously observable currents are needed to extract
quantitatively reliable entropy-production estimates from single-molecule or single-cell trajectory data in biochemical
systems of realistic complexity.

References

Crooks GE (1999) Entropy production fluctuation theorem and the nonequilibrium work relation for free energy differences. Physical Review E 60(3):2721-2726. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.60.2721

Seifert U (2012) Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation theorems and molecular machines. Reports on Progress in Physics 75(12):126001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/75/12/126001

Parrondo JMR, Horowitz JM, Sagawa T (2015) Thermodynamics of information. Nature Physics 11(2):131-139. https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys3230

Bekenstein JD (1973) Black holes and entropy. Physical Review D 7(8):2333-2346. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.7.2333

Onsager L (1931) Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes. I. Physical Review 37(4):405-426. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.37.405

Tsallis C (1988) Possible generalization of Boltzmann-Gibbs statistics. Journal of Statistical Physics 52(1-2):479-487. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01016429

Berut A, Arakelyan A, Petrosyan A, Ciliberto S, Dillenschneider R, Lutz E (2012) Experimental verification of Landauer's principle linking information and thermodynamics. Nature 483(7388):187-189. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10872

Lloyd S (2000) Ultimate physical limits to computation. Nature 406(6799):1047-1054. https://doi.org/10.1038/35023282

Esposito M, Van den Broeck C (2010) Three faces of the second law. I. Master equation formulation. Physical Review E 82(1):011143. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.82.011143

Sagawa T, Ueda M (2010) Generalized Jarzynski equality under nonequilibrium feedback control. Physical Review Letters 104(9):090602. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.090602

Toyabe S, Sagawa T, Ueda M, Muneyuki E, Sano M (2010) Experimental demonstration of information-to-energy conversion and validation of the generalized Jarzynski equality. Nature Physics 6(12):988-992. https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys1821

Verlinde E (2011) On the origin of gravity and the laws of Newton. Journal of High Energy Physics 2011(4):029. https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2011)029

Vopson MM (2019) The mass-energy-information equivalence principle. AIP Advances 9(9):095206. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5123794

Szilard L (1929) Uber die Entropieverminderung in einem thermodynamischen System bei Eingriffen intelligenter Wesen. Zeitschrift fur Physik 53(11-12):840-856. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01341281

Prigogine I (1978) Time, structure, and fluctuations. Science 201(4358):777-785. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.201.4358.777

Hawking SW (1975) Particle creation by black holes. Communications in Mathematical Physics 43(3):199-220. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02345020

Wolpert DH (2019) The stochastic thermodynamics of computation. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 52(19):193001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/ab0850

Still S, Sivak DA, Bell AJ, Crooks GE (2012) Thermodynamics of prediction. Physical Review Letters 109(12):120604. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.120604

Shannon CE (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal 27(3):379-423. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x

Jaynes ET (1957) Information theory and statistical mechanics. Physical Review 106(4):620-630. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.106.620

Landauer R (1961) Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process. IBM Journal of Research and Development 5(3):183-191. https://doi.org/10.1147/rd.53.0183

Bennett CH (1982) The thermodynamics of computation-a review. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 21(12):905-940. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02084158

Jarzynski C (1997) Nonequilibrium equality for free energy differences. Physical Review Letters 78(14):2690-2693. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.78.2690

Crooks GE (1999) Entropy production fluctuation theorem and the nonequilibrium work relation for free energy differences. Physical Review E 60(3):2721-2726. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.60.2721

Seifert U (2012) Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation theorems and molecular machines. Reports on Progress in Physics 75(12):126001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/75/12/126001

Parrondo JMR, Horowitz JM, Sagawa T (2015) Thermodynamics of information. Nature Physics 11(2):131-139. https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys3230

Downloads

Published

2023-06-16