Example networks#
pyphi.examples collects the substrates, systems, TPMs and transitions
used throughout the IIT literature and this documentation, so that a worked
example is one function call away. Every example is registered in
pyphi.examples.EXAMPLES, a mapping from category (substrate, system,
tpm, transition) to the functions that build them; xor_substrate, for
instance, is EXAMPLES["substrate"]["xor"]. The cards and connectivity graphs
below are drawn from the objects themselves when this page is built. The cards leave out the transition probability
matrices; load an example to see its TPM.
Substrates#
grid3
3-node grid substrate.
| Units | A, B, C |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | · |
| B | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| C | · | 1 | 1 |
basic
A 3-node substrate of logic gates.
| Units | A, B, C |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | · | 1 |
| B | 1 | · | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | · |
basic_noisy_selfloop
Based on the basic_substrate, but with added selfloops and noisy edges.
| Units | n0, n1, n2 |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| n0 | n1 | n2 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| n0 | 1 | · | 1 |
| n1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| n2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
residue
The substrate for the residue example.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | · | · | · | · |
| B | · | · | · | · | · |
| C | 1 | · | · | · | · |
| D | 1 | 1 | · | · | · |
| E | · | 1 | · | · | · |
xor
A fully connected system of three XOR gates. In the state (0, 0, 0), none of the elementary mechanisms exist.
| Units | A, B, C |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | · | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | · |
propagation_delay
A version of the primary example from the IIT 3.0 paper with deterministic COPY gates on each connection. These copy gates essentially function as propagation delays on the signal between OR, AND and XOR gates from the original system.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | 1 | · | · | · | · | · | · | 1 |
| B | · | · | · | 1 | · | · | · | · | · |
| C | 1 | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · |
| D | · | · | 1 | · | 1 | · | · | · | · |
| E | · | · | · | · | · | · | 1 | · | · |
| F | · | · | · | 1 | · | · | · | · | · |
| G | · | · | · | · | · | 1 | · | 1 | · |
| H | 1 | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · |
| I | · | · | · | · | · | · | 1 | · | · |
macro
A substrate of micro elements which has greater integrated information after coarse graining to a macro scale.
| Units | A, B, C, D |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
blackbox
A micro-substrate to demonstrate blackboxing.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E, F |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | F | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | · | 1 | · | · | · |
| B | · | · | 1 | · | · | · |
| C | · | · | · | 1 | 1 | · |
| D | · | · | · | · | · | 1 |
| E | · | · | · | · | · | 1 |
| F | 1 | 1 | · | · | · | · |
rule110
A substrate of three elements which follows the logic of the Rule 110 cellular automaton with current and previous state (0, 0, 0).
| Units | A, B, C |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | 1 |
rule154
A substrate of five elements which follows the logic of the Rule 154 cellular automaton.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | · | · | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | 1 | · | · |
| C | · | 1 | 1 | 1 | · |
| D | · | · | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| E | 1 | · | · | 1 | 1 |
fig1a
The substrate shown in Figure 1A of the 2014 IIT 3.0 paper.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E, F |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | F | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | 1 | 1 | · | · | · |
| B | 1 | · | 1 | · | 1 | · |
| C | 1 | 1 | · | · | · | · |
| D | 1 | · | · | · | · | · |
| E | · | · | · | · | · | · |
| F | · | · | · | · | · | · |
fig3a
The substrate shown in Figure 3A of the 2014 IIT 3.0 paper.
| Units | A, B, C, D |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | · | · | · |
| B | 1 | · | · | · |
| C | 1 | · | · | · |
| D | 1 | · | · | · |
fig3b
The substrate shown in Figure 3B of the 2014 IIT 3.0 paper.
| Units | A, B, C, D |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | · | · | · |
| B | 1 | · | · | · |
| C | 1 | · | · | · |
| D | 1 | · | · | · |
fig4
The substrate shown in Figures 4, 6, 8, 9 and 10 of the 2014 IIT 3.0 paper.
| Units | A, B, C |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | · | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | · |
fig5a
The substrate shown in Figure 5A of the 2014 IIT 3.0 paper.
| Units | A, B, C |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | · | · |
| B | 1 | · | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | · |
fig5b
The substrate shown in Figure 5B of the 2014 IIT 3.0 paper.
| Units | A, B, C |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | 1 | 1 |
| B | · | · | 1 |
| C | · | 1 | · |
Could not render: StateUnreachableForwardsError: The state (0, 0, 0) cannot be reached from any previous state (forward TPM check). IIT evaluates a system that arrived at its state through its own cause-effect power, so a state with no possible predecessor has no defined analysis.
fig16
The ABCDEFG portion of the substrate shown in Figure 16 of the 2014 IIT 3.0 paper.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E, F, G |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | 1 | 1 | · | 1 | · | · |
| B | 1 | · | 1 | · | · | · | · |
| C | 1 | 1 | · | · | · | · | · |
| D | · | 1 | · | 1 | 1 | · | · |
| E | · | · | · | 1 | 1 | · | · |
| F | · | · | · | · | · | 1 | 1 |
| G | · | · | · | · | · | 1 | 1 |
actual_causation
The actual causation example substrate, consisting of an OR and AND gate with self-loops.
| Units | OR, AND |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| OR | AND | |
|---|---|---|
| OR | 1 | 1 |
| AND | 1 | 1 |
disjunction_conjunction
The disjunction-conjunction example from Actual Causation Figure 9.
| Units | A, B, C, D |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | · | · | 1 |
| B | · | · | · | 1 |
| C | · | · | · | 1 |
| D | · | · | · | · |
gomez_p53_mdm2
The multi-valued p53-Mdm2 regulatory network from Gómez et al. (2020).
| Units | P, Mc, Mn |
|---|---|
| State space | alphabets (3, 2, 2) |
| P | Mc | Mn | |
|---|---|---|---|
| P | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Mc | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Mn | 1 | 1 | 1 |
frog
The substrate of a frog from Grasso et al. (2021).
| Units | SL, SC, SR, CL, CC, CR, ML, MR |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| SL | SC | SR | CL | CC | CR | ML | MR | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SL | · | · | · | 1 | 1 | · | · | · |
| SC | · | · | · | 1 | 1 | 1 | · | · |
| SR | · | · | · | · | 1 | 1 | · | · |
| CL | · | · | · | · | · | · | 1 | · |
| CC | · | · | · | · | · | · | 1 | 1 |
| CR | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | 1 |
| ML | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · |
| MR | · | · | · | · | · | · | · | · |
iit4_2023_fig1a
The 3-unit logistic substrate of Fig 1A.
| Units | A, B, C |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | · |
| C | · | 1 | 1 |
iit4_2023_fig6a
The 6-unit “bottleneck” architecture of Fig 6A.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E, F |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | F | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | · | · | · | · |
| C | 1 | · | 1 | · | · | · |
| D | 1 | · | · | 1 | · | · |
| E | 1 | · | · | · | 1 | · |
| F | 1 | · | · | · | · | 1 |
iit4_2023_fig6b
The 6-unit “modular” architecture of Fig 6B.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E, F |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | F | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | · | 1 | · | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | · | · | · | · |
| C | · | 1 | 1 | 1 | · | 1 |
| D | · | · | 1 | 1 | · | · |
| E | · | 1 | · | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| F | · | · | · | · | 1 | 1 |
iit4_2023_fig6c
The 6-unit “copy” architecture of Fig 6C.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E, F |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | F | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | · | 1 | · | · | · | · |
| B | · | · | 1 | · | · | · |
| C | · | · | · | 1 | · | · |
| D | · | · | · | · | 1 | · |
| E | · | · | · | · | · | 1 |
| F | 1 | · | · | · | · | · |
iit4_2023_fig6d
The 6-unit “specialized” architecture of Fig 6D.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E, F |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | F | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| E | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| F | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
iit4_2023_fig6e
The 6-unit “structured” architecture of Fig 6E.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E, F |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | F | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| E | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| F | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
iit4_2023_fig7
The 5-unit state-dependent network of Fig 7.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| E | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
iit4_2023_fig7_inactivated
The Fig 7 network with unit E inactivated (Fig 7C).
| Units | A, B, C, D, E |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| E | · | · | · | · | · |
mayner_2026_monad
A single binary unit that keeps its state with probability p (Mayner, Marshall & Tononi 2026, Fig 2A-B): an imperfect COPY for p > 0.5. Its φₛ is min{p·log₂(2p), −log₂ p} (2026, Eq. 27), maximal at p ≈ 0.744 where φₛ ≈ 0.427 (Fig 2C).
| Units | M |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| M | |
|---|---|
| M | 1 |
marshall_2023_fig1
The four-unit systems of Marshall et al. (2023), Fig 1.
| Units | A, B, C, D |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
marshall_2023_fig2
The four-unit sigmoid systems of Marshall et al. (2023), Fig 2.
| Units | A, B, C, D |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
marshall_2023_fig3
The eight-unit universe of Marshall et al. (2023), Fig 3.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H |
|---|---|
| State space | binary |
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| E | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| F | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| G | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| H | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
ac_2019_three_candidate_election
The three-candidate, seven-voter election of Albantakis et al. (2019), Fig 11: voters A-G each in state 0, 1, or 2 (candidates “1”, “2”, “3”), and W in state 1, 2, or 3 for the candidate with a strict majority of votes, or 0 for a tie. Voters repeat their state.
| Units | A, B, C, D, E, F, G, W |
|---|---|
| State space | alphabets (3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4) |
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | W | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| B | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| C | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| D | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| E | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| F | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| G | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| W | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Could not render: StateUnreachableForwardsError: The state (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0) cannot be reached from any previous state (forward TPM check). IIT evaluates a system that arrived at its state through its own cause-effect power, so a state with no possible predecessor has no defined analysis.
Systems, TPMs and transitions#
A system example is its substrate in the state used by the source it comes
from. TPM examples return a bare transition probability matrix, and transition
examples a Transition for actual causation.
Systems
grid3_system—basic_system— A system containing all the nodes of the :func:~pyphi.examples.basic_substrate.basic_noisy_selfloop_system— A system containing all the nodes of the :func:~pyphi.examples.basic_noisy_selfloop_substrate.residue_system— The system containing all the nodes of the :func:~pyphi.examples.residue_substrate.xor_system— The system containing all the nodes of the :func:~pyphi.examples.xor_substrate.macro_system— A system containing all the nodes of :func:~pyphi.examples.macro_substrate.rule110_system—rule154_system—fig4_system—fig5a_system—fig5b_system—differentiation_micro_1_system—iit4_2023_fig1a_system—iit4_2023_fig6a_system—iit4_2023_fig6b_system—iit4_2023_fig6c_system—iit4_2023_fig6d_system—iit4_2023_fig6e_system—iit4_2023_fig7_system—iit4_2023_fig7_inactivated_system—
Tpms
cond_depend_tpm— A system of two general logic gates A and B such if they are in the same state they stay the same, but if they are in different states, they flip with probability 50%.cond_independ_tpm— A system of three general logic gates A, B and C such that: if A and B are in the same state then they stay the same; if they are in different states, they flip if C is ON and stay the same if C is OFF; and C is ON 50% of the time, independent of the previous state.
Transitions
prevention_transition— The :class:~pyphi.actual.Transitionfor the prevention example from Actual Causation Figure 7D.frog_transition— The state transition analyzed for a frog from Grasso et al. (2021).