Recently, the journal Nature released its latest sub-journal "npj Complexity", an online open access platform dedicated to publishing high-quality peer review work on all aspects of complexity research, especially encouraging research that integrates multiple methods or perspectives, and aims to promote dialogue between different fields and professions around the world. This article is a translation of the opening review article, "The Road to Complexity", which reviews some milestones in the history of the development of complex science, pointing out that the most pressing problems facing humanity are inherently interdisciplinary and require complexity thinking and interdisciplinary collaboration.
撰文 | Laurent Hébert-Dufresne, Antoine Allard, Joshua Garland等
Translator | Guo Ruidong
Proofreading | Liang Jin
Original Title:
The path of complexity
Original link:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s44260-024-00004-0
"I think [the 21st century] will be the century of complexity. ”
– Stephen Hawking
Complex science studies are systems that are composed of a large number of components or subsystems of different natures that can produce unexpected emergent phenomena at multiple scales. It is these phenomena hidden behind the simple rules that control individual components that best define complex systems. Since these interesting behaviors arise from the interaction between parts, complex systems are not opposed to simple systems, but to decentralized systems. Therefore, the study of them often requires a cross-scale, interdisciplinary approach.
However, this collaborative approach between traditional disciplines presents challenges for the publication of papers in complex sciences, which are often not suitable for a clear categorization of journals in specific disciplines. In this review, we provide a look at the current state of research on complex systems and explain how this new journal fills an important gap for researchers in these fields.
1
A Brief History of Complex Science
Complexity, as an interdisciplinary way of looking at systems, is itself an emergent phenomenon because it cannot be traced back to a single individual, study, or event, but slowly emerges across various fields. In its broadest definition, complexity is a lens that accepts uncertainty and the interdisciplinary effort required in the face of large, interconnected systems. This view has a long history around the world, from classical Eastern philosophies to key figures in Western science. In Descartes' last work, The Passions of the Soul (1649), human life itself is described as an interaction between many parts of different natures, forming a network of emergent properties, in which local effects can have surprising global consequences. These concepts did not become formal terms at the time, but were used as a framework to try to address complex ideas that challenged reductionist descriptions.
The formalization of complexity has taken place in multiple disciplines in the last century. In 1962, Herbert Simon laid a roadmap for the study of complex systems in The architecture of complexity [1]. Simon himself was a political scientist who turned to organizational and artificial intelligence research. Ten years later, physicist P.W. Anderson discussed this philosophical conflict with the standard reductionist hypothesis in 1972 in The Many Differences: Broken Symmetries and the Nature of Scientific Hierarchies [2]. In this paper, Anderson argues for the need for multiple perspectives because "the ability to reduce everything to simple fundamental laws does not mean that the universe can be reconstructed from those laws." ”
The more we delve into the fundamentals, the less relevant they become to the question of the global human scale. Similar ideas have emerged in philosophy, represented by Edgar Morin's interdisciplinary work and his critique of reductionism or systems theory [3]. Moran's formal work on the subject can be said to begin with Human Unity (1978) and to conclude with Introduction à la pensée complexe (Introduction à la pensée complexe) in 1990. ) to climax. In the foreword to Introduction to Complex Thinking[4], Alfonso Montuori summarizes the paradigm of complexity as "a way of thinking that does not dismember life...... Not abstract and disjointed, but full of feelings, intuition, and connections to the wider social and historical context. ”
Curiosity about the extraordinary complexity of living systems is a key factor in facilitating the spread of the concept of complexity across multiple disciplines. Schrödinger, who made great insights in the field of quantum mechanics, turned to the development of self-replication and genetic information theory, and in doing so, he commented: "A complete understanding of living systems may require new laws of physics". [5] At the same time, von Neumann and Ulam were developing theoretically feasible machines (which laid the groundwork for the future field of computer science) that would later become known as the "von Neumann machine" and that would eventually evolve to higher and higher levels of biological complexity [6,7]. Both Per Bak and Stuart Kauffman, who have tried to explain the origins of biological complexity, have made self-organization-centric structuralist arguments, but each has followed their own path of thinking, with Kauffman analyzing coarse-grained models of gene regulatory networks [8] and Bak developing iconic sandpile models with self-organizing criticality [9].
The success of the Life Complexity Research Community reminds us that life, like any other complex system, is best studied holistically from multiple perspectives. This process of promoting research progress through interdisciplinary dialogue has also been repeated in other disciplines. Theories from the social sciences and models from physics and mathematics are now used to analyze various types of networks [10]. As we discussed in our inaugural collection, the study of epidemics and disinformation is increasingly turning to a unified toolbox of biological or social contagions. This process of interdisciplinary dialogue and the search for unified models and theories became the philosophy of complexity science in the decades that followed.
2
Complexity Research Community
Complexity may not be seen as a narrowly defined "science", arguably without a specific shared system of interest or methodological tools, but it is certainly a community of shared scientific methods. Members of the complexity community come from many different disciplines and are driven by intellectual curiosity and openness to new issues and disciplines.
In fact, over the past decade, complex science has emerged in waves, constantly touching new disciplines. Complexity has its roots in philosophy, economics, and physics, and began as a community based on abstract thought experiments and models [11]. Computer scientists and statisticians join in to help with computational modeling and processing big data. Joined by ecologists, anthropologists or political scientists, who have been studying complex systems for decades, food chain data, social support networks, governance systems, and even communication networks for trees. Neuroscientists and biomedical scientists have also joined in, proposing that complex science help us better understand ourselves through complex models of our brains, microbiomes, and immune systems, among other things.
One driver of this growth is that the core message of "many are different" resonates with many scientists [12]. It is very difficult to move from an ideal system of isolated research to an open group of interacting people in various disciplines. This is how many academic fields were born: population biology, ecology, statistical physics. Complex science has evolved because of the recognition of the lessons that can be learned from all these efforts. This message has been echoed over the past few decades, forming the complex communities we have today. Especially in recent years, when we celebrate Giorgio Parisi's Nobel Prize, his success highlights the importance of allowing curiosity and real-world serendipity to guide theoretical and basic scientific research[13].
3
Interdisciplinary, not arbitrary
In traditional publishing systems, which are based on specific disciplines, research that transcends disciplinary boundaries presents unique challenges. Therefore, the goal of npj complexity is to publish work that fosters interdisciplinary dialogue. Our editorial team is well aware of the traditional challenges in this space and is committed to embracing new, quirky, and creative perspectives. It is hoped that this will create a space for communication where members can listen to new voices or discover new ideas and research areas, regardless of their field.
Today, complexity studies often require a choice between two imperfect options. Research can be published in a journal of the corresponding discipline, such as physics, biology or social sciences, which requires tailoring the project and text to a specific subject audience, while running the risk of losing the interdisciplinary character of the research. Alternatively, research can be directed at multidisciplinary journals, which are often more large journals that publish work from any discipline rather than focusing exclusively on interdisciplinary work. At the heart of npj Complexity's mission is to provide a space for communication for research that crosses disciplines or bridges between disciplines. It wasn't designed to be a journal of the future, it was created in partnership with a traditional publisher and relied on current open access standards. However, the goal of this journal is to help fill a long-standing and important gap in the field of interdisciplinary work publishing.
As a community that includes new members who are interested in reading this article, the journal aims to push knowledge in new directions at the edges and intersections of many disciplines. This goal means sometimes solving big problems with a unique perspective, and sometimes reinventing the wheel in a new environment. In order to distinguish between the two, it is essential for complex science researchers to place themselves among diverse experts and listen to the knowledge of new disciplines. Failure to do so risks complex science becoming another discipline with interesting names and its own terms and questions. Therefore, a core requirement of npj Complexity is that manuscripts published by the journal must be able to be understood by its broad target audience so that pre-release and post-publication peer review can cross disciplinary boundaries.
To quote the great Murray Gell-Mann, a physicist who turned to complex science, in his 1969 Nobel Prize speech: "We are driven by a curiosity that is not normally insatiable as scientists, and our work is a delightful game." "At npj Complexity, research entails communicating with scientists from any discipline by appealing to the curiosity inherent in complex science researchers. This is a difficult and subjective goal, but one at the heart of complex science.
4
The road to complexity
Complexity science is sometimes described as bizarre and unique, but it has many close relatives, such as systems theory, cybernetics, ecology, political science, and any field of interest in systems that are made up of multiple parts, interact at multiple scales, or through multiple mechanisms. Part of the value of using the term "complex" is to embrace the openness of the community through the ambiguity of the terminology. As a result, it was difficult to develop a specific mission statement for the journal. However, there is an urgent need for a holistic approach to complexity research: from theory to experimentation to application, including its philosophy and ethics.
npj Complexity aims to be such a space that focuses on complex systems, and research areas include, but are not limited to:
network science,
artificial life,
computational social science,
systems biology,
data science,
ecology and evolution,
dynamical system
Economics and Finance,
and social complexity.
Spanning these areas and beyond, we find that the most pressing issues facing humanity are inherently interdisciplinary: emerging pandemics, disinformation, climate change, growing global inequalities, human rights movements, adaptation to new technologies, and the resulting non-linear interactions between all of these challenges. None of these problems can be solved in isolation, they require complexity thinking and interdisciplinary collaboration. Research along this path can be challenging for standard peer review practice, as it involves cross-disciplinary dialogue and expertise, or requires new language and perspectives. The effort to meet these global challenges and embrace their complexities deserves its own publication.
bibliography
[1] Simon, H. A. The architecture of complexity. Proc. Am. Philos. Soc. 106, 467–482 (1962).
[2] Anderson, P. W. More is different: broken symmetry and the nature of the hierarchical structure of science. Science 177, 393–396 (1972).
[3] Morin, E. From the concept of system to the paradigm of complexity. J. Soc. Evol. Syst. 15, 371–385 (1992).
[4] Montuori, A. Edgar Morin’s Path of Complexity (Hampton Press, 2008).
[5] Schrödinger, E. What is Life?: The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell (Cambridge University Press, 1946).
[6] Ulam, S. et al. Random processes and transformations. In Proc. International Congress on Mathematics 264–275 (Citeseer, 1952).
[7] von Neumann, J. & Burks, A. W. Theory of Self-Reproducing Automata (University of Illinois Press, 1966).
[8] Kauffman, S. A.The Origins of Order: Self-organization and Selection in Evolution (Oxford University Press, 1993).
[9] Bak, P. How Nature Works: The Science of Self-organized Criticality (Copernicus New York, 1996).
[10] Newman, M. Networks (Oxford University Press, 2018).
[11] Miller, J. H. A Crude Look at the Whole: The Science of Complex Systems in Business, Life, and Society (Basic Books, 2016).
[12] Mitchell, M. Complexity: A Guided Tour (Oxford University Press, 2009).
[13] Parisi, G. In a Flight of Starlings: The Wonders of Complex Systems (Penguin Press, 2023).
[14] Gell-Mann, M. The Quark and the Jaguar: Adventures in the Simple and the Complex (Macmillan, 1995).
This article is reprinted with permission from the WeChat public account "Jizhi Club".
Special Reminder
1. Enter the "Boutique Column" at the bottom menu of the "Huipu" WeChat official account to view a series of popular science articles on different themes.
2. "Back to Park" provides the function of searching for articles by month. Follow the official account and reply to the four-digit year + month, such as "1903", to get the article index in March 2019, and so on.