Internal Feedback in Biological Control: Architectures and Examples
Authors:
Anish A. Sarma,
**g Shuang Li,
Josefin Stenberg,
Gwyneth Card,
Elizabeth S. Heckscher,
Narayanan Kasthuri,
Terrence Sejnowski,
John C. Doyle
Abstract:
Feedback is ubiquitous in both biological and engineered control systems. In biology, in addition to typical feedback between plant and controller, we observe feedback pathways within control systems, which we call internal feedback pathways (IFPs), that are often very complex. IFPs are most familiar in neural systems, our primary motivation, but they appear everywhere from bacterial signal transd…
▽ More
Feedback is ubiquitous in both biological and engineered control systems. In biology, in addition to typical feedback between plant and controller, we observe feedback pathways within control systems, which we call internal feedback pathways (IFPs), that are often very complex. IFPs are most familiar in neural systems, our primary motivation, but they appear everywhere from bacterial signal transduction to the human immune system. In this paper, we describe these very different motivating examples and introduce the concepts necessary to explain their complex IFPs, particularly the severe speed-accuracy tradeoffs that constrain the hardware in biology. We also sketch some minimal theory for extremely simplified toy models that nevertheless highlight the importance of diversity-enabled sweet spots (DESS) in mitigating the impact of hardware tradeoffs. For more realistic models, standard modern and robust control theory can give some insights into previously cryptic IFPs, and the new System Level Synthesis theory expands this substantially. These additional theories explaining IFPs will be explored in more detail in several companion papers.
△ Less
Submitted 22 October, 2021; v1 submitted 11 October, 2021;
originally announced October 2021.
Internal Feedback in Biological Control: Diversity, Delays, and Standard Theory
Authors:
Josefin Stenberg,
**g Shuang Li,
Anish A. Sarma,
John C. Doyle
Abstract:
Neural architectures in organisms support efficient and robust control that is beyond the capability of engineered architectures. Unraveling the function of such architectures is challenging; their components are highly diverse and heterogeneous in their morphology, physiology, and biochemistry, and often obey severe speed-accuracy tradeoffs; they also contain many cryptic internal feedback pathwa…
▽ More
Neural architectures in organisms support efficient and robust control that is beyond the capability of engineered architectures. Unraveling the function of such architectures is challenging; their components are highly diverse and heterogeneous in their morphology, physiology, and biochemistry, and often obey severe speed-accuracy tradeoffs; they also contain many cryptic internal feedback pathways (IFPs). We claim that IFPs are crucial architectural features that strategically combine highly diverse components to give rise to optimal performance. We demonstrate this in a case study, and additionally describe how sensing and actuation delays in standard control (state feedback, full control, output feedback) give rise to independent and separable sources of IFPs. Our case study is an LQR problem with two types of sensors, one fast but sparse and one dense but slow. Controllers using only one type of sensor perform poorly, often failing even to stabilize; controllers using both types of sensors perform extremely well, demonstrating a strong diversity-enabled sweet spot (DESS). We demonstrate that IFPs are key in enabling this DESS, and additionally that with IFPs removed, controllers with delayed sensing perform poorly. The existence of strong DESS and IFP in this simple example suggest that these are fundamental architectural features in any complex system with diverse components, such as organisms and cyberphysical systems.
△ Less
Submitted 5 April, 2022; v1 submitted 24 September, 2021;
originally announced September 2021.
