● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● K$_{T}$ Δ H 1 2 3 4 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 K=L K=1 L=1 K=L K=1 L=1 K=L K=1 L=1 K=L K=1 L=1 Figure 11: Sensitivity to initial conditions for cases 1, 2 & 3 ( K = L , K = 1, and L = 1, respectively). between modules, even when average connectivities K$_{T}$ are high. It can be said that modularity in MRBNs brings the dynamics of the chaotic regime closer to criticality. Notice that the phase transition ( K$_{T}$ = 2, Δ H = 0) does not move with κ . Rather, the properties of the critical regime are expanded into the chaotic regime by higher values of κ . From Figure 12 it can be seen that µ is also relevant for the sensitivity to initial conditions within the chaotic regime ( K$_{T}$ > 2). Case 4 (equivalent to a classical RBN) has the highest sensitivity, since damage can equally spread among all nodes in the MRBN. The extreme case 5 has a very low sensitivity to initial conditions. On the one hand, it is because of the fictitious links already explained. On the other hand, since all nodes have self-connections when K ≥ 1, damage will have a lower probability of spreading to other nodes (modules). The intermediate case 1 shows that some modularity prevents damage from spreading between modules, bringing the chaotic dynamics 20