ArticleJournal of theoretical biology2009
On the long-run sensitivity of probabilistic Boolean networks.
Article in Journal of theoretical biology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Method for identification of sensitive nodes in Boolean models of biological networks.IET systems biology · 2018Article
- Mathematical and Computational Modeling in Complex Biological Systems.BioMed research international · 2017Review
- Systems biology of cancer: a challenging expedition for clinical and quantitative biologists.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2014Article
- Recent development and biomedical applications of probabilistic Boolean networks.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2013Review
- Validation of gene regulatory network inference based on controllability.Frontiers in genetics · 2013Article
- Evolving sensitivity balances Boolean Networks.PloS one · 2012Article
- Probabilistic reconstruction of the tumor progression process in gene regulatory networks in the presence of uncertainty.BMC bioinformatics · 2011Article
- Inverse perturbation for optimal intervention in gene regulatory networks.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Boolean networks and, more generally, probabilistic Boolean networks, as one class of gene regulatory networks, model biological processes with the network dynamics determined by the logic-rule regulatory functions in conjunction with probabilistic parameters involved in network transitions. While there has been significant research on applying different control policies to alter network dynamics as future gene therapeutic intervention, we have seen less work on understanding the sensitivity of network dynamics with respect to perturbations to networks, including regulatory rules and the involved parameters, which is particularly critical for the design of intervention strategies. This paper studies this less investigated issue of network sensitivity in the long run. As the underlying model of probabilistic Boolean networks is a finite Markov chain, we define the network sensitivity based on the steady-state distributions of probabilistic Boolean networks and call it long-run sensitivity. The steady-state distribution reflects the long-run behavior of the network and it can give insight into the dynamics or momentum existing in a system. The change of steady-state distribution caused by possible perturbations is the key measure for intervention. This newly defined long-run sensitivity can provide insight on both network inference and intervention. We show the results for probabilistic Boolean networks generated from random Boolean networks and the results from two real biological networks illustrate preliminary applications of sensitivity in intervention for practical problems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.