Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28630888›Full record

ArticleIEEE life sciences letters2016

GillesPy: A Python Package for Stochastic Model Building and Simulation.

John H Abel, Brian Drawert, Andreas Hellander, Linda R Petzold

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in IEEE life sciences letters, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Beyond Deterministic Models in Drug Discovery and Development.Trends in pharmacological sciences · 2020
    Review
  12. Comparison of solitary and collective foraging strategies ofPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

John H AbelDepartment of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115 USA and the Department of Chemical Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 USA.
Brian DrawertDepartment of Computer Science, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 USA.
Andreas HellanderDepartment of Information Technology, Division of Scientific Computing Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden SE-751 85.
Linda R PetzoldDepartment of Computer Science, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 USA.

Funding

StochSS: A Next-Generation Toolkit for Simulation-Driven Biological DiscoveryR01EB014877 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA · PI PETZOLD, LINDA R. · 2012 to 2022
$3.9M
MECHANISMS AND MODELING OF NETWORKED CIRCADIAN PACEMAKER SYNCHRONIZATIONR01GM096873 · NIGMS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI DOYLE, FRANCIS J, HENSON, MICHAEL · 2011 to 2014
$1.1M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB014877NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM096873
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

GillesPy is an open-source Python package for model construction and simulation of stochastic biochemical systems. GillesPy consists of a Python framework for model building and an interface to the StochKit2 suite of efficient simulation algorithms based on the Gillespie stochastic simulation algorithms (SSA). To enable intuitive model construction and seamless integration into the scientific Python stack, we present an easy to understand, action-oriented programming interface. Here, we describe the components of this package and provide a detailed example relevant to the computational biology community.

Indexed as

Biological systemsopen-source softwarestochastic systemssystems biology

Identifiers

PMID28630888
PMCPMC5473341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.