ArticleJournal of mathematical biology2018
Exact probabilities for the indeterminacy of complex networks as perceived through press perturbations.
Article in Journal of mathematical biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Qualitative and quantitative responses to press perturbations in ecological networks.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We consider the goal of predicting how complex networks respond to chronic (press) perturbations when characterizations of their network topology and interaction strengths are associated with uncertainty. Our primary result is the derivation of exact formulas for the expected number and probability of qualitatively incorrect predictions about a system's responses under uncertainties drawn form arbitrary distributions of error. Additional indices provide new tools for identifying which links in a network are most qualitatively and quantitatively sensitive to error, and for determining the volume of errors within which predictions will remain qualitatively determinate (i.e. sign insensitive). Together with recent advances in the empirical characterization of uncertainty in networks, these tools bridge a way towards probabilistic predictions of network dynamics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28735343What 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.