Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29291750›Full record

ArticleBMC systems biology2018

Bayesian uncertainty analysis for complex systems biology models: emulation, global parameter searches and evaluation of gene functions.

Ian Vernon, Junli Liu, Michael Goldstein, James Rowe, Jen Topping, Keith Lindsey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC systems biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Systematic structural discrepancy assessment for computer models.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025
    Article
  5. Emulating computer models with high-dimensional count output.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Bayesian emulation and history matching of JUNE.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2022
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The importance of uncertainty quantification in model reproducibility.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2021
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Predicting left ventricular contractile function via Gaussian process emulation in aortic-banded rats.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2020
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Ian VernonDepartment of Mathematical Sciences, Durham University, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK. i.r.vernon@durham.co.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-9161-9946
Junli LiuDepartment of Biosciences, Durham University, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK. junli.liu@durham.ac.uk.
Michael GoldsteinDepartment of Mathematical Sciences, Durham University, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK.
James RoweDepartment of Biosciences, Durham University, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK.
Jen ToppingDepartment of Biosciences, Durham University, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK.
Keith LindseyDepartment of Biosciences, Durham University, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/E006531/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany mathematical models have now been employed across every area of systems biology. These models increasingly involve large numbers of unknown parameters, have complex structure which can result in substantial evaluation time relative to the needs of the analysis, and need to be compared to observed data of various forms. The correct analysis of such models usually requires a global parameter search, over a high dimensional parameter space, that incorporates and respects the most important sources of uncertainty. This can be an extremely difficult task, but it is essential for any meaningful inference or prediction to be made about any biological system. It hence represents a fundamental challenge for the whole of systems biology.

methodsBayesian statistical methodology for the uncertainty analysis of complex models is introduced, which is designed to address the high dimensional global parameter search problem. Bayesian emulators that mimic the systems biology model but which are extremely fast to evaluate are embeded within an iterative history match: an efficient method to search high dimensional spaces within a more formal statistical setting, while incorporating major sources of uncertainty.

resultsThe approach is demonstrated via application to a model of hormonal crosstalk in Arabidopsis root development, which has 32 rate parameters, for which we identify the sets of rate parameter values that lead to acceptable matches between model output and observed trend data. The multiple insights into the model's structure that this analysis provides are discussed. The methodology is applied to a second related model, and the biological consequences of the resulting comparison, including the evaluation of gene functions, are described.

conclusionsBayesian uncertainty analysis for complex models using both emulators and history matching is shown to be a powerful technique that can greatly aid the study of a large class of systems biology models. It both provides insight into model behaviour and identifies the sets of rate parameters of interest.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalSystems BiologyUncertaintyArabidopsisBayes TheoremPlant Growth RegulatorsPlant RootsPlant Growth RegulatorsArabidopsisBayesian uncertainty analysisEmulationHormonal signallingKinetic modelsParameter searchRoot development

Identifiers

PMID29291750
PMCPMC5748965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.