ArticlePloS one2019
Multiscale Modelling Tool: Mathematical modelling of collective behaviour without the maths.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mobile cognition: imaging the human brain in the 'real world'.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2023Review
- Negative feedback may suppress variation to improve collective foraging performance.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Noise-induced effects in collective dynamics and inferring local interactions from data.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Collective behaviour is of fundamental importance in the life sciences, where it appears at levels of biological complexity from single cells to superorganisms, in demography and the social sciences, where it describes the behaviour of populations, and in the physical and engineering sciences, where it describes physical phenomena and can be used to design distributed systems. Reasoning about collective behaviour is inherently difficult, as the non-linear interactions between individuals give rise to complex emergent dynamics. Mathematical techniques have been developed to analyse systematically collective behaviour in such systems, yet these frequently require extensive formal training and technical ability to apply. Even for those with the requisite training and ability, analysis using these techniques can be laborious, time-consuming and error-prone. Together these difficulties raise a barrier-to-entry for practitioners wishing to analyse models of collective behaviour. However, rigorous modelling of collective behaviour is required to make progress in understanding and applying it. Here we present an accessible tool which aims to automate the process of modelling and analysing collective behaviour, as far as possible. We focus our attention on the general class of systems described by reaction kinetics, involving interactions between components that change state as a result, as these are easily understood and extracted from data by natural, physical and social scientists, and correspond to algorithms for component-level controllers in engineering applications. By providing simple automated access to advanced mathematical techniques from statistical physics, nonlinear dynamical systems analysis, and computational simulation, we hope to advance standards in modelling collective behaviour. At the same time, by providing expert users with access to the results of automated analyses, sophisticated investigations that could take significant effort are substantially facilitated. Our tool can be accessed online without installing software, uses a simple programmatic interface, and provides interactive graphical plots for users to develop understanding of their models.
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.