ArticlePLoS computational biology2022
Bayesian calibration, process modeling and uncertainty quantification in biotechnology.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond predictive accuracy: A case for mechanism-informed, uncertainty-aware machine learning in food microbiology.iScience · 2026Review
- Beyond petrochemicals: challenges and opportunities in industrial-scale biomanufacturing.Nature communications · 2026Review
- A Guide to Bayesian Optimization in Bioprocess Engineering.Biotechnology and bioengineering · 2026Review
- Integrating Time-ResolvedEnvironmental science & technology · 2024Article
- Automated in vivo enzyme engineering accelerates biocatalyst optimization.Nature communications · 2024Review
- "High-throughput screening of catalytically active inclusion bodies using laboratory automation and Bayesian optimization".Microbial cell factories · 2024Article
- PyMC: a modern, and comprehensive probabilistic programming framework in Python.PeerJ. Computer science · 2023Article
- Control of parallelized bioreactors II: probabilistic quantification of carboxylic acid reductase activity for bioprocess optimization.Bioprocess and biosystems engineering · 2022Article
- bletl - A Python package for integrating BioLector microcultivation devices in the Design-Build-Test-Learn cycle.Engineering in life sciences · 2022Article
- Bayesian calibration, process modeling and uncertainty quantification in biotechnology.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Quantification of nisin concentration from fluorescence-based antimicrobial activity assay using Bayesian calibration.Biotechnology progressArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-throughput experimentation has revolutionized data-driven experimental sciences and opened the door to the application of machine learning techniques. Nevertheless, the quality of any data analysis strongly depends on the quality of the data and specifically the degree to which random effects in the experimental data-generating process are quantified and accounted for. Accordingly calibration, i.e. the quantitative association between observed quantities and measurement responses, is a core element of many workflows in experimental sciences. Particularly in life sciences, univariate calibration, often involving non-linear saturation effects, must be performed to extract quantitative information from measured data. At the same time, the estimation of uncertainty is inseparably connected to quantitative experimentation. Adequate calibration models that describe not only the input/output relationship in a measurement system but also its inherent measurement noise are required. Due to its mathematical nature, statistically robust calibration modeling remains a challenge for many practitioners, at the same time being extremely beneficial for machine learning applications. In this work, we present a bottom-up conceptual and computational approach that solves many problems of understanding and implementing non-linear, empirical calibration modeling for quantification of analytes and process modeling. The methodology is first applied to the optical measurement of biomass concentrations in a high-throughput cultivation system, then to the quantification of glucose by an automated enzymatic assay. We implemented the conceptual framework in two Python packages, calibr8 and murefi, with which we demonstrate how to make uncertainty quantification for various calibration tasks more accessible. Our software packages enable more reproducible and automatable data analysis routines compared to commonly observed workflows in life sciences. Subsequently, we combine the previously established calibration models with a hierarchical Monod-like ordinary differential equation model of microbial growth to describe multiple replicates of Corynebacterium glutamicum batch cultures. Key process model parameters are learned by both maximum likelihood estimation and Bayesian inference, highlighting the flexibility of the statistical and computational framework.
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.