Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38560526›Full record

ArticlePNAS nexus2024

Inferring networks from time series: A neural approach.

Thomas Gaskin, Grigorios A Pavliotis, Mark Girolami

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PNAS nexus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Thomas GaskinDepartment of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0WA, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5644-4431
Grigorios A PavliotisDepartment of Mathematics, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3468-9227
Mark GirolamiDepartment of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3008-253X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Network structures underlie the dynamics of many complex phenomena, from gene regulation and foodwebs to power grids and social media. Yet, as they often cannot be observed directly, their connectivities must be inferred from observations of the dynamics to which they give rise. In this work, we present a powerful computational method to infer large network adjacency matrices from time series data using a neural network, in order to provide uncertainty quantification on the prediction in a manner that reflects both the degree to which the inference problem is underdetermined as well as the noise on the data. This is a feature that other approaches have hitherto been lacking. We demonstrate our method's capabilities by inferring line failure locations in the British power grid from its response to a power cut, providing probability densities on each edge and allowing the use of hypothesis testing to make meaningful probabilistic statements about the location of the cut. Our method is significantly more accurate than both Markov-chain Monte Carlo sampling and least squares regression on noisy data and when the problem is underdetermined, while naturally extending to the case of nonlinear dynamics, which we demonstrate by learning an entire cost matrix for a nonlinear model of economic activity in Greater London. Not having been specifically engineered for network inference, this method in fact represents a general parameter estimation scheme that is applicable to any high-dimensional parameter space.

Indexed as

model calibrationnetwork inferenceneural differential equationspower grids

Identifiers

PMID38560526
PMCPMC10978060

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.