Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40354480›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2025

Conformal prediction for uncertainty quantification in dynamic biological systems.

Alberto Portela, Julio R Banga, Marcos Matabuena

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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.

Alberto PortelaComputational Biology Lab, MBG-CSIC (Spanish National Research Council), Pontevedra, Galicia, Spain.
Julio R BangaComputational Biology Lab, MBG-CSIC (Spanish National Research Council), Pontevedra, Galicia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-4245-0320
Marcos MatabuenaDepartment of Biostatistics, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0009-0009-7743-5495

Funding

CSIC PIE 202470E108 (LARGO)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Uncertainty quantification (UQ) is the process of systematically determining and characterizing the degree of confidence in computational model predictions. In systems biology, and particularly with dynamic models, UQ is critical due to the nonlinearities and parameter sensitivities that influence the behavior of complex biological systems. Addressing these issues through robust UQ enables a deeper understanding of system dynamics and more reliable extrapolation beyond observed conditions. Many state-of-the-art UQ approaches in this field are grounded in Bayesian statistical methods. While these frameworks naturally incorporate uncertainty quantification, they often require the specification of parameter distributions as priors and may impose parametric assumptions that do not always reflect biological reality. Additionally, Bayesian methods can be computationally expensive, posing significant challenges when dealing with large-scale models and seeking rapid, reliable uncertainty calibration. As an alternative, we propose using conformal predictions methods and introduce two novel algorithms designed for dynamic biological systems. These approaches can provide non-asymptotic guarantees, improving robustness and scalability across various applications, even when the predictive models are misspecified. Through several illustrative scenarios, we demonstrate that these conformal algorithms can serve as powerful complements-or even alternatives-to conventional Bayesian methods, delivering effective uncertainty quantification for predictive tasks in systems biology.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalSystems BiologyAlgorithmsBayes TheoremComputational BiologyComputer SimulationHumansUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID40354480
PMCPMC12091895

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.