Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42623412›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Bayesian model discovery for reverse-engineering biochemical networks from data.

Andreas Christ Sølvsten Jørgensen, Marc Sturrock, Atiyo Ghosh, Vahid Shahrezaei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Andreas Christ Sølvsten JørgensenDepartment of Mathematics, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2276-5779
Marc SturrockDepartment of Physiology and Medical Physics, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Atiyo GhoshDepartment of Mathematics, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Vahid ShahrezaeiDepartment of Mathematics, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4013-5458

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reverse engineering gene regulatory networks from gene expression data is a challenging inference task. A related problem in computational systems biology is identification of signalling networks that perform particular functions, such as adaptation. Indeed, for many research questions, there is an ongoing need for efficient inference algorithms that can identify the simplest model, from among a larger set of inter-related models, that best explains empirical observations. To this end, we introduce Sparse Likelihood-free Inference using Gibbs sampling (SLInG), a Bayesian sparse likelihood-free inference method. SLInG provides an efficient sampling method for Approximate Bayesian Computation with sparsity-inducing hierarchical priors that is widely applicable for any simulation-based model discovery task. We first apply SLInG to linear sparse regression problem using a classic dataset, before focusing on applications to biochemical network model discovery. We demonstrate that SLInG can reverse engineer stochastic gene regulatory networks from single-cell data with high accuracy, outperforming state-of-the-art correlation-based methods. Furthermore, we show that SLInG can successfully identify signalling networks that execute adaptation. Sparse hierarchical Bayesian inference thus provides a versatile and powerful tool for model discovery in systems biology and beyond.

Indexed as

Gene Regulatory NetworksModels, BiologicalSystems BiologyAlgorithmsBayes TheoremComputational BiologyComputer SimulationSignal Transduction

Identifiers

PMID42623412
PMCPMC13492775

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.