Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42693360›Full record

ReviewBulletin of mathematical biology2026

How AI Can Advance Mathematical Biology: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions.

Kobra Rabiei, Grzegorz A Rempala, Reinhard Laubenbacher, Wenrui Hao

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bulletin of mathematical biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Kobra RabieiDepartment of Mathematics, Penn State University, State College, PA, USA. kxr5609@psu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0174-7328
Grzegorz A Rempala *College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Reinhard Laubenbacher *Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Wenrui Hao *Department of Mathematics, Penn State University, State College, PA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mathematical biology has long relied on mechanistic models, including ordinary and partial differential equations, stochastic systems, and agent-based models, to study biological processes across scales. These approaches remain central because they provide structure, interpretability, and biological insight. However, modern biological and biomedical data, including longitudinal clinical records, medical imaging, and multi-omics measurements, are often high-dimensional, noisy, heterogeneous, and incomplete. These features make model calibration, simulation, and uncertainty quantification increasingly difficult. As a result, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are playing a growing role in mathematical biology, not as replacements for mechanistic modeling, but as complementary tools that can support prediction, hybrid modeling, inference, and control. In this review, we organize these uses of AI from a mathematical biology perspective and examine how data-driven and mechanistic approaches interact across different modeling tasks. The selected examples span biomedical, epidemiological, ecological, evolutionary, biochemical, and population-level systems, while the review is intended to be representative rather than exhaustive. We emphasize recurring challenges that strongly affect biological credibility and practical usefulness, including interpretability, identifiability, generalization, and uncertainty quantification. Our goal is to clarify the roles AI can play in mathematical biology and to highlight the opportunities and limitations that arise when flexible learning methods are integrated with biologically grounded modeling.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceModels, BiologicalAnimalsComputer SimulationHumansSoft ComputingSystems BiologyArtificial intelligenceMathematical biologyMechanistic models

Identifiers

PMID42693360
PMCPMC13541877

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.