ReviewBriefings in bioinformatics2026
From prior knowledge to data-informed models: a review of Boolean network inference.
Review in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Molecular mechanisms are highly complex and involve numerous components in non-linear interactions, imposing challenges in analysis and understanding. Networks provide intuitive representations of these systems, enabling visualisation of experimental data and the aggregation of prior knowledge. However, static networks cannot account for key temporal dynamics. Boolean networks address this limitation as discrete dynamical models representing temporal properties of biological regulation through binary variables connected by logical functions, offering scalable frameworks for hypothesis generation while avoiding parameterisation challenges of quantitative modelling approaches. Construction of (Boolean) networks is a mostly manual, labour-intensive and bias-prone process, relying on the review of a large corpora of prior knowledge. This review surveys methods for Boolean network inference that integrate experimental data with or without prior knowledge to automatically construct context-specific, data-informed models. We begin by examining network curation methods from text mining to manual curation given their use as backbones of Boolean networks, then analyse several inference algorithms categorised as heuristic (MIBNI, ATEN, LogicGep, CANTATA, and CellNetOptimizer) and exact (BoNesis, caspo, Sketchbook, RE:IN, and Griffin) methods. For each method, we discuss computational representation, inputs, inference algorithms, and benchmarking. We identify key considerations for method selection, including handling of uncertainty, choice of updating scheme, scalability, and data discretisation challenges. We advise that method selection be guided by the type and extent of available prior knowledge and experimental data, and modelling objectives.
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.