You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Lineage grammars: describing, simulating and analyzing population dynamics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-15-249 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adam Spiro, Luca Cardelli, Ehud Shapiro |
| Abstract |
Precise description of the dynamics of biological processes would enable the mathematical analysis and computational simulation of complex biological phenomena. Languages such as Chemical Reaction Networks and Process Algebras cater for the detailed description of interactions among individuals and for the simulation and analysis of ensuing behaviors of populations. However, often knowledge of such interactions is lacking or not available. Yet complete oblivion to the environment would make the description of any biological process vacuous. Here we present a language for describing population dynamics that abstracts away detailed interaction among individuals, yet captures in broad terms the effect of the changing environment, based on environment-dependent Stochastic Tree Grammars (eSTG). It is comprised of a set of stochastic tree grammar transition rules, which are context-free and as such abstract away specific interactions among individuals. Transition rule probabilities and rates, however, can depend on global parameters such as population size, generation count, and elapsed time. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 40% |
| Researcher | 8 | 27% |
| Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 23% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 23% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 3 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 July 2014.
All research outputs
#18,375,064
of 22,758,963 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,306
of 7,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,264
of 228,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#105
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,963 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,272 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 228,570 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.